Stansted 15 found guilty of 'endangering' airport

Discussion in 'protest, direct action and demos' started by Enviro, Dec 10, 2018.

  1. Spymaster

    Spymaster Cockney Wanker

    It's an airport, ffs.

    Do people really expect to be able to cut a hole in the fence, go wandering around the operational area, chain themselves to an aircraft, and not get nicked?
     
  2. SpookyFrank

    SpookyFrank Self-cleaning oven, the whole bit.

    They expected to get nicked. They didn't expect to be contemplating the prospect of life in jail when they have not harmed a living soul and have acted in defence of human rights.

    Ultimately they expected, as you would, a fair trial. The judge's intructions to the jury denied them that.
     
    Last edited: Dec 11, 2018
    nyxx, Signal 11, Enviro and 1 other person like this.
  3. NoXion

    NoXion Keep an eye out for diamonds

    Nope. And if you re-read carefully, you'll note that my objection is not that they've been arrested, or even that they've been charged with an offence. Rather it is that legislation ostensibly cooked up to "preserve" our freedumbs from the guddam terrists, is being used on the flimsiest of pretexts as an act of political intimidation against people who non-violently acted according to their conscience.
     
    nyxx likes this.
  4. eoin_k

    eoin_k Lawyer's fees, beetroot and music

    The defendants were charged under a law to enact an international treaty against sabotage to civil aviation, which came out the year after a related treaty on hijacking planes. Both agreements responded to a wave of such actions in the late 1960s and early 1970s. At the time lawyers drew a contrast between the close relationship between these two agreements, and another earlier treaty on jurisdiction over general criminal offences taking place on board aircraft. What seems so inaccurate to you about describing this as counterterrorism legislation?

    In this case, everything took place in the UK and involved a plane chartered by the UK Home Office. None of the complications to do with jurisdiction involved with international transport came in to play here.Presumably, these defendants could have been charged with the usual protest offences (criminal damage, aggravated tresspass etc.).

    Hopefully, the judges instructions to the jury provide the basis for a quick appeal.
     
    Last edited: Dec 11, 2018
    NoXion and ska invita like this.
  5. ska invita

    ska invita back on the other side

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice