Palestine Action Activists Cleared Over Weapons Factory Attack That Left Police Officer With “Shattered Spine”
Six Palestine Action activists have been cleared of committing aggravated burglary after a break-in at the UK headquarters of an Israeli-owned arms company despite a police officer being left with a “shattered spine”. The Telegraph has more.
At Woolwich Crown Court, in south-east London, Charlotte Head, Samuel Corner, Leona Kamio, Fatema Rajwani, Zoe Rogers and Jordan Devlin were found not guilty over allegations that they had used or threatened unlawful violence.
Activists used an old prison van to ram-raid an Elbit Systems factory in Bristol in the early hours of August 6th 2024, and attacked police officers with sledgehammers, according to Avon and Somerset Police.
Footage played to the jury showed six protesters wearing red jumpsuits at the site.
All six on trial were acquitted of aggravated burglary, and jurors also found Rajwani, Rogers and Devlin not guilty of violent disorder.
The jury deliberated for 36 hours and 34 minutes, but could not reach verdicts on charges of criminal damage against all six defendants. No verdict was reached in the allegation that Corner, 23, inflicted grievous bodily harm on Sgt Kate Evans or on the charges of violent disorder against Head, Corner and Kamio.
Lord Walney, co-Chairman of the All Party Parliamentary Group for Defending Democracy, said: “It is deeply disappointing that the jury was unable to reach a verdict on the sledgehammer attack that allegedly caused grievous bodily harm to a police sergeant who approached the Palestine Action saboteurs.
“I expect the CPS will now seek a retrial on this and other issues on which the jury were unable to reach a verdict. There should also be an investigation into whether signs placed outside the courtroom constituted jury tampering.”
The six activists hugged each other in the dock as a dozen of their supporters cheered from the public gallery.
Prosecutors said the demonstrators had tried to “cause as much damage as possible and obtain information about the company”.
At around 3.30am, Head, a charity worker, drove a prison van into the site’s perimeter fence before using the vehicle “as a battering ram” to enter the factory, the court heard.
In body-camera footage from one of the security guards, three of the defendants were seen approaching the officer and shouting “f— off” at him, with one holding a lighted flare and two others brandishing sledgehammers.
Prosecutors alleged that the activists swung the sledgehammers towards the security officers as they tried to stop them, and whipped them while a foam fire extinguisher was sprayed.
Head described it as “the craziest 20 minutes of my life” before the protesters were arrested.
All the defendants except Devlin gave evidence, telling jurors they had entered the factory without permission and damaged Elbit’s equipment, including computers and drones.
The sledgehammers were solely for destroying property and were not “in any circumstances intended to injure security staff”, the court heard. The defendants had also not planned to use violence during the protest, they said.
Not the jury system’s finest hour. Hopefully a retrial won’t be scuppered by presumably ideologically anti-Israel jurors, which I’d hazard is what happened in this case.
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Brilliant. So I can now smash stuff up and hit police officers with my sledgehammer?
In the UK and only if you’re doing it ‘for Gaza’.
If you try that in Iran I’d guess the outcome might be different.
I wonder how easy it is to find a jury in London that isn’t rotten with anti Israel sentiment.
Absolutely disgraceful.
Come to think of it (late again) don’t try it in Gaza either.
“In Iran” or “for Iran”.
Someone needs to break into Samuel Corner’s house, trash the place, shatter his kneecap with a hammer then get found ‘not guilty’. He needs a dose of his own medicine. The jury were obviously all terrorist-supporting antisemites. Has the comments section just been reconfigured or did I put the wrong kind of ‘shrooms in my risotto?
One can only hope that their families, and the people who live near them openly shun them, and that if they are employed (ha) no doubt mummy and Daddy will support the poor sensitive darlings, the employer will find a way to get rid, as their anti semitic and violent nature makes them a danger to the public.
Yes, if you do it for an approved cause.
Smashing things up and hitting a police officer with a sledgehammer – acquittal. File under “Mostly peaceful demonstration”.
Emotional tweet about “asylum seekers” – 31 months in prison. File under “racially aggravated hate crime, inciting violence.”
Fast tracked to boot.
Only if you’re wearing a terrorist tea towel.
Only if you have a rich daddy and money who can speak to the Judge and CPS on your behalf!
It’s quite beyond belief that the jury couldn’t agree to the charge of criminal damage – there is a video of them doing it!
To me that suggests that they have pre-judged the case. Prejudice.
Who put up the signs? Were the signs intimidating/threatening? Did they contain ‘evidence’ that was not presented in court?
Edit: It occurred to me (rather late) that the jury as a body failing to find the defendants guilty only requires one juror to dissent.
Plus a cop in a sodding wheelchair.
I’m speechless with anger at this.
Are there grounds for a re-trial, or does ‘double jeopardy’ apply?
Unarguable case of GBH and criminal damage in Bristol, tried at Woolwich Crown Court in front of a jury selected from a South East London demographic – draw your own conclusions.
How is this possible? There is no law and order then?
All depends on whether u are anti or pro Israel/islam……
I don’t know what to post. It’s probably best, for my benefit at least.
Me & you both 🤯 + you’ve got a down tick which must be from a supporter of this insanity 😳
Outraged when I heard this outcome. At a time when trial by jury is in doubt, jurors expressing clear sympathies with defendants is perhaps a reason why juries cannot be seen as independent or trustworthy in such cases (though nothing to do with Lammy’s agenda).
The same goes for the acquittal of Ricky Jones last August (then a Labour councillor, suggesting cutting throats to protestors in Walthamstow – the Qu’ranic prescribed method of execution, widely practised).
Where one or more jurors makes a decision based on sympathies, rather than evidence and points of law, are they not in contempt of court?
It appears that so-called ‘jury equity’ allows them to do this. See e.g. https://www.bsbsolicitors.co.uk/blog/jury-equity-a-verdict-of-conscience-the-recent-case-of-hm-solicitor-general-v-trudi-warner-has-shone-a-light-on-a-little-known-but-now-increasingly-prominent-issue-of-jury-equity-the-issue-is-n/
I can only assume Zack Polanski is one of those weird anti-Zionist Jews, given his statement on Twitter. How to say “I’m a traitor” without saying “I’m a traitor”.🤨
“Pleased to see the jury make this decision.
We need to have eyes wide open this is exactly why the Government wants to abolish juries.
People protesting against a genocide are not the criminals here – it’s the politicians who continue to provide cover.”
Ironically, from Lammy’s viewpoint the result, with a jury, is probably broadly the same as he might have desired without one?
I have heard that defendants have the right to attend juror selections, and reject any potential juror they think might find them “Guilty”, by accusing the potential juror of “bias”.
If that is true, it seems the only explanation for the openly criminal decisions of this jury: that it was packed with political activists, exactly like juries in the Third World.
PS. Looking at all the smug, smirking “activists” in that photo, I wonder what their own personal reactions would be if their own homes were burglarized, smashed up, and their relatives paralyzed with sledgehammers? And then a “jury” let the criminals off completely?
Would they regard that as “justice”? Thought not.
I wouldn’t be surprised if at least 50% of these people come from very privileged backgrounds.
When I look at it, I wonder about the levels of personal hygiene… it’s really quite distressing.
One solution might be to allow the prosecution to also have a say in who is on the jury although this could mean huge numbers of people being called for jury service then rejected.
The verdict was an outrage but given how woke a lot of judges are I’m not convinced it would of been any different if the case was heard by a panel of 3 or 5 judges and no jury. If trial without jury starts to be used in cases where the defendants were motivated by ideology there’s a real danger that it would be the start of a slippery slope to more and more cases being tried without a jury as per Lammy’s wishes.
I’ve no idea what the best solution to ideologically motivated juries acquitting criminals would be.
It would only take one juror to refuse to find the defendant ‘guilty’. The fact that they deliberated for 36 hours (I assume in addition to breaks) suggests to me that they could not agree. I think judges only accept a majority in certain circumstances.
I did jury service and we had one guy who wanted to give the defendant the ‘benefit of the doubt’ to an unreasonable degree. We went round in circles for hours.
My own experience, with a case where the evidence wasn’t conclusive, was that a not guilty verdict was returned but a juror said “OK, he’s not guilty of this, but he’s definitely guilty of something!”
People think in somewhat odd ways.
Did these people steal anything? Why were they charged with burglary at all? I wonder if someone at the CPS set this case up to fail by pressing the wrong charges.
“Burglary – The act of entering another’s premises without authorization in order to commit a crime”
Do you laugh or do you cry? Do you get angry or do you roll your eyes?
This country is broken.
So not one thing they did was worthy of spending some time inside?
But type some hurty words and they throw the book at you. Nuts.
We can only hope that Mossad won’t be as forgiving as the jury with these useful idiots.
Is it not possible to take a private prosecution of the pos who attacked the female police officer with a sledgehammer? Surely with all the video evidence he should be made financially responsible for medical care, sick pay,compensation etc
This is the lesson to learn.
Wear a check tea towel, claim to love Hamas, and hate the jews, and you can with impunity, break into a place of work, a home as long as its connected in someway to Israel and the jews, and you can smash it up, physically damage and possibly kill the inhabitants/workers, and in the anti semitic world that is the UK, you can walk away, smile and congratulate yourself that the state is behind you in your actions, and of course the great opportunity to do it again.
Those of us who are not of the persuasion of the fine jury, should note the photos of these young would be killers, and shun them, they are anti semitic, hate filled vermin.
Incredible miscarriage of so called justice, reminiscent of the Statue vandalising mob who plod stood & watched ! Compare this to protester Peter Lynch the cardboard placard carrying Grandad who sadly died by his own hand while banged up .
Is the injured Police Officer permanently disabled ??
Anyone ????
SOCIAL JUSTICE is NO JUSTICE at all——-There is only one true justice—–EQUAL JUSTICE FOR ALL. ——No matter what silly world view you have.
CORRECT …. ! If we had at least had that, it would CURE multi cultural ism .
The issue is to do with the government casting these protesters as terrorists. Whilst it is apparent they should be punished for criminal damage and causing injury this should not been seen in the light of terrorism but rather activism. Then a jury will be more comfortable in delivering a verdict that sees this event for what it truly was: ill considered and dangerous.
After reading all the informative comments on here and looking things up, it seems to me that the best thing would be to abolish the requirement for unanimous jury votes, and replace it with a universal requirement for a MAJORITY OF 10 out of 12 jurors, as is already accepted for some cases.
That would be fair and just, and save huge amounts of wasted time in court cases, when one lone obstreperous juror can scupper the whole jury and the whole trial.
I was shocked to learn that only a handful of countries use jury systems, while the entire rest of the world uses judges !!! We should cherish our legal system rooted in English Common Law. “…In much of continental Europe, Latin America, and many Asian countries, legal systems are based on comprehensive codified laws. In these jurisdictions, legal proceedings typically involve professional judges who decide both questions of law and fact.” “Instead of juries, many civil law systems utilize “mixed courts” or “mixed tribunals”. These courts consist of a panel of professional judges and lay assessors who deliberate and decide together on both the verdict and, in some instances, the sentence. Germany, France, and Austria are examples of countries that employ such mixed court systems, where lay judges work alongside professional judges. This structure allows for lay participation while maintaining a strong role for legal professionals.” “The United Kingdom, United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and Ireland commonly use juries. These jurisdictions consider jury trials a core element of their legal heritage, particularly for serious criminal cases.” “Spain utilizes a jury system for certain criminal matters, where nine citizens are presided over by a professional judge. Japan incorporates lay participation… Read more »