Court:
|
City of London Magistrates |
Hearing date:
|
01/06/2021 |
Bench (DJ or JPs)
|
JPs |
Charged with:
|
Section 14, Sept. Rebellion 2020, Parliament Square – sitting in the road. |
Represented by:
|
Self-representing |
Please outline key points in prosecution and defence cases.
|
Prosecution: S14 imposed on 31st Aug to restrict location and duration of XR protests on 1st Sept between 8 a.m. and 7p.m. Evidence: bodyworn and arresting officer statement read by CPS.
Recap of April and October Rebellions – scope and impact on businesses, demands on police resources. City Airport action, Heathrow Pause and Burning Pink paint-throwing actions singled out as examples of ‘high profile criminality’.
‘Serious disruption’ to public, legislature, businesses. Breach of Covid restrictions in this action.
Crown case facts not disputed re. S14. Ella Kissi-Debra first acknowledged victim of illegal air pollution in UK, so already victims of CEE; therefore action was necessary, proportionate and reasonable in response to immediate danger. Articles 9, 10, 11 Justin Kenrick acquittal on 7th April Shell 7 acquittal by jury Paris Agreement commitments not met by UK govt. Conscientious Protector entitled him to take the action. |
Was defence evidence submitted in writing?
|
No
|
Did defence witness(es) give evidence in person? Were they cross-examined?
|
No witnesses called.
Cross-examination of Defendant focused on narrow definitions of S14 – whether on the day Defendant chose not to comply by moving to the designated protest area, and could have done so. Argument made that he was in no immediate danger from climate change, and also (revoltingly) since Ella Kissi-Debra is already dead, he wasn’t protecting her by refusing to move. |
What was the verdict?
|
Guilty |
What was the sentence?
|
Conditional discharge 1 year. |
What costs were awarded?
|
CPS applied for £775, but costs reduced to £272 plus £22 victim surcharge because no police witness attended in person, and because Defendant retired early to care for his wife who has MS. |
Please add anything else relevant.
|
Magistrate said Defendant was motivated by altruism, but his arguments were not relevant to the breach of the S14. |
Charge
Outcome
Court date