Section 14 - Guilty: 01/06/21

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 (in her wheelchair)

Represented by:

Self-representing

Please outline key points in prosecution and defence cases.

Prosecution:

S14 imposed on 31^st Aug to restrict location and duration of XR protests on 1^st 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.

Actions reasonable, proportionate and necessary

UN Report stating govts’ failure in level of ambition to meet Paris Agreement commitments.

Article 9, 10, 11

Earth Protector

Has a friend in Sydney who was terribly affected by bushfires – how close does an emergency have to be for one to be entitled to act? We are all connected.

Lifestyle changes (vegan, no flying etc.) and petitions, writing to MP and marches she has been involved in over many years are not sufficient to create the necessary change.

Was defence evidence submitted in writing?

No.

Did defence witness(es) give evidence in person? Were they cross-examined?

No defence witnesses called.

Cross-examination of Defendant focused on narrow definitions of S14 – whether on the day Chrissie chose not to comply by moving to the designated protest area, and could have done so.

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 Chrissie retired early from nursing career because of her MS.

Please add anything else relevant.

Magistrate in sentencing declared that lifestyle changes were the way that consumers could encourage corporations to make the necessary changes to tackle the CEE, whereas “breaking the law achieves absolutely nothing” (we all shook our heads at that!)