Obstruction of the Highway - Guilty: 04/05/21

Court date



City of London Magistrates’ – Court 3

Hearing date:


Tuesday, 4th May 2021

Bench (DJ or JPs)


D.J. Woodcock

Charged with:


S137. Wilful Obstruction of the Highway on 9/10/19 at Whitehall

Represented by:



Please outline key points in prosecution and defence cases.


An unusual case. Defendant lives in country Wales. His case has been adjourned more than once. Today, over the phone, he was offered CVP but refused because of poor internet reception. He couldn’t travel because of immunity problems . He requested another adjournment. This was refused.

The judge continued, assuming a plea of NG.

The CPS went through the formalities, complete with arresting officer and bwv. The judge withheld judgement because he wanted to hear the defendant’s mitigation statement. This could be done over the phone if necessary.


Information from continued trial:

He was tried 2 days before (4th May) in his absence before DJ Woodcock who deferred his verdict until he had heard Mr. Trevor-Roper’s mitigation statement.

This, he heard now before sentencing.

Quoting from my own notes. “You’ve dealt with many XR cases. You know the emergency. Since my actions in 2019 I’ve heard a lot of words from government but seen no change. This is your chance to show resolve”.

He is a software development manager, so was able to pay.


Was defence evidence submitted in writing?



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

Yes, yes
He gave his mitigation statement.

What was the verdict,
sentence, costs?


9 mths c/d; £775 costs; £21 v/s to be paid within 28 days.

Please add anything else relevant.


The first time I’ve seen a defendant appeal directly to the bench to “show resolve”. I reckon we need more of that.