Court:
|
CLM Court 2, 10 am |
Hearing date:
|
12/11/21 |
Bench (DJ or JPs)
|
Victoria Fraser, Jacqueline Haliday (I think) |
Charged with:
|
Willful Obstruction of the Highway and Section 14 |
Represented by:
|
Unrepresented as didn’t qualify for legal aid, although this was mistake according to Ms Mathews |
Please outline key points in prosecution and defence cases.
|
Because Defendant was unrepresented she needed time to look at the statements and prepare questions for the witnesses.so we came back in the afternoon. She was arrested at the junction of Long Acre and St Martin’s Lane at 8pm on the 23rd August. She was a drummer in the Samba Band near the pink table and it was not her intention to get arrested then, as it was the first day of the Rebellion. Superintendent Wayne Mathews was a witness. He imposed Section 14 in that area from 7pm that evening. PC Helen Constantinou, also a witness, arrested defendant after giving her due warning. There was also a police tannoy communicating the S!4 regulations. Defendant said that she could not hear as she had ear plugs in because of the band. We were shown Body Worn Video (BWV) and it did appear (to me) that she was willfully ignoring the Officer, turning her head away and not engaging. She was arrested and carried away to the van, and she was not interviewed. She was subsequently released in the afternoon of the following day. defendant asserted that it was a chaotic situation and she had dropped to the floor because she was scared. The police had thwarted the protest and it was the police cordon who were effectively blocking the area. Initially defendant’s group were outside the police cordon. Subsequently they were inside. defendant said that she was demonstrating because of the existential threat to humanity and the planet. She would much rather be at home in her garden. She quoted Articles 10 and 11 of the Human Rights Act in her defence. Prosecution suggested defendant could hear the arresting PO. |
Was defence evidence submitted in writing?
|
|
Did defence witness(es) give evidence in person? Were they cross-examined? |
Yes. She pleaded not guilty. She gave evidence in Court.
|
What was the verdict?
|
Guilty. S!4 was lawful and proportional under the circumstances. Because she was of previous good character she had 9 months conditional discharge. She had no means so she had no costs to pay!!!! The Magistrate seemed to say that this was because she was held so long in the police station.
|
What was the sentence?
|
9 months conditional discharge. |
What costs were awarded?
|
None! See above |
Charge
Outcome
Court date