...But here is where the really nightmarish situation begins. The judge, Mr Justice Johnson, had already decided that he would add a ‘terrorist connection’ to their sentences. He did this secretly, before the verdict and the jury was never told this was being considered. The defence was never given the opportunity to address it. The conviction came down on criminal damage charges. And then the judge, alone, unilaterally, declared that these young people are terrorists. I did my research and found out this has never happened before in British legal history. Direct action protesters have never been treated this way. Criminal damage has never been considered a terrorist offence. The barrister for the defence, Rajiv Menon KC, called it ‘chilling and creeping authoritarianism’. He is not wrong...

Crosspost from https://lemmygrad.ml/post/11929891

...But here is where the really nightmarish situation begins. The judge, Mr Justice Johnson, had already decided that he would add a ‘terrorist connection’ to their sentences. He did this secretly, before the verdict and the jury was never told this was being considered. The defence was never given the opportunity to address it. The conviction came down on criminal damage charges. And then the judge, alone, unilaterally, declared that these young people are terrorists. I did my research and found out this has never happened before in British legal history. Direct action protesters have never been treated this way. Criminal damage has never been considered a terrorist offence. The barrister for the defence, Rajiv Menon KC, called it ‘chilling and creeping authoritarianism’. He is not wrong...

Crosspost from https://lemmygrad.ml/post/11929891

Four young people—Charlotte Head, Samuel Corner, Leona Kamio, and Fatema Rajwani—were sentenced as terrorists this week for the crime of criminal damage. They broke into an Elbit Systems factory in Filton, near Bristol, and caused approximately £1.2 million worth of damage. They livestreamed the whole thing wearing their, now iconic, red jumpsuits and they acted in the open.

A jury of their peers, that is, Brits, convicted them of criminal damage. Not terrorism or any kind of violent disorder. Simple criminal damage.

But here is where the really nightmarish situation begins. The judge, Mr Justice Johnson, had already decided that he would add a ‘terrorist connection’ to their sentences. He did this secretly, before the verdict and the jury was never told this was being considered. The defence was never given the opportunity to address it. The conviction came down on criminal damage charges. And then the judge, alone, unilaterally, declared that these young people are terrorists. Image

I did my research and found out this has never happened before in British legal history. Direct action protesters have never been treated this way. Criminal damage has never been considered a terrorist offence. The barrister for the defence, Rajiv Menon KC, called it ‘chilling and creeping authoritarianism’.

He is not wrong.