Possibly the funniest thing I’ve seen on Google Maps was that statue’s location changing to the water.
So this is interesting:
>Jurors trying four people accused of toppling a statue of Edward Colston have been told the fact the man was a slave trader is “wholly irrelevant”.
>Opening the case, prosecutor William Hughes QC said: “We accept that Edward Colston was a divisive figure, however we say what Edward Colston may or may not have done, good or bad, [is] not on trial and [is] not an issue for you – these four defendants are.”
One one hand, theres a world of difference between tearing down a statue of say, Hitler and one of David Attenborough.
But the prosecutor isn’t wrong. The defendants are accused of criminal damage, so the jury should only be deciding whether the defendants committed criminal damage or not.
These folks did a public service by toppling the statue. Taking out the trash.
Just remembering all the racism and backlash against the Black Lives Matter movement this toppling unleashed at the time … And just look at the perps.
👏 👏 👏
[removed]
Oh no; what a shame. Maybe if the Friends of Colston didn’t keep lobbying for the statue to be kept people wouldn’t have felt the need to topple the statue of a slavetrader.
not gonna lie im genuinely surprised that not one of them had a double barrel in their name
>In 2021, a noteworthy case of jury nullification took place when a six activists associated with the environmental protest organisation Extinction Rebellion were placed on trial for causing criminal damage to the UK Headquarters of multinational oil company Royal Dutch Shell.
>Though the judge instructed the jury that there was ‘no defence in law’ for the protestors’ actions, which according to the prosecutor had caused ‘significant damage’ to the building, the activists were acquitted by the jury.
“Milo Ponsford” and “Sage Willoughby” have absolutely killed me 😂
Imagine being the lawyer who has to go to bat for a slave trader lol
Bottom line is its criminal damage. If everyone went around tearing down things they didn’t like without any repercussions the place would be fucking carnage.
Will likely be found guilty. Just because you disagree with something, does not give you Carte Blanche to break the law. However the judge may have the discretion to sentence accordingly.
Shouldn’t face a single charge, shame the statue fall on some Tories too
Good. Destroying statues is the kind of thing a group like the Nazis or ISIS would do. Don’t care if it’s slavers because if we’re using that motive then we should probably destroy most statues which have ever been created worldwide. While we’re at it might as well nuke the pyramids
What will happen if the other four statues are convicted? More toppling?
Lots of debate ITT about whether this criminal damage is ok because it’s a statue of a complete bastard. Thing is, you can’t have one law for things you don’t mind getting smashed up and dropped in the sea and another law for things you don’t want smashed up – like your house, or your car.
These guys took the opportunity to smash up property that is not theres. It was criminal damage and while they shouldn’t get the book thrown at them they can’t be let off either.
The level of cringe here is beyond belief. Varied opinions in this thread for or against, because a bunch of white guys pulled down a statue of a slave trader who died three hundred years ago, primarily because an American cop killed a criminal / drug addict.
Whatever you make of that, these protests have changed nothing, and in order get rid of everything related to slavery we’d have to bulldoze most of the world.
I’m not going to say whether I’m for or against that, but I will say I think it’s all pointless and a distraction from real issues, in this country by people who don’t understand American culture or history at all but who really do get a kick out of LARPing as Americans.
Is it just me or, is taking the law in your own hands and tearing down public monuments a completely illegal thing to do?
18 comments
Possibly the funniest thing I’ve seen on Google Maps was that statue’s location changing to the water.
So this is interesting:
>Jurors trying four people accused of toppling a statue of Edward Colston have been told the fact the man was a slave trader is “wholly irrelevant”.
>Opening the case, prosecutor William Hughes QC said: “We accept that Edward Colston was a divisive figure, however we say what Edward Colston may or may not have done, good or bad, [is] not on trial and [is] not an issue for you – these four defendants are.”
One one hand, theres a world of difference between tearing down a statue of say, Hitler and one of David Attenborough.
But the prosecutor isn’t wrong. The defendants are accused of criminal damage, so the jury should only be deciding whether the defendants committed criminal damage or not.
These folks did a public service by toppling the statue. Taking out the trash.
Just remembering all the racism and backlash against the Black Lives Matter movement this toppling unleashed at the time … And just look at the perps.
👏 👏 👏
[removed]
Oh no; what a shame. Maybe if the Friends of Colston didn’t keep lobbying for the statue to be kept people wouldn’t have felt the need to topple the statue of a slavetrader.
not gonna lie im genuinely surprised that not one of them had a double barrel in their name
I hope the jury are aware or become so of [‘jury nullification’](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification#England_and_Wales) that was used recently in an XR case:
>In 2021, a noteworthy case of jury nullification took place when a six activists associated with the environmental protest organisation Extinction Rebellion were placed on trial for causing criminal damage to the UK Headquarters of multinational oil company Royal Dutch Shell.
>Though the judge instructed the jury that there was ‘no defence in law’ for the protestors’ actions, which according to the prosecutor had caused ‘significant damage’ to the building, the activists were acquitted by the jury.
“Milo Ponsford” and “Sage Willoughby” have absolutely killed me 😂
Imagine being the lawyer who has to go to bat for a slave trader lol
Bottom line is its criminal damage. If everyone went around tearing down things they didn’t like without any repercussions the place would be fucking carnage.
Will likely be found guilty. Just because you disagree with something, does not give you Carte Blanche to break the law. However the judge may have the discretion to sentence accordingly.
Shouldn’t face a single charge, shame the statue fall on some Tories too
Good. Destroying statues is the kind of thing a group like the Nazis or ISIS would do. Don’t care if it’s slavers because if we’re using that motive then we should probably destroy most statues which have ever been created worldwide. While we’re at it might as well nuke the pyramids
What will happen if the other four statues are convicted? More toppling?
Lots of debate ITT about whether this criminal damage is ok because it’s a statue of a complete bastard. Thing is, you can’t have one law for things you don’t mind getting smashed up and dropped in the sea and another law for things you don’t want smashed up – like your house, or your car.
These guys took the opportunity to smash up property that is not theres. It was criminal damage and while they shouldn’t get the book thrown at them they can’t be let off either.
The level of cringe here is beyond belief. Varied opinions in this thread for or against, because a bunch of white guys pulled down a statue of a slave trader who died three hundred years ago, primarily because an American cop killed a criminal / drug addict.
Whatever you make of that, these protests have changed nothing, and in order get rid of everything related to slavery we’d have to bulldoze most of the world.
I’m not going to say whether I’m for or against that, but I will say I think it’s all pointless and a distraction from real issues, in this country by people who don’t understand American culture or history at all but who really do get a kick out of LARPing as Americans.
Is it just me or, is taking the law in your own hands and tearing down public monuments a completely illegal thing to do?