Palestine Action

Vic said:
I think people should refrain from commenting without knowing anything about the evidence.

Posting stills from poor and confusing video doesn't help, but it's the PA activists in the red jumpsuits, and they brought the sledgehammers. The sledgehammers were to destroy drones used to kill children, but it was a daft choice as they were too heavy for the women to use properly. One of the security guards grabbed and then wielded one of the sledgehammers. Corner's use of a sledgehammer against the policewoman came when he'd been sprayed with PAVA spray by police and was responding to one of the women activists screaming in pain while being restrained.

I summarise - there were many days of evidence before the jury.
Click to expand...
I think your right I deleted my post could you do the same I thought they were security guards, he is still locked up and I don’t want to prejudice the trial
 
Postman Pep said:





Click to expand...

There are two separate moments of attacks. The first shown in the screenshot of your post is the first moment, which is 18 seconds before he attacks the female officer.

Below are screenshots and videos of the second attack (against the female officer).

The man literally attacked her twice within the span of one second, once in her back and once from the front. Just because they intended to do something you approve of doesn’t mean you need to go blind defending them at any cost. Cowardly attacking a working woman with a sledgehammer doesn’t help Palestine at all.001.png
002.png
003.png
004.png
005-down.png

 
Itd said:
There are two separate moments of attacks. The first shown in the screenshot of your post is the first moment, which is 18 seconds before he attacks the female officer.

Below are screenshots and videos of the second attack (against the female officer).

The man literally attacked her twice within the span of one second, once in her back and once from the front. Just because they intended to do something you approve of doesn’t mean you need to go blind defending them at any cost. Cowardly attacking a working woman with a sledgehammer doesn’t help Palestine at all.View attachment 182886
View attachment 182887
View attachment 182888
View attachment 182889
View attachment 182890

Click to expand...

Using "autism" as a defence is mental. The guy will hopefully be serving porridge.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Itd
BlueMoonday said:
Using "autism" as a defence is mental. The guy will hopefully be serving porridge.
Click to expand...
Again, a partial understanding of the defence. It's not autism that's a defence but that his autism meant his behaviour and actions were unlikely to have been done maliciously or intended to cause serious injury, which is what had to be proved for a section 18 offence.
 
Vic said:
Again, a partial understanding of the defence. It's not autism that's a defence but that his autism meant his behaviour and actions were unlikely to have been done maliciously or intended to cause serious injury, which is what had to be proved for a section 18 offence.
Click to expand...
That old chestnut. Sounds more like a very violent individual. Many are quick to cite some form of condition for their wrong doing these days, it's a kop out.

If he does have a condition then why was he allowed out and why were PA happy to onboard him? So much for duty of care.
 
Last edited:
Itd said:
There are two separate moments of attacks. The first shown in the screenshot of your post is the first moment, which is 18 seconds before he attacks the female officer.

Below are screenshots and videos of the second attack (against the female officer).

The man literally attacked her twice within the span of one second, once in her back and once from the front. Just because they intended to do something you approve of doesn’t mean you need to go blind defending them at any cost. Cowardly attacking a working woman with a sledgehammer doesn’t help Palestine at all.View attachment 182886
View attachment 182887
View attachment 182888
View attachment 182889
View attachment 182890

Click to expand...

They are just hate filled cunts and arrogant as fuck with it
 
BlueMoonday said:
That old chestnut. Sounds more like a very violent individual. Many are quick to cite some form of condition for their wrong doing these days, it's a kop out.

If he does have a condition then why was he allowed out and why were PA happy to onboard him? So much for duty of care.
Click to expand...
"Allowed out"? The defence case was that he was not a very violent individual and, half blinded by PAVA spray, was reacting to defend one of his colleagues.
 
Vic said:
"Allowed out"? The defence case was that he was not a very violent individual and, half blinded by PAVA spray, was reacting to defend one of his colleagues.
Click to expand...
If he doesn't want to be pepper sprayed then maybe he should avoid trespassing, intimidating innocent staff and vandalising equipment. Fuck around and find out.

Is he violent or not violent then? If his autism can lead to violent behaviour then why did PA onboard him? It sounds like you are making excuses for a very violent and aggressive individual because their cause aligns with your beliefs.
 
Last edited:
BlueMoonday said:
If he doesn't want to be pepper aorayed then maybe he should avoid trespassing, intimidating innocent staff and vandalising equipment. Fuck around and find out.

Is he violent or not violent then? If his autism can lead to violent behaviour then why did PA onboard him? It sounds like you are making excuses for a very violent and aggressive individual because their cause aligns with your beliefs.
Click to expand...
No, it's just that I've read the reports of the evidence, including the judge's summing up and directions. You should try it.

And by "equipment" you mean child-killer drones.
 
Last edited:
Vic said:
Again, a partial understanding of the defence. It's not autism that's a defence but that his autism meant his behaviour and actions were unlikely to have been done maliciously or intended to cause serious injury, which is what had to be proved for a section 18 offence.
Click to expand...
He wasn’t released with the rest though I think he will serve time for using the sledgehammer, it’s one thing peaceful demonstrating against the genocide in Gaza and another breaking in to a factory armed with a weapon, the rest of the group didn’t do him any favours going along with it if they knew he was Autistic.
They’ve already all been locked up in solitary confinement for 16 months curtesy of the proscription so whatever the court decide for him section 18 might be life.
 
Kirkstall Blue said:
He wasn’t released with the rest though I think he will serve time for using the sledgehammer, it’s one thing peaceful demonstrating against the genocide in Gaza and another breaking in to a factory armed with a weapon, the rest of the group didn’t do him any favours going along with it if they knew he was Autistic.
They’ve already all been locked up in solitary confinement for 16 months curtesy of the proscription so whatever the court decide for him section 18 might be life.
Click to expand...
But the jury couldn't reach a verdict even on lesser charges, e.g. they could have found him not guilty of causing grievous bodily harm with intent, but guilty of causing actual bodily harm.

But the defendants were found not guilty of aggravated burglary, which means the jury were not sure, on the evidence, that any of the defendants "had with them a sledgehammer which, at the time of entering the building, they intended to use to cause injury to or incapacitate a security guard if needed (or encouraged or assisted a co-defendant to have with them a sledgehammer which, at the time of entering the Elbit building, they both intended to be used by the co-defendant for that purpose)".

In other words the jury didn't believe they entered intending to use the sledgehammers against anyone, only to damage property (as it happens, death-dealing property used for war crimes).
 
Kirkstall Blue said:
He wasn’t released with the rest though I think he will serve time for using the sledgehammer, it’s one thing peaceful demonstrating against the genocide in Gaza and another breaking in to a factory armed with a weapon, the rest of the group didn’t do him any favours going along with it if they knew he was Autistic.
Click to expand...
I think this is the key point though. A sledgehammer isn't the sort of thing you bring if you're trying to hurt people, is it? Unless you're Thor. So yes, it was used as a weapon, but I hardly think you can say that they 'went in armed with a weapon' any more than if they'd hit the security guard with a pair of bolt cutters.
 
Vic said:
Click to expand...
Good programme that, the Lord who rolled his eyes at the mention of genocide while being part of friends of Israel seemed a little off but he definitely wrote an independent report :-)
The government emails confirming it was looked at because of property damage to private businesses(obviously Israeli ones) and the complaining emails previously from Elbit Uk who make drones for the military. Owner has a nice CBE to boot for prosperity to Israeli and Uk business.
Then obviously there is the optics of the great unwashed making the govt look silly by being concerned about dead folk.

Not exactly a surprise is it ?
 
Last edited:
KPXBLN said:
The High Court has found the ban on PA unlawful. :)
Click to expand...
There's around 300 folk holding "I support Palestine Action" signs outside the court which has just said it's unlawful to arrest them. Yet they can still arrest them as the court wants to here the appeal from the Goverment before it's rubber stamped.

Should of just said you're good to go from now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top