The Colston Four

[KS55]

The three hours is a bit misleading. A majority verdict can’t be given until at least two hours and ten minutes have passed, and most likely it will have been a bit more than that. So, it may very well be the case that everyone had entrenched positions for a couple of hours, and it was clear no-one was going to budge, so a message was given the the Judge and he gave them the majority direction, upon which they came back with a verdict. Three hours, in a high profile case like this, is pretty quick tbf.

Yup. Fly on the wall needed!

 

[mosssideblue]

Good for them , i lived in bristol for a couple of years and everything coulson was despised , the council were asked year on year to remove the statue and they refused , in this case mob justice was fully warranted

Sorry Kaz, mob justice is never fully warranted, unless you want to live in a lawless society

 

[meltonblue]

Yup. Fly on the wall needed!

Thats the thing with jury cases, you don’t get to hear the reasoning behind their verdict and if there was any particular argument that they found most persuasive.

I think with this one, there would have been a few jurors that just needed to be told of one that could be used and that was enough.

 

[kaz7]

Sorry Kaz, mob justice is never fully warranted, unless you want to live in a lawless society

Nobody was intending to hurt anyone , it is a statue ffs

 

[BobKowalski]

Pleased for the defendants and props for the jury in seeing sense.

 

[bluethrunthru]

jury trial as old of the hills and is seen as the benchmark of a civilised and just society - however some on here unhappy with the outcome of a jury trial want to lurch further towards a banana republic - maybe we need to go to this

 

[blueinsa]

Nobody was intending to hurt anyone , it is a statue ffs

Yet 8 police officers where injured.

 

[Scottyboi]

4 trustafarians celebrate ending racism with some avocado on toast and a chai latte. Hugs all round.

 

[Vic]

Yet 8 police officers where injured.

During the bringing down of Colston's statue? I think you may be getting mixed up with the offshoot rioting during the protests against an authoritarian government wanting to criminalise protest.

 

[abu13]

Bunch of cunts.

 

[mosssideblue]

Nobody was intending to hurt anyone , it is a statue ffs

Irrespective of whether anyone got hurt or not, it's criminal damage and they were guilty

 

[BobKowalski]

During the bringing down of Colston's statue? I think you may be getting mixed up with the offshoot rioting during the protests against an authoritarian government wanting to criminalise protest.

Seem to recall the police did little to stop the statue toppling and were criticised for not defending a monument to a man who murdered thousands of people.

 

[BobKowalski]

Irrespective of whether anyone got hurt or not, it's criminal damage and they were guilty

Not according to the jury and the rule of law.

 

[mosssideblue]

Not according to the jury and the rule of law.

Even they admitted it

 

[BobKowalski]

Even they admitted it

What they or anyone’s else says is irrelevant. Under the law they were found not guilty.

And rightly so.

 

[mosssideblue]

What they or anyone’s else says is irrelevant. Under the law they were found not guilty.

And rightly so.

I agree with your first point but never with your second

 

[meltonblue]

Even they admitted it

They admitted damaging the statue. That does not make them guilty of criminal damage, the defence argument gave the jury three legal routes to find them not guilty.

 

[kaz7]

Irrespective of whether anyone got hurt or not, it's criminal damage and they were guilty

Not in the court of law

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

Even they admitted it

Whatever they admitted to, they didn’t plead guilty to the charges against them, otherwise they wouldn’t have had the trial in front of jury.
The jury heard the evidence and found them not guilty of the charges.
It happens. Whether the rest of us think we know better or not.

 

[mosssideblue]

Not in the court of law

Q. Do you think they we're guilty of criminal damage?