Right, but they didn't put people's lives in danger, nor were they trying to. So they don't meet the most extreme levels of offence. IANAL, but that's my reading.
Going to jail for sure, but I think 18 months is more likely than six years.
Sycamore Gap tree at Hadrian's Wall 'felled overnight'
- Thread starter Neil79
- Start date
Right, but they didn't put people's lives in danger, nor were they trying to. So they don't meet the most extreme levels of offence. IANAL, but that's my reading.
Going to jail for sure, but I think 18 months is more likely than six years.
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Aug 2004
- Posts
- 8,400
- Location
- England
How long until it's a Netflix docu/drama?
Right, but you only said chopping down some random tree. You completely neglected the other part of their crime.
Read it again, I was saying that IF it was a random tree it'd be a fine. It wasn't a random tree.
Sorry, could you show me where you said that in the original post?
Is this a thing you have made up in your head? If not, please post solid evidence that the people who pulled down the Colston statue were found not guilty because "some judge recommended the jury to let them off".
As I recall at the time the general expectation was that they would not be found guilty by a jury, because a lot of people thought the statue of a slave trader was offensive and should have been removed from the city centre years before.
The defence put forward several arguments to explain the actions of the defendents (unlike the Sycamore Gap morons they did not deny what they had done) and the judge explained the options to the jury. I have seen no evidence that the "judge recommended the jury to let them off".
That's exactly how I read it originally
Could you show me where IF is in the post I quoted? I still can't see it.
Context clues
Evil Roots: The Trial of The Sycamore Two.
Context is he was talking purely about the tree and made no mention of the wall.
He opined that this is not just the felling of a random tree, so a punishment greater than a fine is appropriate. Subsequently clarifying that his reasons for this not being just being the felling a random tree include the damage to a historic wall, does not appear to conflict with the earlier post.
I really can't see that it's worth arguing about.
Unless I'm mistaken, he only mentioned the wall after I pointed out he hadn't?
But it's not unreasonable to contend that it was inferred. It's not really a winnable argument.
couple of minutes on google https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/AG-Ref-Colston-Four-judgment-280922.pdf
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Jan 2010
- Posts
- 3,869
Let the punishment fit the crime- throw chainsaws at them.
As I mentioned in my post, the judge explained the options to the jury. Where does it say that the "judge recommended the jury to let them off"?
[ so 73% of people didn't want colston removed or thought it was removed inappropriately - "justice seen to be done" ?
Do you approve or disapprove of protesters in Bristol pulling down the statue of Edward Colston?
and look at the age bias on that opinion from the populist social media clan.
]
Do you approve or disapprove of protesters in Bristol pulling down the statue of Edward Colston?
and look at the age bias on that opinion from the populist social media clan.
]