BLM protesters cleared over toppling of Edward Colston statue

I'm amazed.

So I should think!

It was an accident was it?

Must have fallen over all by its self then.

I suppose it indicates what most "people in the street " think.

Just 12 on a jury Ilovecheese.

Crazy and sad. We can all see where this country is heading. In completely the wrong direction.

love0c

Crazy and sad. We can all see where this country is heading. In completely the wrong direction.

What direction is that, loveOc?

I was born and raised in Bristol and lived there for over 50 years. The statue was a stain on the city and many thousands of people had tried to have it removed through peaceful, constructive channels.

"Colston was “chief executive officer” of a company that branded children as young as nine, and which was eventually responsible for enslaving more Africans than any other in British history"

When I heard it was pulled down I stood up from my gardening and punched the air. I've never done that before and don't expect I'll do it again in a hurry! Good on those kids with the conviction and fire in their belly to do what decent people should have done decades earlier.

"thousands of people had tried to have to removed through peaceful, constructive channels".

Whether or not you approve of a particular deed, the law is the law. There was footage of this statue being toppled by protesters. They broke the law and the verdict should have been based on evidence given at the time, not on whether or not any of the jury were one of "many thousands" who tried to have it removed by other means.

Perhaps this is what you meant love0c.

Decent people don't break the law.

I was expecting a guilty verdict and then a very minimal fine. This sets a bad precedence.

Juries are representing "the people" They made the correct decision in my view. Slavery is nothing to be proud of, and those that worked in that disgusting industry should not be honoured in any way.

I'm glad it is gone and I am glad that the jury made that decision.

The people have spoken

I wonder what you think about the suffragettes breaking the law Smileless2012.

I agree Avalon and would go as far to say it sets a very bad precedence.

Juries represent "the people" to see that justice is served Ilovecheese and IMO this jury has let the people down. It's got nothing to do with what this statue represented, it was wilful damage to public property which is against the law.

That is kind of you Smileless to go to the trouble on my behalf. You are quite correct , I do not go along with breaking the law.

"public property"

It should have gone a very long time ago.

If these things need to be protected for whatever reason, shove them in a museum and name it "The British museum of Shame" or something

The public has spoken. They should have been heard, they spoke louder.

What I think about them breaking the law is irrelevant Coastpath.

These protesters weren't acquitted because they were innocent, so what does that say about this jury?

That's what I expected too 25Avalon. Regardless of how much anyone was in agreement with the action, those jurors did not keep the oath they swore which was to reach a verdict 'according to the evidence'. There was video evidence of the defendants participating in the felling of the statue and then throwing it into the river. When jurors decide their personal preference outweighs the correct application of the law we're on a slippery slope. As someone who has done jury service several times I've had to make some difficult and unwelcome decisions based purely on the evidence, not my personal feelings.

No worries love0c it was quite clear to me what you meant.

Excellent post Rosie.

Rosie51 totally agree with your post.

I agree that the statue should have been removed a long time ago and put in a museum.
The pigeons will miss it.

However, this is condoning criminal damage and technically it is the wrong verdict.
What precedent does it set?

I agree Rosie51