You must log in or register to see images
Four cleared of criminal damage over toppling statue of Edward Colston
You must log in or register to see images
Four cleared of criminal damage over toppling statue of Edward Colston
Couldn’t have put it better myself, my feelings exactlyPeople who are anti Christian will be able to demolish St Mary Redcliffe Church & Bristol Cathedral, People who are anti Moslem can knock down mosques, people who are anti Brunel can blow up the Clifton Suspension bridge and sink the SS. Great Britain, take it a step further lets throw John Cabot statue in the habour and blow up the Cabot tower because of his 1497 voyage showing us all the way, why don't we blow up the whole of Bristol including the Wills building for allowing the tobacco industry to develop causing plantations and smoking, all this will be legal because Marvin Rees the idiot and his collection band of fools, lefties and wokes have convinced our legal system that this puts us all on the right side of history and life.
It's a pure nonsense and a travesty, the criminals should be locked up, Rees and his cronies should be shafted at the next election,
I’m certainly no Tory lover, but this has nothing to do with them.I have no time for Boris or the Tories at present. They are a bunch of liars and cheats who are only interested in themselves and don't know or understand the common people or understand what the priorities and common decency should be.
However, much though I'd like to blame the Tories over yet another failure on their part with these people being acquitted, it's the system that's too blame not the government.
further to my #9 post and chatting over the verdict with a couple of friends Colstons school. Not so much now, but the coffers [ school income /fees] are swollen by descendants, of 2 and 3 generations ago, who in the past themselves benefitted by COLSTONS gift /endowment and helped them get educated. Of all nationalities, irrespective of colour.
Edward Colston’s father was a Bristol merchant who moved his family to London when Edward was nine years old. At the age of seventeen Edward was apprenticed to a London mercer and by the 1670s he was trading independently in cloth, exporting to Spain, the Canaries and Mediterranean countries and importing wine, oil and fruit.
He was already a very wealthy man by 1680, when he became a member of the Royal African Company. He was to be deputy governor from 1689 until 1692, when his involvement ceased.
in the 12 years he was involved it was estimated that around 80,000 slaves were transported, was his the only ship? or ships? NO. this company had many investors including Samuel Pepys Royal mint made a coin/ coins to celebrate him! and John Locke physician, benefitted from investment income from slaving profits!
In 1682, [Colston ] he made a loan to the Bristol Corporation and the following year, became a member of the Society of Merchant Venturers. QUESTION... HOW MUCH MONEY bearing in mind had possibly been responsible for transporting a small portion of the 80,000 slaves during his time with Royal A C . He didnt just stop all his ships carrying the more profitable items that for 8 years had made him a very rich man, textiles wines sherry, cod, yep fish , and silk. AND FOR THE FOLLOWING 20years till he retired? / died [ 29 years later ]
HISTORY WILL BE FOREVER THERE you cant pull it off a plinth and pretend everything is going to be forgotten. The pupils who go his schools, his funded church's benefit from his foundations wiil be in denial should they believe that bit of history is forgotten. Black people cant deny it happened and hope it goes away, so it will always be a "major part of their history" Every time they say " the slave trade was evil, most of the planet agree, and the whole historical event is revisited. The woke 4, by their actions and being found not guilty has opened another door to revisit
the wonderful patchwork quilt of our past history, another key in the door so to speak. Imagine it without Colstons help we could be a little port like town, a few fishing boats catching the odd elver in the spring, abandoned coal pits, population of 50k? with 20 little villages surrounding it Brislington, Whitchurch, Hanham, Kingswood Filton Pylle etc etc etc .... Thank you EC
I did wonder whether the decision could go to appeal, they were obviously guilty of criminal damage if nothing else surelyThe Attorney General is "carefully considering" whether to refer the Bristol Edward Colston statue case to the Court of Appeal.
hey thats good news ....
Suella Braverman said trial by jury was "an important guardian of liberty" but the result was "causing confusion"
The referral would not affect the acquittal, she added.
bol loxitus always a negative. lets hope they find some more evidence, or a couple more involved .....
that is where the so called clarity is so called cloudy.I did wonder whether the decision could go to appeal, they were obviously guilty of criminal damage if nothing else surely
If they admitted what they did, then they are guilty of criminal damage at the very least surely, even if you then argue about what the sentence will be.that is where the so called clarity is so called cloudy.
I wonder how the investigation will proceed? Will it involve interviewing the jury individually to see if they understood what they were making a verdict on, after all the 4 admitted what they did whilst claiming not guilty to the charge based on "they didnt like it"
was any members of the jury coerced into voting guilty, were they so called unbiased before the trial? Was the judge at fault? .......
The judge in the Colston statue trial feared defence lawyers may have placed the jury under 'wrongful' pressure by urging them to be 'on the right side of history'.
Judge Peter Blair QC said jurors may have felt an 'additional burden on their shoulders' after hearing a barrister's claims about the global impact of their decision.
Meanwhile, MPs last night said the decision to allow a historian who 'desperately' wanted to join the Colston statue protest to give expert evidence to the trial was 'absurd'.
Critics claimed that letting Professor David Olusoga [ black person supporter of the BLM ] speak in front of the Colston Four jury converted a criminal trial into a political one.
They questioned whether jurors were unfairly swayed by the involvement in the case of prominent campaigners, who also included Bristol-born artist Banksy and specialist protest lawyer and Labour politician Raj Chada.
During the two-week trial, prosecutors argued that BLM supporter Professor Olusoga should not have been allowed to give evidence for the defendants due to his well-known stance on the statue's vandalism.
The academic, who has produced several documentaries about slavery for the BBC, has also publicly accused Winston Churchill of the equivalent of modern-day 'war crimes'.
Political commentator Calvin Robinson criticised the judge for allowing the 'biased' academic to provide expert witness.
He said: 'David Olusoga was obviously biased, but more importantly he's not an expert in the destruction of property, he is a historian. This court case should have had nothing to do with history. It was about the destruction of public property.'
Mr Robinson added: 'Clearly it was Colston on trial, and not the Black Lives Matter thugs. The whole trial was on Colston – it wasn't entirely relevant and now the result looks political.'
During the trial, prosecutor William Hughes QC unsuccessfully argued that Professor Olusoga's historical evidence was irrelevant.
After the verdict, he said: 'In our view, Olusoga's testimony didn't add anything.
"Rather, it was a gloss that I can imagine would have put anyone in the jury at a degree of unease.'
SO appears they were not on trial for vandalism in front of a jury that had been frightened into not voting for the charge of vandalism ... " vote guilty and face the consequences"
thats why the implication is the jury were put under stress /threat by the defending barrister .. for that the defence barrister of one of them apologised he shouldnt have said it .... a major "point" in a lot films made, where they say something " like he did it before?" [whatever ] ... they get objection ..... your honour leading the jury? ! ... judge "sustained delete from records, I will stress you mustnt say that again etc" ..If they admitted what they did, then they are guilty of criminal damage at the very least surely, even if you then argue about what the sentence will be.