Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

The Colston Four

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

The Colston Four

Old 12th Jan 2022, 12:02
  #161 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 13,940
Originally Posted by DP. View Post
It will get nowhere. They were acquitted. There is no mechanism to allow for their retrial.
I see that the petition repeats the (potentially libellous) trope that the defence team intimidated the jury.

That aside, it's rather sad that (so far) nearly 30,000 people have demonstrated such a poor understanding of the law that they think a petition will achieve anything other than allowing them to let off steam.

And on that subject:

DaveReidUK is online now  
Old 12th Jan 2022, 21:56
  #162 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: heathrow
Posts: 53
I wonder if this will be another case of being found not guilty of criminal damage because the sculptor allegedly sexually abused his daughters.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-59972806
747 jock is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2022, 11:57
  #163 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 678
Burning books deemed to be offensive would normally be next but thankfully these people don’t read
Fonsini is offline  
Old 13th Jan 2022, 12:12
  #164 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 265
The more abhorrent amongst us are often those who refuse to let go of history.
Derfred is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2022, 13:09
  #165 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Lagos
Age: 64
Posts: 3
Originally Posted by mutley the dog View Post
I wonder what the reaction from the people who consider what the "Colston four" did to be acceptable would be if they were to wake up one morning only to find that a mob of Extinction Rebellion activists had trashed their car and the when tried in court for the damage, the jury found them not guilty because the accused stated that as internal combustion engines caused harm and suffering to mankind, they were within their rights to act as they did.
Originally Posted by HOVIS View Post
What a load of cobblers!
I wouldn't be so sure about that HOVIS.


The Extinction rebellion (XR) activists who stopped a train during a 2019 climate change protest were lawfully exercising their right to peaceful demonstration, a jury has found.

The Anglican priest and two other Christian environmentalists caused 77 minutes of disruption after two of them climbed onto a Docklands Light Railway train's roof and the other superglued himself to the carriage.


The three, all also members of Christian Climate Action, an arm of XR, each told the jury they were compelled by their faith to take action to protect God’s creation and prevent run-away climate change.
mutley the dog is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2022, 13:47
  #166 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2020
Location: HERE
Posts: 23
More lunacy from a woke jury

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-59996870
EXEL1966 is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2022, 16:10
  #167 (permalink)  
Thought police antagonist
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Where I always have been...firmly in the real world
Posts: 1,178
Originally Posted by EXEL1966 View Post
Yep, that's the inconvenience of juries. Presumably you are in the "accused - in court = automatically guilty" fraternity so why bother with juries at all.

But, don't despair because the charmless Ms Patel is your salvation with her thoughtful inclusion of draconian sentences for such protestors in a certain Bill. ...after all, who needs civil liberties when the population can simply be told how to behave...or else.

A very popular ideology with populist Govt's
Krystal n chips is offline  
Old 14th Jan 2022, 16:21
  #168 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 13,940
I loved this earlier BBC report that one of the protesters had glued himself to the locomotive on the DLR train.
DaveReidUK is online now  
Old 14th Jan 2022, 23:15
  #169 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 4,492
who needs civil liberties when the population can simply be told how to behave...or else.

A very popular ideology with populist Govt's
Never thought of Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot et al as being populist governments. Learn something new every day.
megan is offline  
Old 15th Jan 2022, 10:17
  #170 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The World
Posts: 1,717
Originally Posted by EXEL1966 View Post
More lunacy from a woke jury
I've always found it quite funny when some complain about "woke" juries. I'm not sure if the UK has a system where the prosecution can "challenge" certain jurors, but maths dictates that logically juries will be a random
cross section of society, one in which the average jury will represent the society at hand. So if in these two recent cases at least 10 out of 12 jurors have been "woke" as you put it, then that says either two things. One, the "wokesters" have successfully infiltrated the jury selection process to almost dominate it apparently with no decent judge or prosecutor noticing. Or, more likely, the majority opinion in public now follows what you refer to as the "woke" position and it's the "anti-woke" opinion which is now in a small minority.
dr dre is offline  
Old 15th Jan 2022, 11:10
  #171 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: No longer in Jurassic Park eating Toblerone....
Posts: 2,677
If the jury had been made up of the people on this platform I doubt they would have got off.

Do you think their age and religion tilted the jurors toward the not guilty verdict despite the reverend saying he was happy to go to prison?

LowNSlow is offline  
Old 15th Jan 2022, 12:25
  #172 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 13,940
Originally Posted by EXEL1966 View Post
More lunacy from a woke jury
Another uninformed (in several senses of the word) comment.

Or are we to assume that you

a) sat through the trial and noted all the evidence presented to the jury?

and

b) eavesdropped on the discussions in the jury room to ascertain whether they allowed their prejudices (if any) to trump the aforesaid evidence?

Thought not. The sum total of what you actually know about the trial is that you disagree with the verdict.
DaveReidUK is online now  
Old 15th Jan 2022, 14:22
  #173 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Under a gooseberry bush
Posts: 65
I’ve never been quite comfortable with the jury system. You only have to see how easily many are persuaded by a few in all situations and in all levels of society. Many people are inherently mentally lazy and prefer to follow than to lead. You get a dominant personality on any jury and most will fall in line - particularly as they have been summoned rather than volunteered. Individual jurors in a case like the Colston Four might not speak out for fear of looking like they are not ‘woke’ for example. A real danger of groupspeak in any trial.

Tbh, I’m not sure what the democratic alternative is; maybe a panel of judges, but even that system would be open to prejudice or bias.
BWSBoy6 is offline  
Old 15th Jan 2022, 15:09
  #174 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 13,940
Originally Posted by BWSBoy6 View Post
Individual jurors in a case like the Colston Four might not speak out for fear of looking like they are not ‘woke’ for example.
At least one, possibly two, did disagree with the majority verdict.
DaveReidUK is online now  
Old 15th Jan 2022, 15:40
  #175 (permalink)  
Thought police antagonist
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Where I always have been...firmly in the real world
Posts: 1,178
Originally Posted by BWSBoy6 View Post
I’ve never been quite comfortable with the jury system. You only have to see how easily many are persuaded by a few in all situations and in all levels of society. Many people are inherently mentally lazy and prefer to follow than to lead. You get a dominant personality on any jury and most will fall in line - particularly as they have been summoned rather than volunteered. Individual jurors in a case like the Colston Four might not speak out for fear of looking like they are not ‘woke’ for example. A real danger of groupspeak in any trial.

Tbh, I’m not sure what the democratic alternative is; maybe a panel of judges, but even that system would be open to prejudice or bias.
Correct, as evidenced by the Brexit referendum .

However, when it comes to group dynamics, the rest of your argument bears deeper scrutiny.

I agree, a dominant personality can be influential, certainly in work environments, but a jury isn't a work environment.

It comprises of 12 random people who have never met before and who don't know each others personalities or personal views. True, some aspects may emerge during discussions, but overall, it's fair to assume a dominant personality isn't going to impose the influence you suggest.

That, and if somebody does try, what happens if the jury includes people like myself, who will listen to the evidence pragmatically, but will take exception to being told, in effect, by one individual as to how they are expected to vote. To try and generalise the personalities of 12 people who suddenly become a group, and remember the basis of forming, norming, etc here, is not only inherently risky, it also shows you don't appear to be familiar with group dynamics.

In closed circles in organisations where 12 people suddenly become a group, there is a basis for forming.

With 12 random people, that isn't going to happen.

The liberal use of the word "woke" to disparage anybody who doesn't conform to what many clearly feel is some form of established status quo, and therefore cannot be challenged, despite the fact society is constantly evolving, a fact which invariably escapes their insular and often bigoted notice, does, in effect, show those who make the most noise are the ones unable and unwilling if not wholly incapable of adapting to change.
Krystal n chips is offline  
Old 15th Jan 2022, 16:02
  #176 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Under a gooseberry bush
Posts: 65
Originally Posted by Krystal n chips View Post
Correct, as evidenced by the Brexit referendum .

However, when it comes to group dynamics, the rest of your argument bears deeper scrutiny.

I agree, a dominant personality can be influential, certainly in work environments, but a jury isn't a work environment.

It comprises of 12 random people who have never met before and who don't know each others personalities or personal views. True, some aspects may emerge during discussions, but overall, it's fair to assume a dominant personality isn't going to impose the influence you suggest.

That, and if somebody does try, what happens if the jury includes people like myself, who will listen to the evidence pragmatically, but will take exception to being told, in effect, by one individual as to how they are expected to vote. To try and generalise the personalities of 12 people who suddenly become a group, and remember the basis of forming, norming, etc here, is not only inherently risky, it also shows you don't appear to be familiar with group dynamics.

In closed circles in organisations where 12 people suddenly become a group, there is a basis for forming.

With 12 random people, that isn't going to happen.

The liberal use of the word "woke" to disparage anybody who doesn't conform to what many clearly feel is some form of established status quo, and therefore cannot be challenged, despite the fact society is constantly evolving, a fact which invariably escapes their insular and often bigoted notice, does, in effect, show those who make the most noise are the ones unable and unwilling if not wholly incapable of adapting to change.
The thing is; I am familiar with group dynamics and have seen this behaviour repeated in numerous situations, both with work colleagues and public meetings where a disparate group have come together and are soon united behind an assertive and vocal self appointed spokesperson. As humans, we seem to automatically sort ourselves into leaders and followers, whatever the group If you understand group dynamics, this is the hidden power and danger of conformity.

If people generally were pragmatic - and I wish they were - why do barristers expend so much time, evidence and sometimes theatricals to persuade a jury? Why not merely provide and let the evidence speak for itself? Apparently, only 10% respond only to the information - which I think is actually pretty frightening!

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ar...l.pone.0196600

I totally agree I would like to think that those selected for jury service were able to listen dispassionately and almost clinically analyse the information provided, but we’re all subject to our own prejudices and prior experiences.

I agree too, rather than ‘woke’ maybe ‘bias’ is a more appropriate word. Whether it’s gender, political or racial.

Last edited by BWSBoy6; 15th Jan 2022 at 16:18.
BWSBoy6 is offline  
Old 15th Jan 2022, 16:36
  #177 (permalink)  
Thought police antagonist
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Where I always have been...firmly in the real world
Posts: 1,178
Originally Posted by BWSBoy6 View Post
The thing is; I am familiar with group dynamics and have seen this behaviour repeated in numerous situations, both with work colleagues and public meetings where a disparate group have come together and are soon united behind an assertive and vocal self appointed spokesperson. As humans, we seem to automatically sort ourselves into leaders and followers, whatever the group If you understand group dynamics, this is the hidden power and danger of conformity.

If people generally were pragmatic - and I wish they were - why do barristers expend so much time, evidence and sometimes theatricals to persuade a jury? Why not merely provide and let the evidence speak for itself? I totally agree I would like to think that those selected for jury service were able to listen dispassionately and almost clinically analyse the information provided, but we’re all subject to our own prejudices and prior experiences.

I agree too, rather than ‘woke’ maybe ‘bias’ is a more appropriate word. Whether it’s gender, political or racial.
Well if you are, as you say, familiar with group dynamics, lets go one stage further.

A jury is composed of 12 individuals, however, within that group is the age range, genders and occupations demographic to consider. Are you seriously suggesting that, with so many variables, one individual could, in such a short space of time have sufficient influence to impose his / her personality on the 11 other members.

As I said, in a work environment, perfectly possible due to the common factor of status and employment in that organisation.

You mentioned public meetings and I've attended a few over the years, and yes, you do get some sell appointed gobby egoist who loves the sound of their own voice, but, again, what is the basis for the public meeting in the first place because, by it's very nature, such a meeting has to have an attraction for those attending and hence any form of influence is relatively easy to impose.

With regard to m'learned friends, as they will happily explain, it's their job to defend / prosecute and theatrical performances have always been a well established feature of courts.
Krystal n chips is offline  
Old 15th Jan 2022, 17:09
  #178 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Rhones-Alpes
Posts: 350
I still can't understand/accept the verdict, and if this has previously been explained, then excuse me because I haven't kept up with all posts.

The charge was "criminal damage " and this wasn't denied but reasons were advanced for the actions. How can the verdict be other than guilty ? This isn't a case where someone is killed and self-defence can be argued and who did what is important; the statue wasn't threatening anybody .
Tartiflette Fan is offline  
Old 15th Jan 2022, 18:01
  #179 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 13,940
Originally Posted by Tartiflette Fan View Post
The charge was "criminal damage " and this wasn't denied but reasons were advanced for the actions.
They didn't deny what they did. They denied that it constituted criminal damage.

You might want to read the relevant legislation.
DaveReidUK is online now  
Old 15th Jan 2022, 18:25
  #180 (permalink)  
Cunning Artificer
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The spiritual home of DeHavilland
Age: 74
Posts: 3,127
Originally Posted by Derfred View Post
The more abhorrent amongst us are often those who refuse to let go of history.
Perhaps the history should be told correctly. European merchants found a lucrative trade by buying slaves on the African slave markets in West African states and selling them at a higher price on the other side of the Atlantic where there was a severe shortage of labour. Horrific as it was, they didn't invent the slave trade, they took advantage of an existing market in Africa - where black lives didn't matter if you were a POW, convicted criminal or even just from the wrong tribe
Blacksheep is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.