Jailed M25 protesters gain support ahead of appeal
Sixteen activists jailed for as long as five years for their involvement in protests will challenge the length of their sentences at the Court of Appeal in London.
They were jailed for activities such as blocking the M25, throwing soup on to Vincent van Gogh's Sunflowers, and occupying tunnels dug under the road leading to the Navigator Oil Terminal in Thurrock, Essex.
Lending her support to their appeals, campaigner Helen Pankhurst compared their campaigns with that of the suffragettes.
"Environmental activists today stand in the same tradition," Ms Pankhurst said.
"I have no doubt future generations around the world will thank them for their campaigns."
Environmental campaign groups Friends of the Earth (FoE) and Greenpeace UK have been allowed to intervene in the case of five protesters, referred to by FoE as the "Whole Truth Five", who were jailed in July last year for disrupting traffic by having protesters climb onto gantries over the M25 for four successive days in November 2022.
Roger Hallam, co-founder of environmental campaign groups Just Stop Oil and Extinction Rebellion, was sentenced to five years in prison while Daniel Shaw, Louise Lancaster, Lucia Whittaker De Abreu and Cressida Gethin each received four-year jail terms.
All five protesters were convicted of conspiracy to intentionally cause a public nuisance, a law introduced in 2022 which outlaws direct action that causes "serious harm" to a section of the public. This can include property damage, injury, serious distress, annoyance or inconvenience.
During their trial, prosecution barristers told the court the protest had led to 50,000 hours of vehicle delays, an economic hit of at least £765,000, and cost the Metropolitan Police more than £1.1m.
During the trial last year, Judge Christopher Hehir said the five protestors had "crossed the line from concerned campaigner to fanatic".
He added Parliament had made clear it saw non-violent direct action against national infrastructure as serious and passed a law allowing him to hand down sentences of up to 10 years - more than for some violent offences.
Calling for the court to repeal the sentences, Ms Pankhurst said: "The heavy-handed and disproportionate custodial sentences given in the UK to peaceful environmental activists speaking truth to power is worrying in the extreme."
FoE and Greenpeace UK said their submissions supporting the five would also "assist those involved in the other linked appeals".
Among those due to appeal against their sentences are Phoebe Plummer and Anna Holland, who were jailed to two years and 20 months respectively for throwing soup on protective glass in front of the Sunflowers painting at London's National Gallery.
FoE said that its lawyers would argue that the sentences were "excessive" and breached human rights legislation, claiming they posed a "serious threat to our democracy".
Katie de Kauwe, senior lawyer at FoE, said: "Instead of further burdening our overcrowded prison system by criminalising those trying to push the climate and nature emergencies up the political agenda out of sheer desperation, the government should be accelerating efforts to deliver fair and meaningful action on the environment."
Ms Pankhurst's great-grandmother Emmeline Pankhurst founded the British suffragette movement in 1903 and helped women win the right to vote.
Helen Pankhurst, who was the University of Suffolk's vice chancellor from 2018 - 24, has continued her family's ongoing campaigns for gender equality.
Listen to the best of BBC Radio London on Sounds and follow BBC London on Facebook, X and Instagram. Send your story ideas to hello.bbclondon@bbc.co.uk
Climate groups to back M25 protesters' jail appeal
Activists throw soup on Van Gogh painting again
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
2 days ago
- CNN
Irish court rejects Conor McGregor appeal in sexual assault case
Mixed martial arts fighter Conor McGregor on Thursday lost his attempt to overturn a jury's order that he compensate a woman who accused him of raping her, with Ireland's Court of Appeal rejecting the appeal in its entirety. The plaintiff, Nikita Hand, alleged that McGregor sexually assaulted her on December 9, 2018. A jury last year ordered McGregor to pay her nearly 250,000 euros ($285,250) in damages. McGregor, 36, denied the allegation and said he had 'fully consensual sex' with Hand. He also denied causing bruising to the plaintiff. In the appeal heard earlier this month, lawyers for McGregor said the judge erred in directing the jury to decide whether he 'assaulted' rather than 'sexually assaulted' the victim. Judge Brian O'Moore said on Thursday that the appeal court had no doubt the overall effect of the trial judge's charge was to tell them the central allegation by Hand against McGregor was that he had raped her. McGregor's legal team had also argued that the judge should not have allowed a line of questioning during cross-examination regarding McGregor's 'no comment' responses in a police interview. That ground was also rejected. Hand embraced a number of people beside her after the appeal court ruling. 'To every survivor out there, I know how hard it is, but please don't be silenced. … You deserve to be heard, you also deserve justice. Today, I can finally move on and try to heal,' Hand said in a statement outside the court. Hand told the high court in November that she and a friend made contact with McGregor, whom she knew, after a work Christmas party. She said they were driven by McGregor to a party in a penthouse room of a Dublin hotel where drugs and alcohol were consumed. She said McGregor, who was not in court on Thursday, took her to a bedroom in the penthouse and sexually assaulted her. Hand's lawyer told the jury that when she was referred to a sexual assault treatment unit the day after the alleged assault, a doctor was so concerned that he directed that photographs be taken of her injuries.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
Hamilton judge reprimanded, ordered to apologize to Peter Khill after giving wrong manslaughter sentence
Ontario Superior Court Justice Andrew Goodman has been publicly reprimanded and ordered to apologize to a man found guilty of manslaughter after he imposed a prison sentence two years longer than intended at the end of the high-profile case. Goodman waited over a year before admitting he'd meant to sentence Peter Khill to six years in prison for manslaughter, not eight. Khill had been found guilty in the 2016 shooting death of Jonathan Styres, a 29-year-old Cayuga father of two from Six Nations of the Grand River. The Canadian Judicial Council's three-person review panel condemned Goodman's "inaction," calling it "a serious ethical lapse and a failure" in a decision released Wednesday. While Goodman apologized through the review process, the panel remained concerned he "still fails to fully appreciate how the delay in correcting his error affects public confidence in the judiciary." Goodman will keep his position in Superior Court, the review panel decided, as his conduct wasn't "so profoundly destructive of the concept of impartiality, integrity and independence" to justify removing him. Goodman handed down the wrong sentence in June 2023 after Khill's three trials, multiple appeals and a Supreme Court of Canada ruling. In August 2024, as Khill was in the process of appealing his sentence and conviction, Goodman sent a letter to the Court of Appeal about his mistake. He said he'd grabbed the wrong printed copy of his decision on the way to the courtroom and realized the error as he read it aloud. He didn't immediately correct himself, Goodman said, "perhaps due to a variety of factors, including having just read out a lengthy 53-page ruling before a crowded and divergent audience, with substantial media presence, for this high-profile case." Supreme Court won't hear Khill's appeal After the hearing, Goodman consulted several "experienced, judicial colleagues" about rectifying his error, but was "dissuaded" from doing so because the eight-year prison term was still an acceptable sentence for manslaughter, Goodman said. It wasn't until Khill's appeal was underway that Goodman felt compelled to come forward. The review panel said his mistake of reading the wrong sentence was a human one and understandable. But his decision to not say anything for over a year was unreasonable. While Khill's sentence ended up being reduced to six years by the Court of Appeal, and he didn't serve any extra time due to Goodman's mistake, it still impacted him, the review panel said. "Mr. Khill, for a significant time, remained under the belief that he was sentenced to a substantially lengthier sentence," the decision said. "It may very well have been that if Justice Goodman's error as to the length of sentence had been immediately corrected, there would not have been any appeal." While the Appeal Court had reduced Khill's sentence, it did not overturn his conviction. Khill argued he fired a gun in self-defence after finding Styres breaking into his truck early into Feb. 4, 2016. Khill attempted to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada, but this week, the top court declined to hear the case, marking its end. As is standard practice, the high court did not give reasons for its decision to disallow hearing the case.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
Conor McGregor Loses Appeal in Civil Rape and Sexual Assault Case: Report
McGregor was accused of assaulting a woman after a party in 2018NEED TO KNOW Ireland's court of appeal rejected Conor McGregor's attempt to overturn a decision from his November trial McGregor was accused of "brutally" raping and battering a woman in 2018 He was ordered to pay roughly $257,000 to the plaintiff following the jury's decisionMMA fighter Conor McGregor lost his appeal in a civil rape case stemming from an incident in 2018. McGregor, 37, was found liable in November in a civil rape and sexual assault case and ordered to pay his accuser, Nikita Hand, about $257,000. On Thursday, July 31, Ireland's court of appeal rejected McGregor's attempt to overturn the decision, according to BBC. McGregor's lawyers' argument for the appeal revolved around mishandling the jury, arguing that the wording of a question given to jurors on the "issue paper" contributed to the final decision, and that McGregor's statements during his police interviews should not have been exhibited to the jury, per the BBC's report. McGregor said he'd be appealing the decision in a now-deleted post on X. "The judge's instruction and the modest award given was for assault, not for aggravated or exemplary damages," he wrote "I am disappointed that the jury did not hear all the evidence that the DPP reviewed. I am with my family now, focused on my future. Thank you to all my support worldwide." Hand accused McGregor in 2021 of "brutally" raping and battering her while she was intoxicated after she invited him to join her and a friend at a December 2018 company holiday party in Dublin. Her lawyers claimed she was left with bruises and post-traumatic stress disorder after the assault. Hand also accused a friend of McGregor's, James Lawrence, of assaulting her on the night in question, Jurors found Lawrence did not assault her, according to The Guardian. McGregor left the trial without speaking to the media. Hand, however, addressed reporters outside the courthouse after the verdict in November. 'To all the victims of sexual assault, I hope my story is a reminder that no matter how afraid you might be, speak up, you have a voice and keep on fighting for justice," she said before crediting her daughter for giving her "so much strength and courage over the last six years throughout this nightmare." 'I want to show [her] and every other girl and boy that you can stand up for yourself if something happens to you, no matter who the person is, and justice will be served," Hand added. If you or someone you know has been sexually assaulted, please contact the National Sexual Assault Hotline at 1-800-656-HOPE (4673) or go to Read the original article on People
