The crime is inconveniencing rich oil executives, duh.
Greta Thunberg: Case thrown because of 'no evidence'
Submitted 10 months ago by GreatAlbatross@feddit.uk to unitedkingdom@feddit.uk
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-68180317
Comments
Rentlar@lemmy.ca 10 months ago
tygerprints@kbin.social 10 months ago
Thank god there's some actual justice in this world, somewhere. How ridiculous to arrest people having a peaceful protest, especially in regard to a subject that should concern everyone. I hope she continues to prosper and get famous for standing up against tyranny.
octopus_ink@lemmy.ml 10 months ago
“It is quite striking to me that there were no witness statements taken from anyone in the hotel, approximately 1,000 people, or from anyone trying to get in,” he said.
“There was no evidence of any vehicles being impeded, no evidence of any interference with emergency services, or any risk to life.”
He said that the protest was “throughout peaceful, civilised and non-violent” and criticised evidence provided by the prosecution about the location of where the demonstrators should be moved to, saying the only helpful footage he received was “made by an abseiling protester”.
Really called out the cops on their bullshit there. Polite but direct. I like it.
Emperor@feddit.uk 10 months ago
Good.
They’ve been working hard to criminise protests, so this may make them think twice.
jettrscga@lemmy.world 10 months ago
How would this make them think twice? There weren’t any consequences for them for unlawful arrest and they still got to inconvenience protesters.
Emperor@feddit.uk 10 months ago
It was going to be the high level conviction that would make the news and be a shot across the bows of anyone else who protested and it failed, miserably. The CPS and everyone else involved are going to have to consider each new case now because the chances of conviction don’t look good.
Most protestors these days are prepared for inconvenience (some go out of their way to courter arrest in order to make a bigger splash), it’s a whole different ballgame if you could be looking at a criminal conviction for not doing much at all.
jtb@feddit.uk 10 months ago
Because the government has to pay her legal fees perhaps.