Showing posts with label Trudy Warner. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Trudy Warner. Show all posts

25 April 2026

The Met & Judge Jeremy Johnson are Trying to Rig the Filton 6 Retrial

The Jury Aren’t Being Allowed to Know the Context of the Defendant’s Actions, Their Right to Acquit on the Grounds of Conscience Nor that They will be Sentenced, if found Guilty of Criminal Damage, as Terrorists

Zarah Sultana Speech in House of Commons - How Judges & the State are Trying to Rig the Retrial of Filton 24 by Keeping Jurors in the Dark

On the 13th April I went to Woolwich Crown Court where the first 6 of the Filton 24 were facing a retrial. Last February all 6 defendants were acquitted of aggravated burglary, the most serious of the charges, carrying a life sentence.


Three of the six, were cleared by the jury of violent disorder and the prosecution last week offered no evidence on this charge against the remaining 3 defendants.

The only charges outstanding are those of criminal damage and in the case of Samuel Corner, Grievous Bodily Harm in respect of Police Sergeant Kate Evans.

Picket on the First Day of the Retrial

The mass media was full of allegations that Corner had deliberately attacked Evans with a sledgehammer. In fact the injury was barely noticeable and the charge of GBH is grossly excessive.

Woolwich Crown Court on Thursday - Cleared of Demonstrators

What the lying British media did not report was that Pava, a synthetic pepper spray had been directed at his face blinding him and then he heard a fellow actionist screaming out in pain. He swung his sledgehammer instinctively and having been blinded.  But you wouldn’t expect the feral British press to report the truth.


Judge Jeremy Johnson - Doing His Best to Secure Guilty Verdicts - A Ruling Class Patsy

This week we learn, and thanks to Zarah Sultana for using her privelege to reveal this in a speech in the House of Commons, that Judge Jeremy Johnson, who  spent his legal life defending the State and MI6, including ruling that  Assange should be deported, has ordered that the jury should not be informed that if the defendants are convicted of criminal damage they will be sentenced as ‘terrorists’.

It is part of the sick society that we live in that you are a ‘terrorist’ if you damage a death factory that is producing drones to murder children and you are a hero if you profit out of those deaths. ‘Justice’ Jeremy Johnson is a fit representative of such a society but it is Starmer, Yvette Cooper and the coconuts that go by the name of Lammy and Shabana Mahmood who are presiding over this injustice.

The jury acquittals in February are why Lammy is determined to abolish jury trials for those liable for less than 3 year sentences. The jury is the one independent element in the whole so-called Justice System. Judges are appointed by the Executive and are their creatures. This so-called Labour Government is determined to continue where the last Tory government left off.  

Supporting Genocide is illegal under British law. Sections 51/52 of the International Criminal Court Act 2001 make the commission or support of genocide a criminal offence. Yet last year the High Court allowed the government to continue to supply arms for that genocide citing ‘reasons of state’. 

Our judges have no morality and bend the law to fit what they see as the needs of the State. Just as they do their best to adjust their rulings to the needs of their class and justify it through the use of weasel words.

Picket on the First Day of the Retrial



Demonstrators Had Been Moved to the Opposite Side of the Road & Forbidden to Use Loud Hailers 

I was happy to be asked to speak to the wonderful people who had gathered there and who had congregated to make sure that the jury and others passing by knew that this trial was a fit up.

Five of the Filton 6

Woolwich Crown Court is next to Belmarsh Prison and it is surrounded by high metal fences. There was a heavy police presence because preventing justice being done is more important than catching rapists and other criminals.

I also went up on Thursday 23 April and it was a totally different atmosphere. The Met had applied Section 14 of the Public Order Act and cleared the entrance to the court of all demonstrators. I later learnt that two members of Defend Our Juries, including Trudy Warner, had been arrested for holding signs saying that the jury deserved to know the whole truth, not what they are spoonfed by Judge Johnson.

Other signs emphasised that a jury has the right to acquit according to their convictions and conscience. This dates back to the 1670 case of Edward Bushell when the Judge instructed the jury to convict William Penn and William Mead of having spoken to a seditious assembly. Only the state church had that right.

The First Day of the Retrial When Demonstrations Were Not Prohibited

Despite being locked up without food, water, fire or chamber pot the jury refused to convict and were heavily fined (the equivalent of one year’s wages. Edward Bushell was gaoled for refusing to pay the fine and was eventually released after a writ of habeus corpus was granted by a reluctant Chief Justice Vaughan.

Today there is a marble plaque at the Old Bailey commemorating this decision and it reads:

Near this site WILLIAM PENN and WILLIAM MEAD were tried in 1670 for preaching to an unlawful assembly ... This tablet commemorates the courage and endurance of the jury,... who refused to give a verdict against them although locked up without food for two nights; and were fined for their final verdict of Not Guilty. The case of these jurymen was reviewed on a writ of habeas corpus and Chief Justice Vaughan delivered the opinion of the Court which established the right of juries to give their verdict according to their convictions.”

The Metropolitan Police arrest of the two demonstrators was an unlawful arrest whose purpose was to prevent the jury from knowing of their rights. On Friday another 12 people were arrested for holding similar signs. The Metropolitan Police are in the business of establishing a Police State courtesy of the lying Starmer and Mahmood.


The signs asserted the rights of jurors (jury equity). One of the two is Trudi Warner. She was holding the exact same sign she held when unlawfully arrested in 2023, which became the focus of a year-long case to prove that it is not unlawful to hold this sign outside a court. The High Court determined that holding such a sign is not illegal, (Solicitor General vs Trudi Warner) but the Met decided to simply ignore this case.

Not only are jurors in the Filton 24 trial being denied the truth inside court, their right to make a decision based on their conscience, irrespective of a judge’s direction, is also being hidden from them.

It is impossible to know at this stage what the decision of the jury will be. I’m told that it has less Black and Muslim people on it.  No doubt the state has vetted the lists beforehand.

Picket on the First Day of the Retrial

Let us hope that the Filton 6 are acquitted of the remaining charge and Samuel Corner is also found not guilty. Despite the lies of the Daily Mail and the Zionist Jewish Chronicle the Filton 24 are heroes and people like Jeremy Johnson and the Shabana Mahmoods of this world are the villains. See:

https://www.declassifieduk.org/julian-assange-judge-previously-acted-for-mi6/

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/elbit-raid-trial-latest-palestine-10914146

Palestine Action’s ‘Filton 6’ cleared in ‘huge victory for moral courage in face of political pressure’
Posted by at 7 comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

4 December 2025

Natalie Strecker’s Acquittal on ‘Terrorist’ Charges Is A Victory for Palestine Solidarity & a Setback to the Attempts to Criminalise Activists

Now We Need to Build Support for the Hunger Strikers & Defeat Lammy’s Attempts to Abolish Juries

Natalie Strecker Speaking After Her Victory

The acquittal of Natalie Strecker on charges of inviting support for proscribed organisations, Hamas and Hezbollah, is a victory for the all of us and a defeat for a government that has given unstinting support to Israel’s Genocide in Gaza.

'Freedom of Speech and Protests Against Genocide are not Terrorism

Please Register for the Webinar on December 11th 6 pm

https://tinyurl.com/2s3py925

However we cannot rest on our laurels. The government and its Zionist Attorney General Richard Hermer sent a senior King’s Counsel to Jersey to inform the Judge, Sir John Saunders and the Jurants that International Law was to be disregarded.

International law, be it the Genocide Convention  or the European Convention on Human Rights is now a frivolous extra to be disregarded by British courts. One wonders what the point is of signing onto such treaties if they are going to be comprehensively ignored.

We have a miserable ‘Labour government’ that is in hock to Trump who has sanctioned the International Criminal Court for daring to issue arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant on charges of war crimes like some second-rate mafia boss.

Trump has attacked anyone standing up for human rights. Francesca Albanesa has lost all her bank accounts, as a full spectrum attack is made on anyone committed to what remains of international law.

Not surprisingly Starmer and Hermer, both of whom were human rights lawyers, have not only failed to criticise a lawless and rogue American government they have actively aided him with their persecution of those who campaign against Israel’s genocide.

Bringing up the rear, the ever pathetic David Lammy is embarked on abolishing juries in most trials as the government does their best to ensure that the only independent voice in our constitution is silenced. Juries have a habit of acquitting defendants in trials whereas judges do their best to secure convictions.

Judges can be relied on to reflect Establishment views because they come from the very same Establishment

It took a long fight before juries were able to establish their right to reach a verdict that the judge in the trial did not like. The government has attempted to roll back the right of jurors, derived from the 1670 case of Edward Bushells, to deliver a verdict contrary to a judge’s directions and in accordance with their conscience.

Hunger striking UK political prisoners learn lessons from Palestine 

This despite a plaque commemorating this case being on the wall of the Old Bailey. The arrest of Trudy Warner and others who had the temerity to inform jurors of their right was a warning shot across the bows. However Judge Saini in the High Court made it clear that Bushell’s was still good law despite the behaviour of Judge Silas Reid and others in ordering the police to arrest those holding signs informing jurors of their rights. Although the Tory government appealed Saini’s judgment the incoming Labour government dropped it.

Before the Bushell’s Case in 1670 juries had been little more than creatures of the judges. They were termed the Judges 13 voices. It was not unusual for judges to instruct juries that they must return a verdict of guilty.

 In 1670 a jury refused to convict William Penn, the founder of Pennsylvania and a prominent Quaker and William Mead, for preaching to an ‘unlawful and tumultuous’ assembly. They were only prepared to state that they had been preaching, which was a statement of fact.

The jury was then locked up for 2 days without food, water or a chamber pot. The jury was heavily fined but Edward Bushell refused to pay the fine and was imprisoned for contempt. He then petitioned for habeus corpus and the Court of Common Pleas under Chief Justice Vaughan established that juries could not be punished for their verdicts.

The independence of the judiciary was brought into stark relief when 3 pro-Israel conservative judges, led by Robert Maxwell’s former lawyer Dame Victoria Sharp, replaced a more liberal judge, Martin Chamberlain, at the last minute in the Judicial Review of the proscription of Palestine Action as a ‘terrorist’ organisation.

Craig Murray described how

The current legal establishment will adapt themselves to the legal framework of whatever sort is ordained by the rulers. Anybody expecting judges to defend liberties is likely to be sorely disappointed. They will happily remove the ability of juries to defend liberty too.

Democratic rights such as freedom of assembly and speech were established in the teeth of opposition to them by His Majesty’s loyal judges. If our few remaining democratic freedoms and civil liberties had rested in the hands of the judges they would have disappeared long ago.

This government, like its predecessor, have deliberately used the label ‘terrorist’ in order to suppress and close down protest movements. In this the judiciary have played a supporting role.



Protest Outside the BBC at its Silence

As Professor John Dugard KC, a distinguished South Africa International Lawyer and ad-hoc judge of the International Court of Justice said:

Terrorism is an emotive word that has no place in the assessment of the conduct of either a government or a resistance movement. One man’s freedom fighter is another man’s terrorist. Few would today label members of the French resistance in World War II as “terrorist” and most would have no hesitation in describing the Nazi forces as “terrorist”. Yet today most western states refrain from describing the acts of government forces as acts of terror but have no hesitation in so describing the acts of resistance movements and other non-state actors.

We all know what terrorism is. It is the planting of a bomb in July 2017 that killed 22 young people at the Manchester Arena Ariana Grande Concert or the attack by ISIS on the Bataclan concert in Paris that murdered some 100 people.

True to form - the BBC is REFUSING to cover the hunger strikes

It is the State of Israel not Hamas or Hezbollah who are terrorists. Israel thinks nothing of bombing schools and hospitals, shooting children in the head and dropping 2,000 lb bombs on refugee camps. Yet instead of condemning Israel’s genocide in Gaza, Starmer is helping to supply the weapons of mass murder that enable the Israeli government to carry out its genocide.

The judiciary have proved their mettle by remanding in custody the Filton 24 who have been charged with the non-terrorist offences of criminal damage but have been held in conditions reserved for terrorists. Their only ‘crime’ was to have attack an Elbit factory that was manufacturing Quadcopters that are used by Israel after a missile or bomb attack to pick off the survivors.

It is incumbent upon us to step up the fight for the six hunger strikers, two of whom have already been hospitalised. That is why it is disappointing that neither Jeremy Corbyn nor Zarah Sultana have bothered to sign Early Day Motion 2386 calling on the government to intervene. Nor have the two Muslim independent alliance MPs.

Free the Hunger Strikers

The political prisoners for Palestine currently on hunger strike are  (L to R):

T Hoxha, Kamran Ahmed, Jon Cink, Heba Muraisi, Qesser Zuhrah and Amu Gib Their demands are:

1.     An end to censorship in jail. Prisoners’ letters and phone calls have been blocked.

2.     Immediate bail. Most have been held over the usual six-month time limit.

3.     The right to a fair trial. An end to government demonization and lies.

4.     Deproscribe Palestine Action and drop the “terror” link on these cases.

5.     Shut Elbit down.

See     British hunger strikers learn prison lessons from Palestine and

A prosecution under Jersey Terrorism Act affects us all

See The hunger strike is not being televised – nor will the last gasps of our dying freedoms

On Friday December 11th Clare Hinchcliffe of the Filton 24 campaign will be speaking at a webinar organised by Jewish Network for Palestine along with Andrew Feinstein, Fahad Ansari, Huda Ammori, Richard Medhurst and myself among other speakers.

I will be facing the same charges that Natalie faced, namely ‘inviting support’ for a proscribed organisation when my trial begins at Kingston Crown Court on January 5 next year.

It is essential that we step up the campaign to have the hunger strikers freed. So far Palestine Solidarity Campaign has said nothing and done nothing. The BBC has, as expected, refused to cover the hunger strikes.

See Palestine Action Prisoners’ Hunger Strike to Become Biggest Since Irish Republicans and

The hunger strike is not being televised – nor will the last gasps of our dying freedoms

Posted by at 4 comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

29 January 2025

Demonstration 9.30 am Friday 31 January, The Old Bailey

My ‘Crime’ is Supporting Palestinian Resistance While the British State Aids Israel’s Genocide


Hillary Clinton: "we created the problem we are fighting today" | How the US created al-Qaeda

On December 20 2023 I was arrested in a dawn raid at my home by officers of Counter-Terrorism Police SE. Their logo states that their objective is to counter terrorism but today it is to criminalise support for liberation movements and anti-colonial struggles – be they in Palestine or Kurdistan.

My first reaction on being told I was being arrested for a tweet I had posted a month previously was ‘this is Orwellian’ .  At first I was led to believe that I was being prosecuted under s.12(1A) of the Terrorism Act 2000, ‘expressing an opinion or belief that is supportive of a proscribed organisation’.

Now I understand the prosecution is under s.12(1) of the Terrorism Act 2000

This is a blatant attempt to criminalise support for any anti-colonial or resistance organisation of the oppressed. Israel is in an illegal occupation of Gaza, as it has been for 58 years but any expression for armed resistance against Israel’s military and genocidal violence is a criminal offence.

We only have to remember when Margaret Thatcher called the ANC a terrorist organisation to know that none of this is new. There has always been an attempt by governments to brand armed opposition ‘terrorist’. The Nazis called the French and Czech resistance ‘terrorist’.

As Professor John Dugard KC, a distinguished South Africa International Lawyer and ad-hoc judge of the International Court of Justice said:

Terrorism is an emotive word that has no place in the assessment of the conduct of either a government or a resistance movement. One man’s freedom fighter is another man’s terrorist. Few would today label members of the French resistance in World War II as “terrorist” and most would have no hesitation in describing the Nazi forces as “terrorist”. Yet today most western states refrain from describing the acts of government forces as acts of terror but have no hesitation in so describing the acts of resistance movements and other non-state actors.

The Central Criminal Court 'The Old Bailey'

The use of proscription, be it against Hamas or the PKK, the Kurdish Workers Party is an attempt to shut down free speech on support for groups that the British government does not approve of for political reasons. It has nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism.

We all know what terrorism is. It is the planting of a bomb in July 2017 that killed 22 young people at the Manchester Arena Ariana Grande Concert or the attack by ISIS on the Bataclan concert in Paris that murdered some 100 people.

But here’s the rub. Salman Abedi was allowed to go to fight with Libyan jihadi groups in the fight against Colonel Gaddaffis’s government by MI5.  ISIS which carried out the Bataclan attacks didn’t even exist before Britain and the United States illegal attack on Iraq.

The ‘terrorism’ that is used as a pretext to attack domestic support for the resistance organisations of the oppressed has in most cases been created by western foreign policy. Hilary Clinton admitted that it was US policy of supporting Jihadi fighters in Afghanistan which created Al Qaeda.  Every time that the British and American states have employed far-right Islamist fighters to take out regimes they don’t like there has been blow back.

And today we see the blow back in terms of our own rights and civil liberties. It is not me, Natalie Strecker, Sarah Wilkinson or Asa Winstanley or Richard Medhurst, all of whom have had their homes raided, computer equipment stolen and been arrested and/or charged (except for Asa) accused of supporting terrorism. That accolade belongs to the British government and the intelligence agencies.

That is what my trial and the trial of all the other people who have been arrested is about.  And that is why you should join me on Friday January 31 outside the Central Criminal Court, the Old Bailey, in London.

The government has even attempted to roll back the right of jurors, derived from the 1670 case of Edward Bushells, to deliver a verdict contrary to a judge’s directions and in accordance with their conscience with the arrest of Trudy Warner and others who had the temerity to inform jurors of their right.

In other words the right of juries to do justice rather than to follow the conservative interpretation of the law that one can expect from the most exclusive profession in Britain, i.e. Judges. See Solicitor general to appeal over case of climate activist who held sign on jurors’ rights

Tony Greenstein

Posted by at 4 comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)