A climate activist who allegedly held a sign outside court telling jurors they were entitled to find protesters not guilty based on their conscience may still face a criminal charge.
Trudi Warner, 68, allegedly held the placard outside a trial of fellow Insulate Britain protestors at Inner London crown court on 27 March, which read: “Jurors: You have an absolute right to acquit a defendant according to your conscience.”
Judge Silas Reid had imposed an order that the protesters must not mention climate change in their defence to the jury.
The judge has made a number of similar orders – preventing protesters from mentioning the motive for their actions – that have been breached by protesters.
The orders, which said jurors must not consider the defendant’s beliefs as it is not relevant to the question of guilt or innocence, are now being challenged in the court of appeal.
Warner, a retired social worker, is said to have stood by the judge’s car park entrance which was being used by jurors and showed her sign to people she believed to be jurors in the trial – some of whom were.
The jury ended up convicting four Insulate Britain activists for causing a public nuisance by blocking traffic on Upper Thames Street, in the City of London, on 25 October 2021.
They were Julie Mecoli, 68, Stefania Morosi, 45, history professor Nicholas Till, 67, and teacher Louise Lancaster, 57.
Reid had ordered Warner appear at the Old Bailey on Tuesday before a high court judge for “contempt in the face of the court attempting to influence the jury”.
Mr Justice Cavanagh ordered the case be referred to the attorney general to decide if they should proceed with contempt proceedings or refer the case to the CPS to investigate whether Warner should be charged with perverting the course of justice.
He said: “Judge Reid initiated contempt of court proceedings on the basis that she stood outside the court building on 27 March showing a sign to those she thought might be jurors in Judge Reid’s case telling them they were allowed to acquit the defendant based on conscience.
“It is said she did this with a view to incite jurors to not honour their oath to come to verdicts based on the evidence before them, and to disregard the legal directions given by the trial judge. I’m not prepared to take no further action as the allegations against Ms Warner are very serious.
“In this and similar cases Judge Reid has directed the jury to hear the case on the basis of the evidence and leave aside any beliefs they may have on climate change, and defendants must not refer to their beliefs as they are not relevant to guilt or evidence. If relevant they can be referred to at the sentencing hearing.
“It is not the case in any trial that jurors can acquit by their conscience if by that it is meant they can disregard evidence and directions given by the judge and decide on their own beliefs whether a defendant is guilty of a criminal offence. To do so would be a breach of their jury oath and cause injustices.”
Other protesters stood with Warner outside Inner London crown court held signs saying “activists gagged by judge” and “let us tell the truth in court”.
Judge Silas was alerted to the behaviour by a fellow judge and after reviewing CCTV recognised her as someone who had sat in the public gallery of Insulate Britain trials.
When Warner attended court again on 29 March the judge had her arrested by a police officer and held her in detention until a hearing at the end of the court day.
He initiated contempt of court proceedings under criminal procedure rule 48, which enables judges to hand out fines or up to two years imprisonment for contempt of court.
Rather than dealing with the matter himself summarily he ordered Warner to appear before a high court judge at the Old Bailey.
Cavanagh said there were three options before the court: to continue under the criminal procedure rules, to refer the case to the attorney general or to take no further action.
He said judges would not normally take submissions from the accused of their lawyers before making the decision but he would on this occasion.
Warner’s lawyer, Raj Chada, urged the judge not to refer the matter to the attorney general and asked him to take no further action.
He said the idea of activists being “silenced by Silas” was already a matter of public record before Warner held her sign, due to articles in the media.
He said: “This is a case where the behaviour is caught on CCTV. This is a matter of very limited factual dispute. It is not clear what further inquiry could be made.
“The matter in dispute is the legal consequence of the actions. The fact that defendants have been limited in what they can say at Inner Londoncrown court is a matter of public record. The idea of activists being “Silenced by Silas’ has been widely reported. The judge has not made an order that the press may not report on it or this is contempt. The trial went ahead, there was clearly a concern by the judge – but the trial did go ahead- and the defendants in this case were in fact convicted.
“The heart of all this – Judge Reid’s orders on evidence – is now subject to action in court of appeal which was lodged last Thursday and we say that is the appropriate way for this matter to be resolved.”
Warner, of Walthamstow, east London, was not asked to say whether she admitted the contempt.
The case was referred to the attorney general.
