The attorney general has referred the case of four protesters cleared of the toppling of the statue of the slave trader Edward Colston to the court of appeal for legal direction.
In a rare move, which cannot reverse the not guilty verdicts, Suella Braverman is to ask appeal judges for clarification on whether defendants can cite their human rights as a defence in a case of criminal damage.
Jake Skuse, 33, Rhian Graham, 30, Milo Ponsford, 26 and Sage Willoughby, 22, were in January cleared of criminal damage despite admitting to helping crowds pull down the statue at an antiracism protest in Bristol in 2020. They told Bristol crown court they acted out of conscience, claiming the statue was offensive and a hate crime towards Bristol’s black community.
The jury returned a not guilty verdict after they were asked to decide if they believed a conviction for criminal damage was a “proportionate interference” with the defendants’ rights to freedom of expression, thought and conscience – the last question in a “route to verdict” laid out by the judge, Peter Blair QC.
In a move that effectively questions the directions given by Blair, Braverman’s office said she would ask the court of appeal to clarify whether defendants can use a human rights defence in a criminal damage case. She will also ask the court to consider whether it is up to juries to decide if a criminal conviction is a proportionate interference with a defendant’s human rights.
“Trial by jury is an important guardian of liberty and critical to that are the legal directions given to the jury,” Braverman, who is also Conservative MP for Fareham, said. “It is in the public interest to clarify the points of law raised in these cases for the future. This is a legal matter which is separate from the politics of the case involved.”
But Raj Chada, who represented Skuse, suggested there was indeed a political element to the decision to appeal against the case, and particularly around its timing.
“This decision from the attorney general is extremely disappointing and should give everyone who cares about the integrity of our legal system cause for concern. Referrals such as this are very rare and must be made expeditiously. It is more than three months since the jury’s verdict in this case,” Chada said.
“It is of serious concern that the public announcement of this decision coincides with and appears intended to deflect from the police decision to issue FPN [fixed-penalty] notices against the prime minister and the chancellor for unlawful lockdown parties. We appear to be seeing the real-time politicisation of jury trials to stoke up culture wars.”
During the trial in December and January of this year at Bristol crown court, the four defendants variously admitted bringing ropes to the protest and tying them around the neck of the bronze statue, before helping crowds wrench it from its plinth and roll it to Bristol harbour, where it was thrown into the water.
Willoughby, a carpenter, told the court he had targeted the statue of Colston “because he was a racist and a slave trader who murdered thousands and enslaved even more”.
