Smash EDO is a local campaign (Brighton) against EDO MBM Technology Ltd, on Home Farm Road, who manufacture release mechanisms for Paveway bombs supplied to Raytheon and used in Iraq, amongst other things. In May last year, 5 activists got
on the roof and hung banners. They are charged with aggravated trespass. It's been an interesting day in court - circular logic from the judge and a distinct lack of evidence from the prosecution.
on the roof and hung banners. They are charged with aggravated trespass. It's been an interesting day in court - circular logic from the judge and a distinct lack of evidence from the prosecution.
Aggravated trespass requires actual or intended intimidation, obstruction or disruption of a lawful activity. The defendants have been arguing that EDO MBM's supply of bomb-release mechanisms used in Iraq is unlawful in UK law under the International Criminal Court Act (ICCA) 2001 which prohibits 'conduct ancillary to war crimes' - that is aiding the commission of war crimes.
The judge tried to silence this argument by a variety of means. Firstly, she said she had no authority to rule on issues of war crimes. The defence pointed out that the ICCA clearly states war crimes committed abroard are incorporated into English Law. Then the judge simply stated "I don't know if I'm prepared to hear this argument, I don't see its relevance". The defence pointed out the lawfulness or otherwise of EDO's business was central to the charge. Then, the judge said that any how, she'd seen no evidence of war crimes, so the matter was moot. This was a bit ridiculous, as every time the defence tried to present evidence of war crimes the judge intervened to prevent it.
The defence said they could present a video of one incident in which a US F-16 bombs a crowd of civilians in Fallujah. The judge said she couldn't let it be shown because no evidence of war crimes had been presented (because the judge wouldn't let it be). The judge then proceeded with some wonderful circular logic that she couldn't allow evidence of war crimes to be presented as it hadn't been presented already, because she wouldn't let it. With that, the court adjourned for the judge to go away and make up an excuse (sorry, adjudicate). After a long break the judge returned and said she couldn't think of an excuse (sorry, hadn't made a ruling) and simply changed the subject!
The entire prosecution evidence is: 4 employees of EDO, who one month after the protest made statements claiming intimidating abuse ("shame on you!", "murderers") was shouted at them by unidentified persons on the roof. There were 30+ police officers within 100 metres, none of whom made any reference to shouting. Neither did the arresting officers make any mention of shouting. Furthermore, the police camera team didn't film any shouting, even though they were present when it allegedly took place. The prosecution picked out sections of the police video to show the judge, which showed protestors sunbathing and one eating a sanwich on the roof - scary, subersive criminal activities for sure. That's the prosecution case . . . we look forward to tomorrow's exciting instalment! That's all folks!
IF YOU'RE IN THE AREA PLEASE COME ALONG TO THE NOISE DEMO AT EDO'S FACTORY, HOME FARM ROAD, JUST OFF LEWES ROAD NEAR THE VIADUCT - 4 TIL 6 ON THURSDAY - LET'S MAKE SOME NOISE!!!
The judge tried to silence this argument by a variety of means. Firstly, she said she had no authority to rule on issues of war crimes. The defence pointed out that the ICCA clearly states war crimes committed abroard are incorporated into English Law. Then the judge simply stated "I don't know if I'm prepared to hear this argument, I don't see its relevance". The defence pointed out the lawfulness or otherwise of EDO's business was central to the charge. Then, the judge said that any how, she'd seen no evidence of war crimes, so the matter was moot. This was a bit ridiculous, as every time the defence tried to present evidence of war crimes the judge intervened to prevent it.
The defence said they could present a video of one incident in which a US F-16 bombs a crowd of civilians in Fallujah. The judge said she couldn't let it be shown because no evidence of war crimes had been presented (because the judge wouldn't let it be). The judge then proceeded with some wonderful circular logic that she couldn't allow evidence of war crimes to be presented as it hadn't been presented already, because she wouldn't let it. With that, the court adjourned for the judge to go away and make up an excuse (sorry, adjudicate). After a long break the judge returned and said she couldn't think of an excuse (sorry, hadn't made a ruling) and simply changed the subject!
The entire prosecution evidence is: 4 employees of EDO, who one month after the protest made statements claiming intimidating abuse ("shame on you!", "murderers") was shouted at them by unidentified persons on the roof. There were 30+ police officers within 100 metres, none of whom made any reference to shouting. Neither did the arresting officers make any mention of shouting. Furthermore, the police camera team didn't film any shouting, even though they were present when it allegedly took place. The prosecution picked out sections of the police video to show the judge, which showed protestors sunbathing and one eating a sanwich on the roof - scary, subersive criminal activities for sure. That's the prosecution case . . . we look forward to tomorrow's exciting instalment! That's all folks!
IF YOU'RE IN THE AREA PLEASE COME ALONG TO THE NOISE DEMO AT EDO'S FACTORY, HOME FARM ROAD, JUST OFF LEWES ROAD NEAR THE VIADUCT - 4 TIL 6 ON THURSDAY - LET'S MAKE SOME NOISE!!!
e-mail:
Homepage:
Comments
Display the following 7 comments