Skip to content or view mobile version

Home | Mobile | Editorial | Mission | Privacy | About | Contact | Help | Security | Support

A network of individuals, independent and alternative media activists and organisations, offering grassroots, non-corporate, non-commercial coverage of important social and political issues.

Gyrocopter Trial

Netcu Watch | 01.04.2010 11:28 | Animal Liberation | Repression | Birmingham

Sorry this is a bit late

A fatality, a criminal conspiracy and police negligence.

Democracy seems so simple. You fight for new laws by peacefully protesting, you campaign and lobby hard, you write letter on letter, email on email, you get cold and wet, all your spare time is eaten up, you make enemies and receive threats but finally after decades your persistence along with that of others is rewarded, parliament passes a law banning a barbaric practice.

Alas that is not the end of your labours. Normally when a new law is passed there is enforcement from the state Customs, the Police, the Council etc. We see stall holders dragged into court for selling oranges in imperial and not metric, we see millions spent on investigations into peaceful protest using shiny new laws such as SOCPA, we see courts heaving with petty nonsense exacerbated by the 3000 plus new laws passed by this government. What we do not see is the Hunting Act 2004 enforced in any way , shape or form. Punching, stabbing, burning, torturing animals is treated as frivolous by the courts whom actually appears to depend on a charity, the RSPCA, to foot the bill of any prosecution involving assaults, torture and murders where non humans are the victims. The sentencing is pathetic and not only do the public have to shell out in taxes for the criminal justice system in the first place, they pay a second time in donations to charity for prosecutions against those who torment the weak, those who can least afford it donate stoically to see “justice” done.

The lesson learnt may be that Parliament and “democracy” are not the way forward to real change. “No justice, Just us” , relying on self and other grassroots activists and taking direct action has always been very important in combating atrocities and preventing/thwarting and stopping everything from supermarkets being built on woodland, to the Israeli occupation of Gaza. It really does seem to be a waste of time, effort and resources to lobby for laws which are not going to be enforced. So when some condescending politician tells the animal rights movement to go through the “proper” channels what they want is that we direct our energy into parliamentary lobbying so they can then fob us off with an law which they refuse point blank to enforce.

Enter the Hunting Act 2004. After a century of lobbying, several deaths, countless assaults and several lifetimes of hard work for many individuals, it got passed, not rushed through but using the most parliamentary time ever on any one law. Needless to say though without enforcement it is as much use as a chocolate fireguard and the hunts quickly realised that they could carry on as before and dismiss any kill or illegal hunting as an unfortunate “accident”. Quite how blocking up a badger sett when a hunt is supposed to be hunting a trail is “accidental”, (the Cotswold Vale) I fail to see “Ooops the spade must have slipped repeatedly in this badger sett!”. As for “laying trails” over main roads, through people’s gardens and practically on the tails of hares and foxes is amazingly unfortunate but that is what the police find convenient to believe. I am not saying for an instant that every single hunt is breaking the law, nor that all hunt supporters are involved. Many are blissfully unaware of what is going on in front of them as indeed they were when hunting wild mammals with hounds was legal, but there are indeed many who really do not care about ignoring the Hunting Act and who blatantly lie about it to anyone gullible enough to fall for it which of course includes most police officers who would not apply this attitude in any other case ;
“Oi! You with the swag bag, the balaclava and machete smashing your way into that house, you’re nicked!”, “Officer I was merely doing some gardening, I am hideously ugly and do not wish to frighten any children, my machete just brushed against the glass and the window broke, I live here”,
“Oh sorry sir we had a 999 call from some time waster playing a prank, carry on you seem perfectly law abiding to me so I won‘t bother checking that you do indeed live here and that an old lady is not cowering under the bed”.

Hunt monitors who simply observe and film hunts, keep to footpaths and observe the law, and saboteurs who use direct action to try and stop the hounds from killing live mammals are still busy and still the only people who care about those who are hunted. Those paid to investigate crimes against wildlife are sadly impotent. The hunts have got more violent and the police are even arresting those who they think might interfere with the criminal offence of hunting wild animals with hounds for sport. The police in some cases are doing their best to facilitate illegal hunting such is their sycophancy towards the hunt. Strangely enough hunts can ride roughshod over the land of those who do not want them there, kill wildlife and pets, laugh at the protests of the land/garden owner and it is not “in the public interest” to actually bother responding to any complaint. When a hunt whines about being filmed, or heaven forbid the hounds stopped from killing a fox unlawfully, it is deemed a priority for CID to get involved and the CPS to hound the perpetrators of the offence of compassion.

The police cannot be bothered, nor can the CPS. The Hunting Act 2004 has only ever been enforced when monitors have at grave risk to themselves gained footage of hounds and quarry in the same frame, a small fine and a criminal record may then be the fate of the huntsman responsible. Until it is tightened it is a pathetic sop to the public who believe that hunting has been banned.

So to the Warwickshire hunt and the death of Trevor Morse on that fateful day 9th March 2009. Monitoring the hunt was vital if the obscene practice of hunting a fox to death was to be either deterred by the presence of monitors or the evidence caught on film, or by witness statements for a potential prosecution.
Trevor Morse died, Bryan Griffiths was charged with murder (eventually this was changed to manslaughter by gross negligence).


This is what happened at trial from contemporaneous notes

To precis:
Protect Our Wild Animals are a group of very respectable hunt monitors who gather evidence of illegal hunting to pass on to the police. They are often assaulted and bullied by the hunts they monitor so much so that they will not go out unless they can ensure a police presence. Their film “Hunting Anarchy” clearly shows intimidation, assaults and unlawful hunting.

Bryan Griffiths was a pilot with a helicopter and gyrocopter licence. In the sky good evidence could be obtained, there was a deterrent value and the hunt could not harm the monitors. In 2007 a helicopter went up and Sam Butler one of the Warwickshire hunt masters made sure that as many hunt supporters as possible put in a complaint to the Civil Aviation Authority about livestock aborting, terrified children and horses driven to madness etc. The complaints were untrue but following complaints to the Civil Aviation Authority Bryan agreed not to go beneath 1000 feet, twice the usual limit of 500 feet.

Bryan bought his own gyrocopter and began to use it to great effect at the beginning of 2009. Trevor Morse did some research and found out Bryan’s name and address in February 2009 and told his friends in the hunt. A plan was hatched to stop the gyrocopter taking off and question those in it when it refuelled, a plan which defence barrister James Wood described as a criminal conspiracy involving as it did the breach of several aviation laws, unlawful imprisonment, assault, etc.

Trevor Morse was driving the hunt landrover when that plan was enacted. With him was Julie Sargeant another hunt supporter. He had spoken to Otis Ferry, notorious master of the South Shropshire only an hour before his death. He worked out that the gyrocopter was en route to refuelling at Long Marston airfield and drove there in what Julie described as “a white knuckle ride” calling master Anthony Spencer (who was at a funeral) and others on his way.

Meanwhile Bryan Griffiths and his passenger John Curtin landed and were approached by aviation enthusiasts Mr Tipping and Mr Emerson who were just curious about the gyrocopter. (These 2 independent witnesses were actually told that their presence was not required in court by the prosecution. Only at 15.30, the very day before they were to eventually testify, were they called in). Once it was certain that these 2 men were not hunt supporters Bryan told them of his concerns and that the aircraft had been shot at 3 times. It was accepted by the prosecution that Bryan genuinely believed that he had been shot at, both from a landrover on the road and from the courtyard of a house.

None of your business

Trevor Morse arrived and parked up, he started to film [photograph] the car of Mr Emerson and a brief discussion occurred between them. When asked why he was photographing them and the car Morse said “None of your business”..

All 4 men were frightened by Mr Morse, Bryan asked the 2 men to stay as witnesses, they thought they had come across drug dealers! Bryan asked Peter Bunce to hurry up via his moblie so they could get away. Peter Bunce turned up with the fuel, only 10-15 litres out of the 40 was used such was the haste to depart. Morse then drove his landrover up so close that Bryan had to pull the gyrocopter to a different position. Morse fag in mouth (with petrol present), camera in hand stood close to the left at the front and gestured to Julie to get out of the landrover and help stop the gyrocopter taking off She did so very reluctantly and no-one present noticed her by the aircraft. Throughout her evidence she made it clear that she did not want to get involved with any confrontation.

Bryan politely asked him to move out of the way and Morse replied “You’re going nowhere”. Bryan warned him of the danger of the blades saying loudly “starting engine” “clear prop “. Morse said nothing. Peter started filming and asked Morse very politely to desist, Bryan, now in the pilot’s seat, gestured with his hands to Morse to move and then gently started to nudge the aircraft forward, Julie stepped back.

On the video Trevor Morse is seen moving away from the aircraft and then walks back in towards the passenger to either hit him or grab him, thus his life is ended, as he leans forward the back propeller slices through the top of his head to his mouth, lacerating his torso and right arm, all of which is blacked out to spare the jury a frightful image. He is killed instantly.

The gyrocopter stopped, Bryan got out and walked to the very distraught Julie but can think of nothing to say. He called the emergency services. Anthony Spencer turned up, saw Trevor Morse’s body and shouted at Bryan, comforted Julie and also called the emergency services. Bryan on the phone to the emergency services asked desperately for the police to attend time and time again, the operator is asked if a defibrillator might help and asked how Bryan knew that the “patient” was dead.

Otis Ferry arrives with his girlfriend but was told by Spencer that he was not needed. He disappeared rather quickly.

The police and ambulance arrived, Bryan and John are arrested on suspicion of murder. When it became clear that John had no control over the gyrocopter he was released without charge, Bryan was charged with murder after 3 days and remanded in custody for over 6 weeks. Bryan was tagged and not allowed to be out after 19.00 until the very day of the trial. Some time later the charge was reduced to manslaughter through gross negligence.

Antony Spencer argued that Trevor Morse had only gone to the airfield to find out who the pilot was and if he had permission to land . This was contradicted by the fact that found in the landrover which Trevor was driving was a 3 page document downloaded from the internet which had Bryan’s name and address on it and handwritten “…not take off vertically and does not hover”, no attempt was made by the police to analyse who wrote this. Furthermore Trevor Morse did not ask Bryan if he had permission to land, he had plenty of opportunity to do so and as James Wood QC pointed out both men could have gone to Long Marston site office to verify that he did indeed have permission to land from the owner of the airfield. It was clear that Trevor “a man of few words” was going to hold Bryan a virtual prisoner until more hunt supporters turned up to “question” both Bryan and John. Charmain Green MFH said in her evidence that everyone knew that Trevor Morse had found out who the pilot was and where he lived which directly contradicted Anthony Spencer’s fallacies, she also helpfully stated that one of Trevor Morse’s roles, albeit a minor one according to her evidence, was to deal with hunt monitors.

On 17th March 2010 Bryan Griffiths was acquitted by a jury after 7 hours of deliberation.


Since in the media several different themes have emerged.

1. John Curtin’s past. In the 80’s John was sent to prison for attempting to dig up with others the 10th Duke of Beaufort and allegedly cut off his head and send it to Princess Anne. Reportedly the spade broke and no more than a bit of earth was moved from the grave. John has openly reflected on this and publicly regretted this incident, he condemned the digging up of Gladys Hammond an incident given very wide press coverage and which is surrounded by unanswered questions. Let us get this into perspective whilst grave robbing is abhorrent to most people, including myself, no living being is physically harmed, no one has been maimed or killed. He is not a violent man and I have often heard him urging compassion towards animal abusers as opposed to hatred, which has led to accusations of him affectionately being called an old hippy from some of the younger members of the animal rights community.

The hysteria surrounding the fact that he was the passenger is laughable. In the Sunday Telegraph there is some nonsense about John wearing a balaclava at hunts the implication being that he was trying to terrorise. Yes it transpired in court that John wore a balaclava so that his helmet would fit properly, a spiderman one I think it was. How the hunt could even be aware of this, let alone be terrorised by it as he was 1000 feet up is remarkable. Hunting Anarchy the POWA film shows hunt followers wearing balaclavas, so what?

Sam Butler yet another Warwickshire MFH (6 in total) is practically frothing at the mouth in mock terror in Horse and Hound 25th March 2010 so “terrified” he is of John that he wants meetings with the police to “see how we can be kept safe…I am very concerned about the safety of our members”. If so then Sam what about hunting within the remit of the Hunting Act so that no-one has to waste time on monitoring your unlawful activities? How about briefing your followers firmly on peaceful conduct towards hunt monitors and others who are opposed to hunting ? How about not being involved in plans to stand in front of aircraft and walking into things to attack people with propellers going at 200mph in the immediate vicinity? Oh yes your fellow master Anthony Spencer named you as a co conspirator in the plan to ground the gyrocopter so you are partly culpable for Trevor’s death if indeed he was telling the truth. We all know that hunts are rather autocratic institutions where a Master’s word is law, unlikely that Trevor Morse was acting completely on his own initiative now is it not?

The Countryman’s Weekly comes up with an interesting theory that “before Mr Griffiths tried to take off Mr Morse might have recognised Mr Curtin and tried to grab him”. Oh right, so because John committed a crime 3 decades ago which he has since regretted it is OK for Trevor Morse to attack him, or grab him? One website says that John told Bryan to kill Trevor. Well nonsense but let us put that one to bed right now. The police obviously did a great deal of investigation into the gyrocopter the comms unit was not connected. In his haste to escape from the beating which was clearly being orchestrated Bryan had not connected the communications which is a matter of fact. Unless John had shouted which would have been picked up by the video camera he had no way of communicating with Bryan. He could not and did not tell him to do anything.

2. Otis Ferry was interviewed by the Sunday Telegraph. Remarkably a trained journalist wrote, “by coincidence, Otis Ferry, 27, the son of rock star Bryan, and the Joint Master of the South Shropshire came across the scene whilst returning from his court hearing”. Yes indeed an amazing coincidence, there is Otis travelling up from Gloucester Crown Court and although he lives in Shropshire he just happened to stop where the Warwickshire were hunting speaking both to Trevor Morse (as Julie Sargeant gushingly told the court) and Charmain Green. Then he just happened to drive off the road into a private airfield right up to exactly where the gyrocopter was just minutes after the tragic accident. It is almost as believable as the “accidental” digout we witnessed Otis order in 2006. The Shropshire hounds accidentally marked a fox to ground, then purely by accident a terrier man accidentally put some spades and nets on the exits of the earth. Otis accidentally attacked me and my friend, a terrier accidentally went down one hole, etc until the terrier man put his foot down and told everyone, police, us and hunt to politely go away as he had had enough and wanted to take his terrier home which he did. What Otis said about monitors could also apply to him and his ilk, “They are so besotted by their crazy beliefs that normal judgement goes out of the window”. Even Mr Spencer in his urgency to tell James Wood the names of all of his co-conspirators was careful enough to omit one name I.e Otis Ferry, but how else would Otis have arrived at Long Marston airfield at that exact time unless someone had asked him to be there to help with the “questioning” of Bryan and John?

3. Throughout the entire trial the Countryside Alliance exhibited their arrogance by sitting on the press benches in the forms of Clare Rowson and occasionally Tim Bonner, according to a real journalist they had absolutely no right to be there as not only should those on the press benches have press cards but they should not be on either side, impartiality is paramount to those privileged to sit there, a complaint is in progress. So Clare was there when Charmain Green told the court that nearly the entire hunt knew who the pilot was, she was also there when her facebook friend Anthony Spencer said that he and Trevor had gone to the airfield to find out who the pilot was. She must have heard about the 3 page document downloaded by Trevor Morse concerning Bryan’s details a dozen times. This did not dissuade Clare from lying to the press on Birmingham Crown Court’s steps to the very reporters she had sat next to when she said that the hunt had only gone to detain the gyrocopter because they wanted to find out who the pilot was.
Accepted fact by the prosecution and the police ;THE HUNT ALREADY KNEW WHO THE PILOT WAS. If Anthony Spencer did not know then he is either a Billy no mates deliberately kept in the dark, he is very forgetful or he has told fibs on oath, or to put it another way he has committed the offence of perjury.

4. It was stated very clearly in court that the gyrocopter did not go beneath 1000 feet a fact proven by the GPS system and accepted by both sides. In addition on 7th March 2009 PC Nick Hosegood was instructed to observe the gyrocopter and record the height. He did so and found no wrongdoing at all. The nonsense about the gyrocopter (or squadron of them as stated by the Sunday Telegraph) “buzzing” horses and riders should just be disregarded. Julie Sargeant described the gyrocopter as a dot in the sky. The noise was described as less than traffic noise and as James wood QC pointed out the RAF constantly fly high speed jets which nearly blow the ear drums but have little effect on livestock. It must be a very isolated area indeed if anywhere in which horses, sheep and cows have never heard a helicopter or jet engine. To claim as the hunt did in court that sheep, horses at stud, hunt horses and cows were running around terrified by a microlight aircraft 1000 feet above them is simply an insult to anyone with average intelligence.

All in all may Trevor Morse rest in peace after this tragedy and may Bryan Griffiths’s recover from the events of the 9th March 2010. May it also be that the police do their job and investigate the criminal conspiracy which led Trevor Morse to his death and indeed police the Hunting Act so that monitors do not have to attend hunts and face a violent response. When the tired excuse comes out that they have “better things to do” we should bear in mind that they have plenty of resources to hurl at Climate Camp, indeed in August 2008 they had a police officer for each protestor (including those in wheelchairs, babes in arms etc), they have unlimited resources if they think hunt saboteur’s might upset a hunt or if protestors peacefully protest outside a laboratory.

Furthermore let us never forget that Mike Hill aged 18 and Tom Worby aged 15 died in very suspicious circumstances under the wheels of vehicles driven by hunters neither of whom was charged with murder, manslaughter or indeed any offence whatsoever let alone tried for an offence in court. The case of Steve Christmas a sab who was crushed by a landrover in 2000 is perhaps even worse despite the fact that, miraculously, he survived. Steve was not just driven over but the driver reversed over him repeatedly and on purpose, the police and CPS could not be bothered to get this case to court. What they did do though was prosecute ruthlessly the activists who attended a demonstration at the Old Surrey and Burstow hunt kennels to demand justice as Steve lay close to death in ITU. A window was broken, this was considered to be more worthy of the full force of the law than an attempted murder as the front doors of animal rights activists were smashed down all over the South. This sentiment was reflected by the front page of the Daily Telegraph which mentioned the fact that a human being was nearly killed as a mere footnote after lamenting the broken window. Either the police and CPS regard hunters as more far important than those who oppose hunting or they are grossly negligent themselves.

As the Countryside Alliance so rightly said in their evidence to the Joint Committee on Human Rights “Demonstrating respect for rights? A human rights approach to policing protest” 2008 the police should not be attacking or suppressing non violent protestors, interestingly the Countryside Alliance omit any mention of having their human rights impinged on by animal rights activists let alone hunt monitors, not in all of the 6 pages. Everyone else from Eon, to HLS, to the Research Defence Society and the British Fur Trade association gave in their evidence stories of how they had been terrorised by protestors. Why the omission? Maybe hunt supporters have had a taste of what the state does to dissenters and this has radicalised them a little and maybe as well those who attend hunts to either gather evidence or to stop illegal hunting by sabotage are not the bogeymen the CA would have the public believe. “Antis” were certainly not a concern of the CA when they gave evidence on how and if protests should be policed which implies that both monitors and sabs have been very well behaved, unlike some members of the hunting fraternity.

Netcu Watch
- Homepage:


Hide the following 19 comments

Why Otis Left

01.04.2010 13:59

Otis left quickly as he had several pick axe handles and other weapons in his car at the time. Spencer also called off several other hunters who were due to arrive at the airfield.

The police were told of this the day after the events.

in Know

Hunting ban was a political vendetta by a government who care not for animals

01.04.2010 16:21

The New Labour government passed the hunting ban as a vendetta against the Tories. It was not about the animals but a political move. People who have hunts on their land make money from it..some of this money was donated to Tories and there are Tory politicians and councillors who have hunts on their land. That's the real story behind the hunt ban.
The hunt ban had nothing to do with animal rights activists fights but was a political move and is a false victory for AR.

Animals are not the only ones affected by ineffective laws. Rapists go free and women suffer for years while rapists taunt them after the crime while the police do nothing.

As for the RSPCA, there is a real imbalance where the RSPCA are concerned ..this week a grandmother was prosecuted and TAGGED for selling a goldfish to an underage person in her petshop as part of a police sting. Most people would agree that there are worse animal cruelty crimes that go unpunished and this just makes a mockery of animal protection laws. The police treat crime as one big joke.


Sounds like an accident

01.04.2010 16:55

but then again, blame could be possibly be laid out...

As an analogy, if I was on a firing range (runway) and someone started to prance about in front of my gun (aircraft), I would be expected to stop shooting no matter what the reason. Eg. How would i know if that person doesn't have mental health issues and is of deminished responsibility?

The same would be true if i was driving a car. If a pedestrian sees me and deliberately walks in front of my car, I would be expected to stop no matter what the issue. I can't simply run them over because they are in the wrong.

The pilot really should of not started his engines knowing that people were so close to the props.
By shouting out a warning, he is admitting that there is a danger to people around him.

However, the other guy seems to have lost the plot by stepping towards an aircraft with its props spinning around.

A stupid accident due to people's childlike behaviour.


Civil case to follow

01.04.2010 17:08

The CA are funding a civil prosecution - these are decided on the balance of probability - we may need to seek donations to support Bryan.

Farmer Brown

Unfortunately it does work both ways

01.04.2010 19:40

Suppose there are protestors blocking a road. Is it being suggested that all a car need do is slow down to a crawl and proceed forward slowly and then if any of the protestors don't get out of the way, are hit and killed, that was "just an accident"?

Are you suggesting that the "rightness of the cause" governs the situation? Not the action? Imprisonment" does indeed allow one to free oneself by force -- oneself, not any sort of vehicle.

Please note that I am not suggesting anything more than that allowable tactics do not depend upon which side one is on. If we expect those whom we blockade to have to await the police to clear the way instead of forcing their way through then we should not be all that quick to approve this outcome.



01.04.2010 21:23

"Imprisonment" does indeed allow one to free oneself by force -- oneself, not any sort of vehicle."

clearly, if freeing yourself requires you to use a vehicle then you can use such a vehicle.


no it doesn't

01.04.2010 22:32

:) at least not in this country


Why Morse was there

01.04.2010 23:04

I've never met Trevor Morse but I've met lots like him. there was only one reason why he turned up at that airfield and that was to give the people in the gyrocopter a beating. Aggression by hunt supporters is nothing new and I've seen the casual regard for human life that a lot of terrier boys have when their blood is up. He intentionally went to that airfield to hurt people and paid for his stupidity. He paid a high price but the man was a bully and his violent nature was his downfall. The Darwin Award is in the post.....


What if

02.04.2010 02:24

the pedestrian walking in front of the car obviously belongs to the same gang who shot at you as you were driving earlier?
What if the person/s blockading were waiting for reinforcements so that you were being held up for an inevitable beating?
Protest blockades are generally annoying but generally peaceful, this was nothing of the sort. Bryan had been shot at by a hunt supporter and was then blocked from leaving as more hunt supporters raced towards the airfield. I believe that both him, John and Peter were in danger of a beating (after all both John and Peter have been badly beaten before by hunt supporters) and he did what he thought was right at the time. No-one would have thought that anyone was stupid enough to actually walk towards an aircraft in the process of taking off it was bound to end in tears. The aircraft was passing Trevor Morse as seen on the footage he walks into it to take a swipe at the passenger without regard to the propeller.

Netcu watch

The Fallen are forgotten already?

02.04.2010 03:52

"No-one would have thought that anyone was stupid enough to actually walk towards an aircraft in the process of taking off it was bound to end in tears"

Like somebody standing in front of a slow moving arms train? Like somebody standing in front of a bulldozer? I am of the opinion that at least some of us here disapprove of those folks getting really badly hurt and killed. Are of the opinion that the operator of the train, the bulldozer, etc. was obligated to stop (the train MIGHT not have been able to, even slow moving, lots of momentum).

All I am trying to say is that the right or wrong does not depend on whether the attempted blockade was in a good cause or a bad one. Or at least shouldn't. Of course there are those who call people like Rachel Corrie stupid. Was THAT what you meant to say?



02.04.2010 13:58

Well, as has been said the guys had been shot at and was in serious physical danger so there is a big difference between that and a road blockade.

Also yes the 'cause' in question does play a role in the rightness of an action. If a child abuser steals a car to catch his next victim that is wrong, if someone steals a car as it is the only way to get a dying child to the hospital that is right.


???? @

02.04.2010 14:03

When on earth did I say blockading was stupid?
To recap Trevor Morse was not simply blockading. If he had just done a little non violent direct action to stop the aircraft that would have been completely different. Maybe you did not read the post properly, but this was a plan to effectively capture on the ground the 2 monitors who the hunt wished to "question" and this would not have been very pleasant at all for either Bryan or John after all 2 activists have been killed by hunt supporters, and there have been many near misses, to repeat, they had actually been shot at.

I doubt very much that Rachel Corrie, had shot at the soldier who killed her and I doubt very much that she was summoning a gang to beat up the driver of the bulldozer, I doubt that the driver of the bulldozer feared for his life and was trying to get away from her so not exactly a good paralell is it? For the record no she was not stupid but a brave, selfless person who died protecting others.

As has been said before the aircraft inched forward, Trevor Morse was pushed back. Now he himself choose to walk into harms way despite being warned and actually out of Bryans vision, he knew nothing of Trevor Morse's attempt to either grab the plane or to punch John until he head the thud thud of the impact of Trevor Morse and the propeller. It is sad and tragic but if I was to walk into a propeller as an aircraft was taking off that would not be the fault of the pilot. It could well be that once the propeller started that it was invisible to Trevor Morse as it goes so fast that it is invisible to most people. He did not walk back into the gyrocopter to blockade but to , as it looks on tape and according to John's account and to Mr Emerson's, to punch John in the head.

True it is a bit distasteful to rejoice about this as there are no winners just grieving and traumatised people on both sides and of course if we choose to use certain tactics we should not be upset and cry "foul" if our enemies use them too. But the difference is here that this was not simple blockading. If for example a couple of anti facists find a really large facist standing in front of their car on his mobile clearly calling for backup and it is obvious that they are in serious trouble, should they try and edge the car forward or put his safety first? I don't know the right answer but I do know that hindsight is a wonderful thing and that those involved only had minutes to try and make their escape. It is so easy to judge in the cold light of day. I heard most of the evidence and I think that the jury made the right decision. Neither Tom Worby or Mike Hill had their deaths treated seriously with those who drove over them not even being charged with anything.

Netcu Watch

to anon, about grandma who sold goldfish -

02.04.2010 17:34

................ If you read past the headline you will see that she was not tagged just for this, it just makes a better headline title. She was probably prosecuted more for the fact she had an injured sick bird in her pet shop who she failed to have treated at the vets. This bird was put down by the RSPCA due to its condition and the grandma has been prosecuted for this under the new animal welfare act. Thrown into the prosecution was the fact she sold the goldfish in a sting operation set up by the authorities to catch her selling to underage kids as she had already sold a gerbil to an under age girl.
If you ask me this warrants having to pay court costs of 15 grand and a tag and community service at the very least!!!
I would thought someone who reads on indymedia would look past the headlines in the media and at least read the full article. more info here -

another anon

Good article about this matter

03.04.2010 06:54

Several different themes emerge when discussing sentencing for animal abuse. Personally I have no problem with this woman "being made an example of" on the one hand but on the other I would much rather a society whereby no animal is bought and sold. This is a very rare case of someone actually being punished by the courts for animal abuse it seems proportionate, but then like practically everyone else on this site I am not a huge fan of the UK legal system. My problem is that if the girl with learning difficulties had gone in to the shop with her 16 year old brother, no offence would have been committed, ditto with the boy who bought the goldfish if he had gone in with his 16 year old girlfriend. The assumption that when someone reaches 16 they suddenly become an sage on animal welfare is to me a little suspect. The pet industry is disgusting leading to untold misery from those who are sold as mere chattels, abandoned, left to a life of boredom and stress to those who either have to pick up the pieces on the sanctuaries or those who sustain injuries from dogs. This law is like most on animal welfare a mere sop to those who care about animals it is like moving deckchairs on the Titanic. A ban on selling all animals in shops, an immediate closure on all puppy, guinea pig etc farms which churn out screwed up and poorly "pets" to fund the industry, the spaying and nuetering of all dogs(including hounds) and cats (most humans do not meet the needs of those in our care) and stopping the assumption that anyone and everyone can have a "pet" by strictly licensing all future "ownership", now that would be a start in the right direction!
I would rather spend my energies on fighting for animal liberation though which would mean no pets and no hunted animals in this society. It may be that someone cares for an injured wild animal who lives out his or her days loved in a human home and is in effect a "pet", or cares for other creatures as friends not chattels, it may also be that indigenous tribes separate from the rest of humankind continue to hunt as they have for millenia non human animals which is way out of my remit. But the fact is that not one of us needs to use another animal, or kill, or imprison, or maim him or her. This is way beyond legislation it is a challenge to every man woman and child to reflect on the fact that other species are as valid as our own and not resources for us to use as we see fit. It is a challenge to the Judeo/Christian/Islamic mindset which still prevails, even amongst atheists, and dictates that humans are little deities above and beyond the rest of life on earth rather than one species of many and a result of evolution.

Lynn Sawyer

@ Lynn Sawyer

06.04.2010 10:57

"The spaying and neutering of all dogs (including hounds) and cats"

Otherwise known as vivisection, as is all veterinary medicine. Animal liberation means non-human animals living free of all human interference, even that which may be beneficial to them, otherwise it is just a more radical version of animal welfare. It reminds me in a way of people who feed meat to cats or have their children vaccinated and then have the nerve to claim they are vegans.


Oh well NP

08.04.2010 13:45

You guarantee that domesticated species such as dogs, cats, cows etc can be cared for by us and not to the detriment of wild creatures in ever expanding numbers and you have an argument. As a species we are responsible for the welfare of domestic animals and without spaying and nuetering we do not have a hope in hell doing anything but watch them starve every winter and suffer immeasurably. I have actually to meet face to face any animal rights person who disagrees with, as you correctly call it, this welfare measure. It does deny dogs and cats the right to reproduce but only because the alternative is a situation whereby most of them would die early violent deaths in the street. There are too many dogs and cats needing homes why add to the problem? By the way, yes I think that there are too many humans as well but believe that one of the keys to that problem is empowering women and slashing child poverty, mortality and morbidity. Of course none of this is entirely consistant or simple and I see your point but fail to see how practically domesticated species would have quality of life in even greater numbers or who would look after them?

Lynn Sawyer

@ Lynn Sawyer 2

09.04.2010 15:17

If you advocate compulsory sterilization for non-human animals you have to advocate it for human animals too otherwise you are a speciesist and if you advocate it for either group you are a tyrant. The fact that human animals are responsible for domesticating non-human animals is no excuse for further abuse. We should free them all right now and let them get on with their lives as best they can. Their resulting "Quality of life" being no more our concern than our quality of life is theirs. As for the impact freeing domesticated non-human animals would have on "Wild creatures", what about the impact of introduced species on native species, or do you advocate culling them?


Dear NP

12.04.2010 10:46

Yes of course. I will make sure that my canine freind here is no longer put on a lead near traffic. he has no road sense but hey it's speciest to constrict his freedom eh? Likewise if you could let your details be known to various sanctuaries and individuals who home domestic animals as wards to live out their lives as best as possible so you can implement your theory, and indeed cope with feeding, mucking out and entertaining dependent individuals in ever increasing numbers. Sanctuary workers are on their knees coping with caring and loving creatures in existence now, unless you are one of them then you have no place pontificating on what compromises other people have to make in order to help other species have some sort of life in this human supremist state. Simply put I can cope with a couple of dogs but not the 6/12/24/36 ad infinitum that would ensue if I were to allow them to multiply. I would suspect that eventually as oft happens, the dogs would interbreed and as I got much older and maybe a bit confused that their welfare would be severely compromised. Without spaying and nuetering you either suppress natural urges by imprisoning animals away from their kin or you let them breed, you end up with the animal collector scenario, someone who has so many animals in their "care" that none of them have any quality of life whatsoever. Why not let them out on the street? Well that is what people do and those dogs get kicked, starved, run over and are eventually destroyed.
I like many other animal rights activists see spaying and nuetering and indeed abortion as a neccessary evil at present. I hate that we have to do it BUT would hate far more that millions more unloved and suffering individuals whether they be human or non human come into existence in the first place. I have chosen not to have children, there are more than enough humans around. When this is seen worldwide as a viable option I am sure that more of us will control our fertility, domestic non human animals have no way of "family planning" having been controlled for millenia by humans.

Lynn sawyer

@ Lynn Sawyer 3

17.04.2010 10:53

As an animal liberationist I would no more think of having a dog castrated than I would think of taking up badger baiting and would be no more inclined to procure an abortion than to run a slaughterhouse. I don't differentiate between the various manifestations of animal abuse, as all are equally an abuse of power. Compromise is out of the question and to suggest that there is such a thing as “Necessary evil” (Neutering/Spaying, abortion, euthanasia etc.) is like suggesting there is necessary racism or necessary capitalism. None of these things are necessary, they are what some humans choose to do. At lease you acknowledge these actions are evil. I regard other species as autonomous beings who's lives are their own. My only concern is to protect them from the actions of humans, not to end all suffering, some of which is an inevitable consequence of life.


Upcoming Coverage
View and post events
Upcoming Events UK
24th October, London: 2015 London Anarchist Bookfair
2nd - 8th November: Wrexham, Wales, UK & Everywhere: Week of Action Against the North Wales Prison & the Prison Industrial Complex. Cymraeg: Wythnos o Weithredu yn Erbyn Carchar Gogledd Cymru

Ongoing UK
Every Tuesday 6pm-8pm, Yorkshire: Demo/vigil at NSA/NRO Menwith Hill US Spy Base More info: CAAB.

Every Tuesday, UK & worldwide: Counter Terror Tuesdays. Call the US Embassy nearest to you to protest Obama's Terror Tuesdays. More info here

Every day, London: Vigil for Julian Assange outside Ecuadorian Embassy

Parliament Sq Protest: see topic page
Ongoing Global
Rossport, Ireland: see topic page
Israel-Palestine: Israel Indymedia | Palestine Indymedia
Oaxaca: Chiapas Indymedia
All Regions
South Coast
Other Local IMCs
Bristol/South West
Social Media
You can follow @ukindymedia on and Twitter. We are working on a Twitter policy. We do not use Facebook, and advise you not to either.
Support Us
We need help paying the bills for hosting this site, please consider supporting us financially.
Other Media Projects
Dissident Island Radio
Corporate Watch
Media Lens
Earth First! Action Update
Earth First! Action Reports
All Topics
Animal Liberation
Climate Chaos
Energy Crisis
Free Spaces
Ocean Defence
Other Press
Public sector cuts
Social Struggles
Terror War
Workers' Movements
Major Reports
NATO 2014
G8 2013
2011 Census Resistance
Occupy Everywhere
August Riots
Dale Farm
J30 Strike
Flotilla to Gaza
Mayday 2010
Tar Sands
G20 London Summit
University Occupations for Gaza
Indymedia Server Seizure
COP15 Climate Summit 2009
Carmel Agrexco
G8 Japan 2008
Stop Sequani
Stop RWB
Climate Camp 2008
Oaxaca Uprising
Rossport Solidarity
Smash EDO
Past Major Reports
Encrypted Page
You are viewing this page using an encrypted connection. If you bookmark this page or send its address in an email you might want to use the un-encrypted address of this page.
If you recieved a warning about an untrusted root certificate please install the CAcert root certificate, for more information see the security page.

Global IMC Network

satellite tv


estrecho / madiaq
la plana
northern england
nottingham imc
united kingdom

Latin America
chile sur
cmi brasil
cmi sucre
puerto rico


South Asia

United States
hudson mohawk
kansas city
minneapolis/st. paul
new hampshire
new jersey
new mexico
new orleans
north carolina
north texas
rogue valley
saint louis
san diego
san francisco
san francisco bay area
santa barbara
santa cruz, ca
tampa bay
united states
western mass

West Asia


fbi/legal updates
mailing lists
process & imc docs