On 13 Sep, 08:13, Doug
riseup.net> wrote:> On 12 Sep, 18:28, BrianW
hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>>> On 12 Sep, 17:55, "nightjar" .me.uk>
>> wrote:
>
>>> "BrianW"
hotmail.com> wrote in message>
>
>>>> On 12 Sep, 09:13, "nightjar" .me.uk>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> "BrianW"
hotmail.com> wrote in message>
>
>>>>>> On 12 Sep, 08:44, "nightjar" .me.uk>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> "Doug"
riseup.net> wrote in message>
>
>>>>>>>> But a judge allowed them to base their 'lawful excuse' defence
>>>>>>>> around
>>>>>>>> their cause: the fear that the power station could contribute to
>>>>>>>> climate change...
>
>>>>>>> I will be very surprised if this does not go to Appeal and even more
>>>>>>> surprised if the decision is not overturned.
>
>>>>>> It can't be overturned on appeal.
>
>>>>> Why not? It would appear to be a point of law as to whether the defence
>>>>> was
>>>>> properly allowed.
>
>>>> It is a point of law, and the prosecution can ask the Court of Appeal
>>>> to clarify the law, but it does not affect the not guilty verdict.
>>>> Once a defendant has been found "not guilty" by a jury, that is the
>>>> end of the story for that defendant as concerns that particular
>>>> alleged crime:
>
>>> I was referring to the decision that permitted the defence, not to the
>>> verdict, when I said I expected it to be overturned.
>
>> That would be a tricky one. Â The law can state the principles when any
>> particular defence is and isn't applicable, but once it is put before
>> a jury, it is up to them what decision they come to and on what
>> grounds. Â A judge can never direct a jury to find a defendant guilty.
>
> It makes a pleasant change to see you making a useful contribution
> here, Blackhead, especially as it is devoid of personal abuse and
> wrong attributions for a change.
Bwahahahaha. You really are funny, Gollum.
> So what is the verdict then? Is it OK to cause a small amount of harm
> in order to try prevent a greater amount of harm, like breaking down a
> door to put out a fire, superglueing doorlocks, painting names on
> chimneys, paintstripping gasguzzlers or letting their tyres down etc?
That is up to the jury in each case.
