Colston statue topplers acquitted

[SerendipityJane]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-59727161

Four people accused of illegally removing a statue of Edward Colston have been cleared of criminal damage.

Sage Willoughby, 22, Rhian Graham, 30, Milo Ponsford, 26, and Jake Skuse, 33, were charged after a monument to the 17th Century slave trader was pulled down and then thrown into the harbourside in Bristol last June.

It happened during a Black Lives Matter protest in the city.

A jury at Bristol Crown Court found them all not guilty.

During a highly publicised trial, the court heard that the statue was ripped down before being thrown into the harbour during a wave of protests triggered by the murder of African-American George Floyd by a white police officer.

The four defendants, together with "others unknown", were accusing of damaging the Colston statue and plinth of a value unknown without lawful excuse.

During the trial, Mr Skuse said he took part in rolling the statue to the docks to stage a symbolic "sentencing" of the slave trader.

I agree with the verdict.

I also think the statue should have been moved to a museum along time ago. I don’t like the idea of historical artefacts being destroyed no matter how abhorrent. It feels like trying to ‘undo’ the past. We can’t pretend slavery and other barbarism didn’t happen or we will never learn and the sufferers will never get the justice deserved to them. I do think it should be in a museum with other outdated items and principles. Where it belongs.

Would have been better with another plaque on it. The first plaque could say something like "Erected in 1850 - philanthropist, explorer, industrialist , blah, blah, blah" and the second plaque could say "Added in 2020 - history revealed his major exploits were slave trading, transported 84,000 slaves, 19,000 deaths......etc".

When trying to understand history more information, in a modern context, is better than less. Trying to cancel history is what happens in the Middle East, the Soviet Union and China.

To the posters asking if removal of this statue is what the people of Bristol wanted, I'm not sure it was. This statues biggest champion, the one with the golliwog mascot, remains a popular elected official. I think the fact that (maybe) a significant number of people, wanted the statue to remain is actually very worrying.

@Blossomtoes

They were tried in a court of law. They broke the law but the jury decided that was OK. It’s a very dangerous precedent and a perversion of our legal system. Why bother having laws at all if people can break them with impunity when it suits them?

The defence argued, within a court of law, that the toppling of the statue wasn't criminal damage as its removal should be looked at in the wider context of racism and Britain role in the salve trade, Colston traded in almost 100k people, which was completely lawful at the time.... would you have supported slavery?

They chose a jury trial and were aqquited by their peers, this is what makes the law, not corrupt politicians and their attempts at rigging the court system, which is what Bojo is trying to do with the Supreme court right now.

Sometimes violent protest is all that people can do, the authorities ignored peaceful protest over Colston for almost 100 years.

@Magnited

Would have been better with another plaque on it. The first plaque could say something like "Erected in 1850 - philanthropist, explorer, industrialist , blah, blah, blah" and the second plaque could say "Added in 2020 - history revealed his major exploits were slave trading, transported 84,000 slaves, 19,000 deaths......etc".

When trying to understand history more information, in a modern context, is better than less. Trying to cancel history is what happens in the Middle East, the Soviet Union and China.

On the specific issue of statues aiding our understanding of history, there's no evidence this one was actually doing much of that is there? The toppling of the statue has almost certainly led to Colston's story and actions being more widely known and discussed in the UK.

And isn't the statue currently in a museum? I know it was. If that isn't a permanent exhibit, it should be, because the toppling of the statue is as authentic a part of the statue's history as the decision to put it up. We should all be able to learn about it.

@NameChanged15729

I agree with the verdict.

I also think the statue should have been moved to a museum along time ago. I don’t like the idea of historical artefacts being destroyed no matter how abhorrent. It feels like trying to ‘undo’ the past. We can’t pretend slavery and other barbarism didn’t happen or we will never learn and the sufferers will never get the justice deserved to them. I do think it should be in a museum with other outdated items and principles. Where it belongs.

The potential for a thought provoking and educational display around the statue is huge. From it's horrific origins to it's final indignity at the hands of a local passionate community trying to make peace with it's past. It's not only history, but society in action.

It's the paradigm of what David Cameron was urging with "The Big Society". People getting engaged with their community, it's roots and destiny.

@Magnited

Would have been better with another plaque on it. The first plaque could say something like "Erected in 1850 - philanthropist, explorer, industrialist , blah, blah, blah" and the second plaque could say "Added in 2020 - history revealed his major exploits were slave trading, transported 84,000 slaves, 19,000 deaths......etc".

When trying to understand history more information, in a modern context, is better than less. Trying to cancel history is what happens in the Middle East, the Soviet Union and China.

Nonsense!

The statues to Hitler were removed, there wasn't a plaque to say he was brilliant at lowering unemployment and building motorways but we later learnt he was responsible for 46m deaths in WW2.

Has that "cancelled" history?

The cancelling of history was done until the statue was removed, as we now all know what he really did to make money.

@JuneOsborne

Ah, but it's their time now. The youth do this stuff (have done for decades) and it causes change. In the 60s all the marches, the huge social changes, free love, the movements were the youth. It's all been a bit quiet really since. It's good to see young people shaking us up.

It's like people are waking up too. We've had a Tory government for ages now and I'm amazed that there isn't more shit like this going on.

I did drive past some graffiti the other day. It said: join a union. Scruffy, not art graffiti, and I was marvelling that maybe the youth are going to rescue us!

.... and the Unions in the 70's wrecked the country so don't try and sell me all that leftie bollocks.

@Alexandra2001

Hitler put his own statue up.

My point is a bit more subtle. History is more evident if we see what the people of Bristol originally thought about Colston then and what they see know through enlightened eyes. The same with other 'empire builders' in other places, UK and elsewhere. I fear we will lose the whole story eventually. Nobody in Briton today has clean hands. The ancestors of the acquitted four will have benefitted from Colston and indeed some of them may have erected the statue!

Apparently a jury result doesn't set a precedent - so you can't all go pulling statues that you don't like over!

I'm local so have seen local coverage – the defence was about the action being a just response to a statue that celebrated a mass murderer. The statue was put in its historical context during the trial by the defence, while by contrast, the prosecution tried to make it an open and shut case of criminal damage.

I have to say, I do consider myself much better educated about the role of slavery in British history as a result of the debate that came about following the statue being toppled. For example, I had no idea that slaves on Colston's ships who seemed less likely to be profitable would be dumped overboard and drowned so he could claim on the insurance. I also didn't know that we – UK taxpayers – were still paying reparations to slave owners for the loss of their property when slaves were freed until 2015, when the last of the government bonds that financed that were paid off.

We really weren't taught anything about when I was at school, although I think this may be changing now. My kids did talk about the Colston statue being pulled over in their school lessons, and how that fitted in what they'd been learning about in history.

The potential for a thought provoking and educational display around the statue ishuge.

Definitely, and we should absolutely be doing this. I'd like to be able to see a museum display showing the statue and giving information about exactly what Colston did and what the slave trade was, the impact his slave trade money had on Bristol, his importance as a local figure, how this all led to the statue being such a divisive issue, the attempts to get the council to remove it, the toppling, and now the trial. We could achieve so much more in the way of education than was being done by simply leaving the statue up. The opportunity is there for the taking.

I grew up in Bristol and remember studying loads of Bristol history. The slave trade was never mentioned.

This was the 80s and I suspect the curriculum is unrecognisable now but I would bet a lot of locals didn’t know much about the slave money the city was built on until coverage of this protest and subsequent trial.

Get rid of juries, maybe ?

It wouldn’t surprise me in the least if that happened. The right wing has been longing to do that for some time. This case has presented that view with significant ammunition.

and the Unions in the 70's wrecked the country so don't try and sell me all that leftie bollocks.

What about increased wages and employer accountability annoys you the most?

Do you understand why 'boomers' are detested by each subsequent generation?

Also what the ever loving fuck do unions have to do with this?

A properly thought out and curated display in a museum (we need to remind ourselves how much Tories hate museums and libraries) could also carry an exhortation to viewers not to attempt to take matters into their own hands (with the attendant risk of conviction) but to engage with their local community to try and make changes peacefully and consensually.

"If you have been affected by any of the issues discussed in this display ...."

Anyway, it's snowing outside. God is laying down a fresh blank canvas for us to fill with love and caring and support and joy.

Interestingly the Tories plan to include the right to trial by jury in the Human Rights Act.

@VikingOnTheFridge

Interestingly the Tories plan to include the right to trial by jury in the Human Rights Act.

That pesky human rights act that Dominic Raab out of the goodness of the Tories party heart is going to fix for us and Im sure that bastion of love, support and acceptance Priti Patel is likely to have her hand in it

Priti probably hasn't even heard of trial by jury.

I have to admit that I am slightly uncomfortable with this.

Do I think the statue should have been there at all, no. Do we need greater understanding of the horrors of the slave trade and its impact, yes.

But in relation to this trial, I can’t help thinking that if it was four black men who were from one of Bristol’s less salubrious areas, the verdict would have been different, leaving me with a feeling that it took white middle class kids to get rid of the statue, thus leaving a feeling of a hollow victory.

Good, good, good!

Please don't refer to “boomers” as though we are a homogenous group, JustAnotherPoster00.
You can't assume that everyone of that generation is anti union, for example.
Some of us were activists in many spheres: employment, social reform, criminal justice, human rights, environmental issues years ago, before this generation.
When young, I would have toppled that statue. Not because the unusual but lawful defence agreed by the jury would exonerate me, but because it was an affront and the lawful representations we were always told to make, produced nothing.
In some of our anti nuclear weapon protests, we used the same arguments, btw. That we were trying to prevent the greater crime of mass genocide that nuclear war would mean. We still got arrested and some of us went to jail, but accepted that direct action sometimes meant prosecution.

Giggorata then you are unlikely to be thought of as a boomer, I think the terminology has shifted from the original meaning of boomer, a boomer is a certain mindset from a certain generation, so no need to self identify as one when you dont have the 'boomer' mindset

@JustAnotherPoster00

Giggorata then you are unlikely to be thought of as a boomer, I think the terminology has shifted from the original meaning of boomer, a boomer is a certain mindset from a certain generation, so no need to self identify as one when you dont have the 'boomer' mindset

Unfortunately you’re completely wrong. It hasn’t moved on at all. It’s become more entrenched - an entire generation judged by its date of birth. These catch all terms to denote a mindset - Karen’s another one - are just lazy. It’s unnecessary and insulting.

@BleuJay

No surprises sadly. Lefty thugs getting away with degenerate, ignorant and pathetic behaviour seems the norm nowadays.

Karen’s another one - are just lazy. It’s unnecessary and insulting.

The MN definition of Karen doesnt really match up to the way its now used in broader society, MN also seems more outraged by the name Karen being used than the behaviour of the Karen its used on.

MN is very much becoming came for the recipies, stayed for the right wing bigotry that gets scattered around this forum for some people on here