What should happen about the hunger strikers?

[noblegiraffe]

There are a group of people currently on remand in prison awaiting trial for criminal activities taken in support of the (currently) proscribed terrorist group Palestine Action. Some of them have gone on hunger strike and are suffering health impacts and some have been hospitalised.

Their demands appear to be:
to be released on bail
for Palestine Action to be de-proscribed as a terrorist group
for the UK to stop selling arms to Israel

I'm seeing various MPs writing earnest letters to David Lammy as Justice Secretary, saying that he must meet with them urgently to discuss their demands.

And then what?

It should go without saying that I really don't want people to die, and I'm sure that their families must be frantic, but what is actually expected to happen here? The proscription of Palestine Action is being appealed in the courts and I don't think people threatening to kill themselves should impact the democratic process.

Being released on bail? While I agree that it is shocking that they have been held in prison for 2 years while awaiting trial, because the justice system should work faster than that, they are active members of a currently proscribed terrorist organisation. At least one of the hunger strikers took part in the attack on Elbit where a female police officer had her back broken by one of the activists who attacked her with a sledgehammer while she lay on the ground. There's plenty of video footage of this, and I don't think the hunger strikers have condemned it. If they did get bail by threatening to kill themselves, surely everyone would then give it a go?

So what should happen?

That is absolute tripe 😂.

Government does not and cannot interfere in the assessment of whether someone should be remanded in custody. There is very very clear guidance on when and how bail should be considered and either granted or refused.

There is a middle ground where the government makes it's views public, and a CPS prosecutor who wants to be a promoted CPS prosecutor follows that tacitly.

A situation which - done properly - leaves no trace.

I’m sorry but this is just utterly false.

Agree.

We know!

It's almost as though there's no conspiracy to be seen here @HoneyParsnipSoup .

Although I am blaming you for changing my mind about the quiche I bought for lunch today, and I now need to root through the freezer for the carrot soup I know I stuffed in there a while ago 😂

Absolutely. We often say the conspiracy is that there is no conspiracy. The extent to which people make 100% false claims on here leads me to be a lot more cautious about claims made about other things.

If it helps I’m on a weight loss journey and just ate 2 shortbread fingers. I’m nowhere near as pious in real life as I am on here!

I’m intrigued to know what country RedAlan is in that they can’t access X. The list of countries that have blocks in X is telling given their posts.

Me too, I'm 6 stone down and I'm a plateau with 4 more to go. We'll ignore the chocolate orange half I had with a cuppa at 10am.

Is it now ?

It's RedTag. It's a fishing fly.

Time for me to bail. My wumao senses are starting to tingle.

If you work it out, you might be able to figure why I am against extended remand.

We often say the conspiracy is that there is no conspiracy. T

Indeed. As anyone who uses Hanlons razor (which I wield as a fiend) knows.

However, there is a world of difference between pointing out circumstances where a conspiracy could arise, and actually believing there is a conspiracy. Or - to put it another way - understanding is not condoning.

Technically I can't access Twitter, as I am in the UK and they insist I show some ID.

Perhaps "can't" was instead of "won't" ?

Is that from a new account? I don’t think I’ve ever showed X ID but I’ve had my account for a few years. It’s blocked the odd thing saying it’s age restricted (pictures of bunnies!!!) but that’s pretty rare.

I googled why they were originally denied bail:

"Defence barristers argued that the defendants were all previously of good character, had spent more than double the generally acceptable period on remand, and were all anxious to attend trial and appeal to a jury to acquit them. The government proscription of Palestine Action, they argued, had effectively ended the organisation, and made any further action a much more serious offence, suggesting the likelihood of further offences would therefore be minimal and easily managed by very stringent bail conditions including electronic curfews, surrender of passports, police station reporting and so on.

In his judgement Mr. Justice Johnson accepted many strands of the defence application, but said that there was no real evidence that their opinions or ‘mindset’ had changed, and while a huge number of people in the country may hold similar opinions on the war in the Middle East, they protested lawfully and didn’t resort to ‘criminality’. In his opinion, the motivating factors for the defendants’ actions had not changed (other than very recent events), and so substantial grounds remained that they might commit further offences. On that basis, bail was denied."

The idea that the prosecution of Palestine Action meant they wouldn't commit any further offences is kind of under minded by the fact that some of them are now starving themselves with the demand that PA be deproscribed.

Why they don't just wait for the appeal decision to be announced I don't know.

I got rid of my 12-year dormant Twitter account (I mean what is it even for ?) when Musk bought it. The very first Twitter link I clicked on needed an account and that was the end of that.

So far (Pats self up and down) I've managed to stay alive without being "on Twitter". If I make it to the New Year I might write a book about it. Who knows ? West end musical isn't beyond the bounds of possibility. Maybe even a touring show ?

Bail in the UK seems to be a bit .... shit. I mean when the world+dog were saying that Julien Assange would 100% skip bail if granted and the judge said "I can't see any reason why we should not grant bail", the idea that judges were in anyway "in touch" was set back a century.

The judge appeared to be spot on in this case though, as when one of them was granted temporary bail they did a runner.

Normally I'd think that only the exceptions make the news.

But again ... Assange ? The word "egregious" springs t mind. Especially as it cost us all untold millions. Millions that could have gone to some Tory donors. Will no one think of them ?

I think you’re going off on rather a tangent.

Is this the point where I say something about the thread police ?

😀

https://news.sky.com/story/uks-sons-and-daughters-need-to-be-ready-to-fight-amid-growing-russian-threat-says-head-of-armed-forces-13483860

Sure, now seems to be exactly the time to be releasing from prison people who have planned and executed attacks on British military assets, and who had further attacks in the pipeline.

It's strange that you care so much about the length of time they're on remand and so little about the fairness of the trial when they eventually get to court.

None of these are 'open and shut' cases and forensics are not the only thing that can make a case complex.

It's not simply a matter of establishing who did what. The jury will also need to decide whether what each individual did (and intended) meets the bar for the specific crimes they are charged with. They will have to listen to the entirety of the defence for each co-defendant, each of whom could theoretically make a completely different argument relying on different points of law. Even if it's all total bollocks, each of their counsels will take as long as they deem necessary to make the case for their client.

The jury will also have to decide whether each of the defendants can be held jointly responsible for things which they did not personally do, but which were done by a co-defendant (joint enterprise).

I doubt the jury's deliberations will be easy or swift. While their political views should be irrelevant, jurors are not robots and some at least will have very strong feelings one way or the other about PA as an organisation. They will have to work hard to ensure they do not let this influence their verdict.

Above all, any convictions need to be safe. The last thing we need is these numerous defendants clogging up the courts with appeals for years to come.

You'll be pleased to know that the man who broke the back of a police woman with a sledgehammer (allegedly) is in the first trial so she won't have long to wait for a conclusion. The chronic pain she now lives with will however continue indefinitely.

You are talking about the trial. I am talking about the time held on remand awaiting trial. In this case, projected to be as long as 2 years.

Imagine losing your job, and house only to be found not guilty ? Almost as bad as being wrongfully convicted for two years only to be released with no compensation.

No one thinks that’s a good thing. No one would object to the trial being moved closer if possible. But logistics seem to be an issue.

In which case, what can be done? If there are reasons not to release them on bail then there are reasons to not release them on bail.

Yep, there are hundreds of people affected. These protestors aren't being treated any different to them.