Break a woman’s spine with a sledge hammer on video and….

[noblegiraffe]

Despite you obviously doing it and the video being available for everyone to watch, the jury will be unable to reach a verdict as to whether you did it or not.

Whatever your opinion on Palestine, this should be absolutely shocking. That poor woman was just doing her job.

Honestly, when they talk about getting rid of trial by jury, this sort of thing goes a long way to convincing me that it’ll be no loss.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/uk-jury-finds-pro-palestinian-activists-who-stormed-elbit-factory-not-guilty/amp/

Well let’s face it, the people who are using the useful idiots would probably have had her flogged for let alone showing her face in public/having a job, so it’s not surprising the same useful idiots don’t care about a western working woman having her spine smashed. Welcome to the future! I just can’t understand where supporters of this agenda mind is at (assuming they have one)

I absolutely feel this should have been a guilty (have followed very closely) but I do feel that it is necessary to separate Jewish and Israeli as far as is possible. I have huge problems with what some of Israel are doing - also some parts of Palestinian. But… let’s take the political bit out of this, other than as a misguided motive.

A women was hit, with a hammer and badly hurt. It was filmed. The person was easily recognisable. They were found innocent. It must and should be investigated. It is a disgrace.

The video is far from clear. I can see why a jury would not convict.

What's not clear to you?

I did JS and initially the judge wanted a unanimous verdict but we had a couple of people (can't remember exact number now) who voted not guilty. After returning to the court room a couple of times the judge asked if there was anyway we would all agree and our foreman said no. So the judge accepted a lower number. I don't know if that is always his choice, or dependent on the crime etc

😳

We aren't party to the whole evidence the jury were presented with.

Fwiw the security guards in the foitage i saw were pretty violent towards the protesters, and in oarticular toione of the women. And the whole scene was extremely chaotic.

I.don't think starting a witch hunt against the jury is helpful. We don't want to encourage a climate where jury's reach verdicts on Public Opinion rather than on the evidence they see at the trial.

Do you actually believe anything you have written, I have no words, no words at all. As the wife of a serving officer, who has to face useful idiots everyday I’m sick to the back teeth of people with thoughts like yours endangering his life.

The Intelligent people in the country can see this verdict for what it is, a culmination of Gaza gullibility syndrome and hatred of women and the police - this means in certain peoples minds smashing a sledgehammer into the spine of a female police officer is justifiable because someone needs to think of the babies in Gaza. Fucking lunacy!!!!!! But this is where we are

@Wellthisisdifficult where did you read that the jury sent a note about Gaza to the judge?

I suspect the political views of tbe jury are very relevant on view of the fact this was a crime inspired by politics. And yes. Politics should have been kept out of the decision making by the jury. But it's likely it wasn't.

Absolutely. I was chairperson on a jury a long time ago admittedly. One of the jurors insisted that a person is guilty and has to be proved innocent during a trial. What also struck me is how a defence barrister can make you believe (almost) anything.

Are you serious?!? The officers in the footage were being attacked by sledgehammers and other weapons on the footage I saw from the minute the entered trying to restrain and arrest the burglars.

And none of it would have happened if some self righteous twats hadn’t driven a digger through the wall of a building. I fucking despair at people trying to justify this. I wonder if it’s because they are starting to feel embarrassed at their immense gullibility to the point they are going to try and defend someone smashing a sledgehammer into the spine of a serving policewoman with no chance to defend herself. Anyone trying to defend that should be in the dock as part of the retrial, because they are excusing and therefore encouraging violence against the police. I’d like to see two tier Keir spend time searching for those people on the internet and fast tracking those through the court system.

As it stands, say a few hurry words and you get locked up, break a police woman’s spine with a sledgehammer and you get hailed a hero.

WTAF! 😮

I suppose if I'm ever in that situation, I could pass a note to the court clerk explaining the situation and asking the judge to advise us.

The video of him smashing the sledgehammer into her back is evidence I would have thought?

Can you point me to where you think I said the video wasn’t evidence?

Evidence of what?

GBH

I know a feminist who described this as ' Good news'. A feminist who applauds a man not being convicted of serious violence against a woman. I fucking despair of people. Apparently ' the cause' makes male violence against women a good thing. 🙄

Nope.

The opposite, actually. One summer I did admin work for a law firm & all the lawyers were unequivocal. If you commit a crime, always insist on a trial by jury because you may well get away with it. Jury trial usually works in the criminal's favour - as seen here and in the many many rape trials. It is designed to protect the innocent but often protects the guilty.

You don't think deliberately using a sledgehammer to break a woman's spine is GBH? Give your head a wobble.

What do you mean "Nope"?!? How is video footage of someone hitting a woman who is on the ground with a sledgehammer on her back and fracturing it - not evidence of GBH?!?

It's an event that could constitute GBH, but the fact it's on video doesn't prove it's GBH for the purpose of a conviction, because whether it actually took place or not isn't the only consideration in play, and as far as I can tell nobody is disputing it did actually take place.

Again, people need to grasp that the fact "its on video" doesn't mean it's inevitable a GBH charge is going to lead to a conviction.

@XDownwiththissortofthingX are you a lawyer?

I am looking for some explanations for this, but I haven't got time to really dig in to stuff

As you say, if it's not in dispute that he attacked her with his sledgehammer, then why wouldn't it be GBH? Genuinely confused.

Full disclosure - I am horrified by this. But I would like to hear some neutral legal analysis.