Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think the judge was right to throw the book at Just Stop Oil?

454 replies

StripedPiggy · 18/07/2024 19:30

Five Just Stop Oil activists, including leader & XR founder Roger Hallam have been sentenced to up to 5 years in jail for blocking the M25 & other main roads.
Their intention was to cause gridlock on roads in the South East. The disruption they caused resulted in people missing medical appointments, flights & business meetings.

Well done to that judge. The criminal justice system is right to pass serious sentences on these fanatics which will act as a strong deterrent to others who might try to cause mass disruption, and put people’s lives in danger, to further a political agenda, whatever it might be.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
12
twomanyfrogsinabox · 19/07/2024 12:37

Donotneedit · 19/07/2024 12:16

That’s a horrible incident that came as a result of deliberate road closure by JSO , have I got that right? any planned road closure which makes it harder to get from a to b could cause exactly the same incident.
so your argument is that Anything that might cause disruption to traffic is inherently violent?
what about disruption to routes caused by Royal weddings or roadworks? Disruptions cause increased risk, we tolerate them all the time.

If there are planned closures you can change your route, make alternative arrangements. If you suddenly see pedestrians on a motorway when you are travelling at 70mph it has potential for horrendous accidents, drivers taking avoiding action potentially colliding with other vehicles or the pedestrians. It is not defensible in any way, if you had killed one of them or they had caused the death of one of your relatives would you still be so sanguine? It was only luck that there wasn't a real disaster.

Collexifon · 19/07/2024 12:43

If I caused an accident on the motorway and injured someone and it caused hours of traffic jams, I'd probably get a 2 year sentence for dangerous driving at the most.

There is no way on earth these jail sentences are fair and or proportionate.

Donotneedit · 19/07/2024 12:50

twomanyfrogsinabox · 19/07/2024 12:37

If there are planned closures you can change your route, make alternative arrangements. If you suddenly see pedestrians on a motorway when you are travelling at 70mph it has potential for horrendous accidents, drivers taking avoiding action potentially colliding with other vehicles or the pedestrians. It is not defensible in any way, if you had killed one of them or they had caused the death of one of your relatives would you still be so sanguine? It was only luck that there wasn't a real disaster.

This is a slightly different scenario though to the arguement about causing disruptions And traffic jams being an inherently violent act,

you are saying that activists simply lept onto motorways where people are driving at 70 miles an hour without time to safely stop. Is that the case?

Allfur · 19/07/2024 12:54

Pleasebeafleabite · 19/07/2024 11:29

To put it simply walking around with a few placards equals acceptable and there is precedent of peaceful protests along agreed routes having taken place for many years.

Grinding the whole of the south east to a halt for hours equals not acceptable.

How you can fail to appreciate the difference in magnitude and intention I‘ve no idea.

'The whole of the south east'? Does that include people who don't drive? Because there are alot of people on the south east who are not affected by the m25

Collexifon · 19/07/2024 14:04

Just adding this - "Bill McGuire, the emeritus professor of geophysical and climate hazards at University College London, whose expert evidence the judge said could not be heard in court, derided the trial and verdict as “a farce”.

“They mark a low point in British justice and they were an assault on free speech,” he said. “The judge’s characterisation of climate breakdown as a matter of opinion and belief is completely nonsensical and demonstrates extraordinary ignorance.

“Similarly, to suggest that the climate emergency is irrelevant in relation to whether the defendants had a reasonable case for action is crass stupidity.”

FinalCeleryScheme · 19/07/2024 14:09

Collexifon · 19/07/2024 14:04

Just adding this - "Bill McGuire, the emeritus professor of geophysical and climate hazards at University College London, whose expert evidence the judge said could not be heard in court, derided the trial and verdict as “a farce”.

“They mark a low point in British justice and they were an assault on free speech,” he said. “The judge’s characterisation of climate breakdown as a matter of opinion and belief is completely nonsensical and demonstrates extraordinary ignorance.

“Similarly, to suggest that the climate emergency is irrelevant in relation to whether the defendants had a reasonable case for action is crass stupidity.”

Bill McGuire doesn’t seem to understand criminal law or procedure.

Collexifon · 19/07/2024 14:13

FinalCeleryScheme · 19/07/2024 14:09

Bill McGuire doesn’t seem to understand criminal law or procedure.

What makes you think that?

FinalCeleryScheme · 19/07/2024 14:18

Collexifon · 19/07/2024 14:13

What makes you think that?

Because the correctness or otherwise of a scientific view is not relevant to or probative of guilt or innocence of a criminal charge. Neither is ‘moral conscience’.

Collexifon · 19/07/2024 14:20

FinalCeleryScheme · 19/07/2024 14:18

Because the correctness or otherwise of a scientific view is not relevant to or probative of guilt or innocence of a criminal charge. Neither is ‘moral conscience’.

Do you think the sentence was proportionate?

Collexifon · 19/07/2024 14:22

Looks as though the new Attorney General is going to look at it. Hopefully the sentences will be lessened.

FinalCeleryScheme · 19/07/2024 14:25

Collexifon · 19/07/2024 14:20

Do you think the sentence was proportionate?

No. They were too lenient.

Collexifon · 19/07/2024 14:25

FinalCeleryScheme · 19/07/2024 14:25

No. They were too lenient.

Okaaaay backs away slowly

coupdetonnerre · 19/07/2024 14:26

This reply has been withdrawn

This has been withdrawn by MNHQ at the poster's request.

Caroparo52 · 19/07/2024 14:29

At the end of the day they are right though. Although I do not condone their methods of protest there is no way of getting the message across... we are fucking up the planet big time and it will all end in tears. Already started with unprecedented weather occurances worldwide and probably too late to stop our little blue planet getting rid of a species hell bent on self destruction.

FinalCeleryScheme · 19/07/2024 14:32

Collexifon · 19/07/2024 14:25

Okaaaay backs away slowly

Whatever. If people cause huge public nuisance and economic damage they should face strong sentencing.

Collexifon · 19/07/2024 14:35

This reply has been deleted

This has been withdrawn by MNHQ at the poster's request.

OK Miss Farage.

coupdetonnerre · 19/07/2024 14:39

This reply has been withdrawn

This has been withdrawn by MNHQ at the poster's request.

PToosher · 19/07/2024 16:13

Collexifon · 19/07/2024 14:22

Looks as though the new Attorney General is going to look at it. Hopefully the sentences will be lessened.

Hopefully not.

Tandora · 19/07/2024 16:47

TempestTost · 19/07/2024 01:03

Climate issues are in the news all the time.

Just because any group thinks a certain things should be done does not give them the right to cause civil disruption in order to force people to do them.

None of us have the right to violently force the causes we think are important on society at large.

But it’s ok to force climate destruction on others?

Tandora · 19/07/2024 16:48

smooththecat · 19/07/2024 02:45

If you’re getting very riled up by it and posting on social media, you’re playing into their hands, it’s what they want you to do. Whether you like it or don’t like it, agree with it or disagree, that’s not really the question. I’m not an activist myself but I can see they are going to be on the right side of history; when we look back at irate people in cars on blocked motorways being slightly inconvenienced, they’ll be the ones looking pretty stupid.

I can see they are going to be on the right side of history; when we look back at irate people in cars on blocked motorways being slightly inconvenienced, they’ll be the ones looking pretty stupid.

yep. This.

IllMetByMoonlight · 19/07/2024 16:50

Tandora, "But it’s ok to force climate destruction on others?", you're right, this is precisely the point, isn't it? I hate it that this is a sort of default position, and that those who call attention to the peril we are in are vilified.

DonnaBanana · 19/07/2024 16:53

I take it you think the truckers who blocked the roads in the 00s and 10s to protest against high fuel prices should have all got five years in jail as well? Also the Suffragettes.

kittycloud · 19/07/2024 16:56

Yes. Throw the book at the lot of them. They blocked the road and stopped an elderly lady and a sick child getting to the hospital. Absolutely abhorrent behaviour, they deserve what they get.

ATenShun · 19/07/2024 16:58

To look at it rationally, the justice system is there to have us atone for whatever crime we commited and show we knew what we did was wrong. I suspect part of the reason they got long sentences is that they still believe they were correct in doing it.

The justice system will also be giving these sentences to deter others from carrying similar out.

Allfur · 19/07/2024 17:30

This reply has been deleted

This has been withdrawn by MNHQ at the poster's request.

For the striking doctors too?