Page 3 | It wasn't planned, he didn't mean it. Seriously, what did he think would happen if he hit a police woman with a sledgehammer!

HeyHoHenryHippy · 2026-05-06T22:01:38+00:00

Remember the man that hit a policewoman with a sledgehammer breaking her spine? "Corner was also found guilty of inflicting grievous bodily harm after striking Sgt Kate Evans twice with a sledgehammer, fracturing her spine. He was cleared of the more serious offence of causing grievous bodily harm with intent." "Corner had told the court he "would never want to seriously hurt anyone" and he denied using violence against people during the raid was planned." It wasn't planned, he didn't mean it.

ruffler45 · 07/05/2026 08:06

Proving intent is probably dificult to a level that would convince a jury to convict, A juror has to be "sure" an offence has been committed these days; "beyond reasonable doubt" does not exist anymore

SapphireSeptember · 07/05/2026 08:13

Just another violent man attacking a woman. That's really what it boils down to. He could so he did. Bastard.

DrBlackbird · 07/05/2026 08:16

The videos show extreme violence directed to the saboteurs who then reacted in self defence

Extreme violence. Directed to. Self defence. Interesting choice of language. This reframes all responsibility for harm away from the people wielding the sledgehammers to the police acting to stop the crime. By this logic, the police deserved whatever happened to them because you think they directed ‘extreme violence’ towards those holding sledgehammers.

In essence, you’re saying that you support these criminal’s violent actions including against an unarmed policewoman because of their pure motives. Okay, fine. But that’s a dangerously slippery slope on which to build a secure democratic society.

What happens when the person holding the sledgehammer has a motive that you don’t agree with but someone else does? Will you condemn the police for intervening then? What if the sledgehammers come after you or your property or business. Will you want the same police you condemn now to protect you?

BackToLurk · 07/05/2026 08:20

SapphireSeptember · 07/05/2026 08:13

Just another violent man attacking a woman. That's really what it boils down to. He could so he did. Bastard.

With a side order of “she was asking for it”.

Naunet · 07/05/2026 08:23

Anyahyacinth · 06/05/2026 23:44

How do you fundraise past a blockade?

Or are you unaware of the flotillas with baby food, medical supplies that keep being intercepted in international waters?

The people you quote as having no regrets were acquitted.

This was an attack on the property of an arms manufacturer. The videos show extreme violence directed to the saboteurs who then reacted in self defence in a completely chaotic situation (the jury did not convict at the first trial)....

I would look but you can too ...that the sledgehammer defendant has apologised saying he believed a woman protester was being badly assaulted.

Maybe follow what they are saying?

Show quote history

Follow what they're saying?! Is that what you always do, follow what the violent man is saying, like when men strangle women to death but say she wanted it so it must be true? Just believe the murderer? What an idiotic attempt at 'logic'.

Winederlust · 07/05/2026 08:23

Cardomomle · 07/05/2026 07:27

Exactly this. He wasn't helping anyone, he was destructive and violent. When "protest" takes this turn, it's less about the cause, more about the ego and entitlement of those involved.

Show quote history

💯

Winederlust · 07/05/2026 08:28

ruffler45 · 07/05/2026 08:06

Proving intent is probably dificult to a level that would convince a jury to convict, A juror has to be "sure" an offence has been committed these days; "beyond reasonable doubt" does not exist anymore

The issue is jurys' lack of understanding of what 'beyond reasonable doubt' means. Most take it to mean beyond all doubt.
And, of course, there's the usual cohort who seem more concerned about the impact on the accused rather than what they actually did.

ThatCyanCat · 07/05/2026 08:36

They're just thugs who need something to sanitise it.

lljkk · 07/05/2026 08:38

People who do violent actions often aren't good at foreseeing consequences. This is not surprising. Many don't even act with malice. Many criminals weren't thinking straight when they did their crimes. Not news and obviously not a successful defence in this case.

Sometimes intent matters. For a violent crime lacking intent could downgrade the severity of the offence a little. For a white collar crime, intent can get you totally acquitted. Save your fury for when people may get away with all sorts of corruption crimes on the defence "I didn't mean to & I didn't know"

awaynboilyurheid · 07/05/2026 08:38

IsabellaVireauxLaurent · 06/05/2026 23:20

if they so want to help Palestine then its a pity mi5 could not put them on the next plane there and see how they do

Oh if only….

Cardomomle · 07/05/2026 08:41

lljkk · 07/05/2026 08:38

People who do violent actions often aren't good at foreseeing consequences. This is not surprising. Many don't even act with malice. Many criminals weren't thinking straight when they did their crimes. Not news and obviously not a successful defence in this case.

Sometimes intent matters. For a violent crime lacking intent could downgrade the severity of the offence a little. For a white collar crime, intent can get you totally acquitted. Save your fury for when people may get away with all sorts of corruption crimes on the defence "I didn't mean to & I didn't know"

Edited

Of course it's news. It was a premeditated act of destruction which ended up with a police officer seriously injured.

Cardomomle · 07/05/2026 08:43

Naunet · 07/05/2026 08:23

Follow what they're saying?! Is that what you always do, follow what the violent man is saying, like when men strangle women to death but say she wanted it so it must be true? Just believe the murderer? What an idiotic attempt at 'logic'.

Edited

Show quote history

Exactly. Some men will always excuse violence against women.

Cardomomle · 07/05/2026 08:44

awaynboilyurheid · 07/05/2026 08:38

Oh if only….

Show quote history

Imagine if they were actually confronted with the reality of war.

loislovesstewie · 07/05/2026 08:47

Anyahyacinth · 06/05/2026 23:44

How do you fundraise past a blockade?

Or are you unaware of the flotillas with baby food, medical supplies that keep being intercepted in international waters?

The people you quote as having no regrets were acquitted.

This was an attack on the property of an arms manufacturer. The videos show extreme violence directed to the saboteurs who then reacted in self defence in a completely chaotic situation (the jury did not convict at the first trial)....

I would look but you can too ...that the sledgehammer defendant has apologised saying he believed a woman protester was being badly assaulted.

Maybe follow what they are saying?

Show quote history

They broke into a factory, that's a crime, they caused damage, that's another, one of them assaulted a police officer, that's another crime. Disagreeing with the business they are in, doesn't make it right to do that. You would change your tune if it happened to someone you agree with. And it didn't help Gaza and they don't protest about other conflicts, because no Jews are involved

ForGreenExpert · 07/05/2026 08:49

There are some jawdropping excerpts from his lawyers final summing up to the jury - I appreciate it's their job, but i couldn't say any of this with a straight face.

"An autistic young man, in an unfamiliar place and an unfamiliar scenario. Alarms going off. Smoke in the air. PAVA in his eyes" Tiny violin

"he cannot help you with the detail of what was going through his mind at the time. He very genuinely cannot remember it clearly and does not want to guess" Convenient memory loss!

"The words used by the prosecution, both to open and close this case, was that this was a fracture to the spine. The choice of words is deliberate. You would very quickly, and deliberately, have been put in mind of a break snapping the spinal column in two, the thick lumbar vertebrae in two from left to right. But that is why you now have the photographs of the CT scan in your agreed facts. So you can see that it was in fact the edge of what we now know to be called the transverse process in medical terms, the little sticky out bit in non-medical terms; this was an injury that was not obvious. The doctor viewing the X-ray initially did not identify any bony injury" A nice minimisation of the injury he deliberately caused

If anyone would like to read this bullshit for themselves, I have linked it here

Filton 6 Trial - Defendants' closing speeches - Real Media - The View From Below

Defence legal professionals watched their clients from the public gallery as the Filton trial dramatically concluded with defendants accusing the court of hiding the nature of the weapons they damaged.

https://realmedia.press/filton-6-closing-speech-1/?utm_source=ig&utm_medium=social&utm_content=link_in_bio&fbclid=PAZnRzaARf_zhleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBzcnRjBmFwcF9pZA8xMjQwMjQ1NzQyODc0MTQAAafMkQkKp0sI3EMpvPvYCdHnnna7R0N9W0viuVDsMWd3G-lzTjHAVPAiT7vv8g_aem_YlsC137gHYfTgj14D6TI-A

tamade · 07/05/2026 08:49

Cardomomle · 07/05/2026 08:44

Imagine if they were actually confronted with the reality of war.

Show quote history

What are you trying to say here?
Agree with their views and actions or don't, but they seem to be protesting against a war/weapons manufacturer. I don't think they like war and need to "see how they like the real thing". The comment just doesn't make sense to me.

likelysuspect · 07/05/2026 08:51

Humdingerydoo · 06/05/2026 23:18

What I'm finding most astounding is the overlap between people who are vocally supportive of someone who injured an unnamed police with a sledgehammer and people critical of the unarmed police last week in Golders Green. The same people are somehow defending both sledgehammer guy and the stabby terrorist?! Surely, if they were even remotely consistent, they'd be supportive of the police action in Golders? Or alternatively would want sledgehammer guy locked up?

This complete lack of any kind of rationality is what happens when your ideology becomes your whole personality. It's very, very dangerous.

Its not inconsistent at all, its anti police and anti Semitic. Completely consistent in both cases

JustMyView13 · 07/05/2026 08:52

As I understand it, in the UK, if you show remorse for your actions then it is positively taken into account for sentencing. Probably just following the lawyers advice.

likelysuspect · 07/05/2026 08:57

ForGreenExpert · 07/05/2026 08:49

There are some jawdropping excerpts from his lawyers final summing up to the jury - I appreciate it's their job, but i couldn't say any of this with a straight face.

"An autistic young man, in an unfamiliar place and an unfamiliar scenario. Alarms going off. Smoke in the air. PAVA in his eyes" Tiny violin

"he cannot help you with the detail of what was going through his mind at the time. He very genuinely cannot remember it clearly and does not want to guess" Convenient memory loss!

"The words used by the prosecution, both to open and close this case, was that this was a fracture to the spine. The choice of words is deliberate. You would very quickly, and deliberately, have been put in mind of a break snapping the spinal column in two, the thick lumbar vertebrae in two from left to right. But that is why you now have the photographs of the CT scan in your agreed facts. So you can see that it was in fact the edge of what we now know to be called the transverse process in medical terms, the little sticky out bit in non-medical terms; this was an injury that was not obvious. The doctor viewing the X-ray initially did not identify any bony injury" A nice minimisation of the injury he deliberately caused

If anyone would like to read this bullshit for themselves, I have linked it here

The autism defence.

Katiesaidthat · 07/05/2026 08:57

The Israeli government are disgusting and this thug deserves all he gets. They are both true to me.

Cardomomle · 07/05/2026 08:58

Katiesaidthat · 07/05/2026 08:57

The Israeli government are disgusting and this thug deserves all he gets. They are both true to me.

Absolutely. It doesn't have to be one thing or the other. Everything is so polarised now.

likelysuspect · 07/05/2026 08:58

Israel and Gaza have absolutely nothing to do with a British police officer being violently attacked in Britain.

I cant believe these apologists on here.

GargoylesofBeelzebub · 07/05/2026 09:05

Anyahyacinth · 06/05/2026 23:44

How do you fundraise past a blockade?

Or are you unaware of the flotillas with baby food, medical supplies that keep being intercepted in international waters?

The people you quote as having no regrets were acquitted.

This was an attack on the property of an arms manufacturer. The videos show extreme violence directed to the saboteurs who then reacted in self defence in a completely chaotic situation (the jury did not convict at the first trial)....

I would look but you can too ...that the sledgehammer defendant has apologised saying he believed a woman protester was being badly assaulted.

Maybe follow what they are saying?

Show quote history

what were the whips that these “saboteurs” brought with them for exactly ?

GingerBeverage · 07/05/2026 09:06

I don't think he would have done it to a male.

MrsShawnHatosy · 07/05/2026 09:16

Pudmyboy · 07/05/2026 00:19

Yes I lived through the IRA attacking Birmingham, but how are these things equivalent?
Israel has war declared on it as soon as it came into being, and has been in a state of war ever since. No peace has been brokered despite Israel's many attempts, Hamas has made it clear that nothing but the obliteration of Israel will do. So, in no way are these histories equivalent.

Bill Clinton brokered peace between Yitzhak Rabin and Yasser Arafat, then Rabin was murdered by an Israeli extremist so that was the end of that.