123

Four young people—Charlotte Head, Samuel Corner, Leona Kamio, and Fatema Rajwani—were sentenced as terrorists this week for the crime of criminal damage. They broke into an Elbit Systems factory in Filton, near Bristol, and caused approximately £1.2 million worth of damage. They livestreamed the whole thing wearing their, now iconic, red jumpsuits and they acted in the open.

A jury of their peers, that is, Brits, convicted them of criminal damage. Not terrorism or any kind of violent disorder. Simple criminal damage.

But here is where the really nightmarish situation begins. The judge, Mr Justice Johnson, had already decided that he would add a ‘terrorist connection’ to their sentences. He did this secretly, before the verdict and the jury was never told this was being considered. The defence was never given the opportunity to address it. The conviction came down on criminal damage charges. And then the judge, alone, unilaterally, declared that these young people are terrorists. Image

I did my research and found out this has never happened before in British legal history. Direct action protesters have never been treated this way. Criminal damage has never been considered a terrorist offence. The barrister for the defence, Rajiv Menon KC, called it ‘chilling and creeping authoritarianism’.

He is not wrong.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Jesus_666@lemmy.world 7 points 1 hour ago

The sentence length is not the problem here. The problem is that the judge has established legal precedent for "upgrading" a crime to terrorism. Secretly at that, without informing the defense or jury.

So now any crime can get you punished under terrorism statutes at the judge's discretion and the judge can announce that after the jury has delivered a verdict. That's not how a justice system should work.

I hope that the defense will move for a mistrial and win. Not that I think the perpetrators should walk free; they certainly seem to be guilty. But they should be convicted under the correct statutes for their crimes.

this post was submitted on 22 Jun 2026
123 points (96.9% liked)

politics

30143 readers
2937 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS