A judge shot down claims by environmental activists that law-breaking could be justified by the need to fight climate change.
District Judge Jonathan Taaffe found six protesters guilty of aggravated trespass after they broke into Manchester Airport and formed a ‘human circle’ around a waiting jet.
The members of Plane Stupid chained themselves together in front of Monarch Airlines plane, shutting the airport down for half an hour and forcing six landing flights to divert to different airports.
During the two-day trial at Trafford magistrates’ court, the defendants claimed they were acting out of ‘necessity’ to prevent the devastating effects of climate change.
But yesterday, Judge Taaffee rejected their arguments saying there was only a ‘remote’ connection between the effects of climate change and their break-in.
He said: “Their actions did not in any way prevent death and serious injury, in fact the actions in the short term seem to have added to the problem by adding to the emissions [from diverted planes].
“In this case the connection, in my view, between the defendants’ actions and the risk of serious injury and death are remote.”
The judge also said ‘democratic and legal options’ were available to the protesters but they chose not to use them.
In a statement released after the trial, the protesters said: “Civil disobedience has a long and honourable tradition in this country and Manchester has a proud place in that history.
“We all have a duty and a responsibility and we will continue to act and stop climate change.
Francis Barney, 27, of Acomb Street, Manchester; Jess Bradley, 22, of Moss Lane East, Manchester; David Cullen, 31, of Rockdove Avenue, Hulme; Iain Hilton, 32, of Ladybarn Lane, Fallowfield; Edward Watson, 21, of Desmoines Road, Manchester, were given a two-year conditional discharge and ordered to pay £310 each.
Robin Gillett, 24, of Ladybarn Lane, Fallowfield, had one previous condition for a similar protest action and was ordered to do 80 hours of unpaid work and pay £310.
Tweet
Comments
Login or Register to comment
Brilliant - should have locked these 'environmental' terrorists up!
These campaigners are not 'the great unwashed', 'lazy lay-abouts' or 'eco-terriorists'. The are people with an immense sense of social responsibility, who are considering the future of us all and not just themselves.
Direct action is controversial and in this case, according to the airport, resulted in greater emissions, however it was an action that was a response to the corrupt nature of the city council who consistently manipulate the planning process in order to avoid any formal means of opposition to expansion
We can be under no illusion that Manchester City Councils permission to expand the airport has been granted due to local politicians with vested interests. It is not relective of their commitment to reduce emissions in the region 41% by 2015, their attempts to make the airport carbon netural, or the legally binding commitments made by the UK in the 2008 Climate Change Act.
Despite the verdict on this case the lenient sentencing demonstrates that the legal system in this country is finally recongnising and engaging with the seriousness of climate change and aviation expansion.
how much did the judge fine the iceland volcano when the going rate is £80 for a half hours disruption at a middle size airport?
Hope they picked up their paper planes and recycled them. Should think themselves lucky they haven't been done for littering, 80 quid a plane that. Wouldn't mind seeing that on 'youtube'.
I can understand why the members of Plane Stupid did this demo. In my opinion, it's important to think about the increase of pollution and its consequences !
But I don't understand people, like John Evans, who names these people "terrorists" ! They have just tried to warn people about serious problems caused by climate change.
Nevertheless, I think the fine is not too high. Only £310 ? If I were the judge, I would give them a higher fine. Stopping the airport traffic is not the best way to wam people.
I prefer the people who speak, and I think these people should think before acting...
To my mind there are so manuy other ways to
As many readers i do think the problem of pollution became a national concern in the country, thanks to the six protesters engaged in the action depicted. Even though they could be insulted by others at the same time.
Anyway, the stupid plane group did arouse a common sense of responsability. At least people seem to be involved in the global warming whatever they feel about the thorny question defined, or the controversial means choosen to defend it.
Nevertheless, there are so many other solutions to express any discordance about a topic for instance, publishing one 's ideas or debating with people. To my mind, in such a way that demonstration would have been a real peaceful means of expression instead of turning into a violent one.
(Clochette)
M. Boulanger, your analysis is wobbly:
How can you tell us that we can't qualify them as terrorists. Take innocent people in hostage, that's terrorism!! So what's the definition of "terrorist"?
That's a person or a group of people who establish a climate of fear. Do you really think that policemen, office workers, the pilot and above all the passengers were fine when they saw, four or five hysterical persons running toward the plane. Moreover, i am curious to know how did people feel when they leave the plane? There's a gap between us( people like me and you) and the true responsible( politicians notably). Nowadays, the best solution is to vote. Your main wish is certainly to see a change, perfect why not. Why don't you give your vote to the ecologists?!
Plane Stupids ' challenge is to highlight the problems about climate, people feel maybe more concerned by employment, healthiness and education which are, to my mind too, essentials for our decade. Democracy is to respect others' opinion and not to oblige them to choose their way of thinking.