September 13, 2008

U.K. Jury Decides That Threat of Global Warming Justifies Breaking the Law

Jury nullification is alive and well in the U.K.:

The threat of global warming is so great that campaigners were justified in causing more than £35,000 worth of damage to a coal-fired power station, a jury decided yesterday. In a verdict that will have shocked ministers and energy companies the jury at Maidstone Crown Court cleared six Greenpeace activists of criminal damage.

Jurors accepted defence arguments that the six had a "lawful excuse" to damage property at Kingsnorth power station in Kent to prevent even greater damage caused by climate change. The defence of "lawful excuse" under the Criminal Damage Act 1971 allows damage to be caused to property to prevent even greater damage - such as breaking down the door of a burning house to tackle a fire.

This isn't the first time this has happened.

The acquittal was the second time in a decade that the "lawful excuse" defence has been successfully used by Greenpeace activists. In 1999, 28 Greenpeace campaigners led Lord Melchett, who was director at the time, were cleared of criminal damage after trashing an experimental field of GM crops in Norfolk. In each case the damage was not disputed – the point at issue was the motive. Read more . . .

Regardless of where you stand on global warming, I think this just sets a dangerous precedent.  Real change will not come from vandalism and eco-terrorism- it comes from convincing the electorate and promoting democratic change.  For every person these actions converted to their beliefs, they lost someone else who believes the ends do not justify the means.

Filed under Blog, Criminal Law by

Didn't find what you're looking for? Try Search!

Spread the Word!

Permalink Print Comment

Leave a Comment

This site uses KeywordLuv. Enter YourName@YourKeywords in the Name field to take advantage.

Subscribe without commenting

Login