Just Stop Oil Sentencing
“Until they put the death sentence as the repercussions for what we’re doing, it won’t deter us. Because the alternative to us not getting the change that we’re demanding is death,” said Cameron Ford, a spokesman for the UK organization Just Stop Oil as “reported” by The Guardian.
Is Ford aware that the United Kingdom abolished capitol punishment decades ago?
If he were protesting in, let’s say China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, or Singapore to name a few, perhaps he’s have some balls.
Things are slightly different for some of his fellow Just Stop Oil comrades.
Roger Hallam, Daniel Shaw, Louise Lancaster, Lucia Whittaker De Abreu and Cressida Gethi were recently tried, found guilty, and sentenced for conspiracy to intentionally to cause a public nuisance in their role of organizing the infamous Just Stop Oil blockages of UK motorways.
Remember the young twenty-something crying woman on the overpass?
Aside from the actual protests themselves, the five, deemed by Just Stop Oil and sympathizers as The Whole Truth Five in a likely effort to coin them as Noble Martyrs, were recorded on a Zoom call intended to organize the protest deeming it “the biggest disruption in British modern history.”
While Just Stop Oil and their supporters insist their efforts are not only legal, peaceful but non-violent.
It’s as if this movie has been played before.
Judge Christopher Hehir, who handed out the sentencing, stated the five “crossed the line from concerned campaigner to fanatic."
Some including notable British celebrities (naturally platformed by the Guardian in their “reporting”) have insisted their sentencing, five years for Hallam, and four for the remaining four in jail is too harsh. Eco-Entrepreneur Dale Vince, apparently someone important across the pond at least in Guardian eyes, whined:
I think climate denial should be illegal, but instead it’s illegal to talk about the climate crisis in court. Now five peaceful protesters could face years in jail as a result of this perverse ruling. It’s a travesty of justice and that’s why I’m joining the calls for the new attorney general to intervene.
(Does the UK have mental institutions?)
University College London Professor and climate activist Bill Mcguire, barked:
They mark a low point in British justice and they were an assault on free speech. The judge’s characterisation of climate breakdown as a matter of opinion and belief is completely nonsensical and demonstrates extraordinary ignorance.
[and]
Similarly, to suggest that the climate emergency is irrelevant in relation to whether the defendants had a reasonable case for action is crass stupidity.
Is there really such thing as freedom of speech in a place1 where police knock on the doors for people for “non-crime hate incidents?”
Is their sentencing really a “travesty of justice?”
Was the judge’s characterization whatever the hell Mcguire screamed?
Or is the Judge’s view the five “crossed the line from concerned campaigner to fanatic," reasonable?
For what it’s worth, The Guardian, with one part Mao struggle session, another part a proxy for actual reporting noted:
Hehir admitted there was a scientific and social consensus that human-made climate breakdown was happening and action should be taken to avert it. “I acknowledge that at least some of the concerns motivating you are, at least to some extent, shared by many,” he said.
“But the plain fact is that each of you has some time ago crossed the line from concerned campaigner to fanatic. You have appointed yourselves as the sole arbiters of what should be done about climate change, bound neither by the principles of democracy nor the rule of law.”
“And your fanaticism makes you entirely heedless of the rights of your fellow citizens. You have taken it upon yourselves to decide that your fellow citizens must suffer disruption and harm, and how much disruption and harm they must suffer, simply so that you may parade your views.”
As for that first question, fortunately UK’s court system makes public some of the documents relating to court cases.
One document made available are the sentencing notes for the five criminals.
The document is 23 pages in length, presented below (or PDF here):
Decide for yourself.
I highly recommend the work of
and . They regularly comment on free speech issues in the UK.Both are here on Substack as well.
It is about time these radicals face the music of the law. They have NO RIGHT to destroy our historical art. They have no right to block the pathways of people needing to get to jobs. It appears THEY have no job. Are they independently wealthy and entitled through their parents first then their equally entitled professors at their elite schools? WHY do these complete fools not have JOBS? Are they paid by the whacko Soros? I am SO GLAD they are going to prison. They deserve it.
These people would be the first to cheer if someone was imprisoned for “Islamophobia”
As a Brit I’m happy and pleased they’re in jail.
It should have been a longer sentence as a deterrent.
Stop people going about their lives, block ambulances, vandalise stuff of cultural heritage then suffer the consequences.