- This topic has 16 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 1 year, 6 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
5000 supporters. £60k raised. Reporters without borders.
I’ve been following Assange’s trial.
I’m based in London and the case did not register in my consciousness.
Claim that the trial was without jury: https://twitter.com/marsxrobertson/status/1643294595952828427
How can I fact-check this claim?
Hello Mar,
so far as I know, extradition proceedings are heard by judges, without a jury. This should be checkable from legal websites. Craig attended Assange’s hearings; his eye-witness accounts can be found here:
Oops, sorry, that link won’t work; try this one:
Search of this site for “gallery” – link
That works because Craig used “Your Man in the Public Gallery…” as the title for those articles.
Twitter link from the original post: https://twitter.com/marsxrobertson/status/1643294595952828427
“Murray – whose appeal application was rejected by the Supreme Court earlier this week – described his trial, which convicted him without a jury, as “Kafkaesque”, and said that he “genuinely does not know” who he was “supposed to have identified”.”
It’s been 4 years since Assange was arrested, what a f-word s-show… Then Craig, the journalist who is covering the case, is put to jail as well… Allegedly without the jury.
Also makes me wonder where £100k in donations went – would be a good public awareness campaign while obtaining some PRO BONO legal help.
Craig highlighted the lack of a jury before his initial court hearing: My Trial, and Freedom of Speech.
He was charged with civil contempt of court for non-compliance with a court order. Civil contempt occurs when someone is judged to have potentially prejudiced an active court case, where the behaviour in question challenges the authority of the court in a way that could interfere with the administration of justice. It is a technical matter of infringement of sub judice proceedings and it doesn’t require a jury to give an assessment of proof beyond reasonable doubt; the decision and sentencing are within the summary powers of the judiciary.
The publication of information that is confidential to court proceedings, in defiance of a court order, constitutes a civil contempt. The quirk in Craig’s case was that he didn’t publish the protected names explicitly; instead the judge decided that he had published enough information about specific events for someone reasonably well acquainted with public knowledge surrounding the case to piece together the identity of the complainers. The court made no attempt to prove that Craig’s blog articles had led to any instances of ‘jigsaw identification’. The evidence that Craig submitted from an independent survey was unfortunately ruled to be inadmissable.
You can read the sentencing remarks in the judge’s verdict here.
The legal nuances were discussed in the thread Keeping Freedom Alive.
Something very similar is now being done to a friend of mine, for merely holding up a sign in a public place:
https://www.google.com/search?q=trudi+warner+contempt+of+court
Climate activist who allegedly held sign directed at jurors …
The Guardian
theguardian.com › uk-news › apr › climat…
5 Apr 2023 — Trudi Warner, 68, is said to have held placard asking jurors to act on conscience outside trial of fellow Insulate Britain protesters.Retired social worker facing possible prison sentence for …
Social Work Today UK
socialworktoday.co.uk › News › Retired-s…
2 days ago — A retired social worker is facing a possible prison sentence for contempt of court. Trudi Warner, 68, is accused of holding up a sign aimed …Climate campaigner faces two years in jail for contempt of …
The Times
thetimes.co.uk › article › climate-campaigne…
5 Apr 2023 — A judge sitting at the Old Bailey in London referred Trudi Warner to the attorney-general for a decision on whether the retired social worker …Insulate Britain trial protest referred to Attorney General
Evening Standard
standard.co.uk › News › Crime
4 Apr 2023 — Trudi Warner was detained last week after allegedly targeting jurors in a trial at Inner London Crown Court.Insulate Britain trial protest referred to Attorney General
The Independent
independent.co.uk › UK › Crime
4 Apr 2023 — Trudi Warner was detained last week after allegedly targeting jurors in a trial at Inner London Crown Court.Catherine Baksi
Twitter
twitter.com › legalhackette › status
4 Apr 2023 — Trudi Warner outside Old Bailey this morning before being referred to attorney general for alleged contempt of court for standing outside a …This is, of course, part of the same matter that Craig blogged about recently:
– “Three climate activists in two separate trials have been sent to jail by Judge Silas Reid using the entirely arbitrary powers of Contempt of Court, because they insisted on telling the jury that their protests had been motivated by the climate crisis and fuel poverty.”
Various juries have recently acquitted protestors, based on their defence of necessity, after hearing expert witness testimony. Previously, Judge Silas Reid had been rather supportive of protestors; here’s a link to my comment on the above article. It looks to me that government have been pressuring the judiciary. The Old Bailey decision to refer Trudi Warner’s case to the Attorney General would seem to confirm this; the Attorney General is a government post, so the judiciary seem to be kicking this back into the government’s court.
“Various juries have recently acquitted protestors, based on their defence of necessity, after hearing expert witness testimony.”
For the defence of necessity (aka “duress of circumstances”) to be deployed, there must be no other legal and defensible course of action open to the accused at the time the offence was committed. Accordingly, the cases of the DLR Six or Shadwell Three are more correctly regarded as rare instances of jury nullication, where the jury decides that morality trumps legality, because conviction would constitute an insult to common public morality.
“The Old Bailey decision to refer Trudi Warner’s case to the Attorney General would seem to confirm this; the Attorney General is a government post, so the judiciary seem to be kicking this back into the government’s court.”
Contempt of court is properly a matter for the Attorney General. Lesser authorities can only issue judgements in immediate and uncontroversial cases, where the AG’s consent can be procedurally assumed and is therefore implicit in the judgement. See Contempt of Court, Reporting Restrictions and Restrictions on Public Access to Hearings
“A Crown Court judge’s power to commit summarily for contempt should be exercised only where the contempt is clear and it is urgent and imperative to act immediately. In the absence of urgency, the matter should be referred to the Attorney General to consider bringing proceedings in the Queen’s Bench Division (Balogh v St. Albans Crown Court [1975] 1 QB 73).”
“Referral
When a contempt issue arises the prosecutor should be available to assist by reference to the procedure. Where the contempt only comes to light after the case has concluded, or the penalty which the court can impose does not reflect the seriousness of the offending, the matter may be referred to the Attorney General to consider instigating contempt proceedings in the High Court. Where this may apply, the reviewing lawyer should bring the matter to the attention of the Unit Head, early contact should be made with the Attorney General’s Office to flag the matter and explain that papers will be sent over and the Press Office should also be kept informed.”“Section 7
Section 7 provides that proceedings for contempt under the strict liability rule shall not be instituted except by or with the consent of the Attorney General or on the motion of a court having jurisdiction to deal with it.
Accordingly if a prosecutor has concerns before the case gets to court that a publication creates a substantial risk of serious prejudice or impediment to the course of justice in legal proceedings, irrespective of the intention behind the publication (as set out in s 1), he/she should refer the concern to the Attorney General. If proceedings have commenced, concerns should be raised with the court in the first instance; the judge may then wish to refer the matter to the Attorney. If the prosecutor feels that the issue has not been adequately resolved following it being raised with the judge, he/she can make the referral to the AGO.”A magistrate can only issue a summary judgement for direct criminal contempt (for example, where a defendant disrupts court proceedings), and the punishments are very limited. A Crown Court has significantly greater summary powers, but again can only convict in clear and immediate cases. Questionable or controversial cases must be referred to the Attorney General’s Office for a plenary judgement by default. The Attorney General (or Advocate General in Scotland) is the highest ranking law officer in the country and chief legal adviser to the government. In practice, their judicial authority is usually delegated to the Solicitor General.
Justin, what do you think caused Judge Reid’s sudden change of attitude?
“Justin, what do you think caused Judge Reid’s sudden change of attitude?”
Speculations about the judge’s attitude, motives or personality are necessarily subjective and of dubious value in legal analysis, but you might find something interesting in Tony Greenstein’s polemic.
Justin, thanks. Tony Greenstein included a link to this article at RealMedia:
The Hidden Forces Pushing Change in our Democracy and Rights
which refers to the Judicial Power Project, funded by the Policy Exchange lobbying outfit in Tufton Street.
OK.
Now I understand.
It was contempt of the court – that’s why no jury – that explains a lot.
– Fascist Judges
– Fascism reaches the UK’s courts
– Silas Reid Would Have Been Happy in Nazi Germany
– The Curious Case of Judge Silas Reid (my own blog)Fascism. Nazi Germany. Hitler.
I’m actually thinking about creating ADOLF: Authority Designating Operational Legal Framework
Pretending that I’m a secret grandchild of Hitler who is very proud observing the collapse of society and giving Silas Reid some award.
(this is obviously a joke, satire, irony, if I go to jail for a joke that would be not funny, but it would be funny after all)
—-
I am contemplating a thought: to what extent do I want to commit myself to jail to protest against the existing system?
I have a personal policy about dying: “it was worth it”, for the time being, same policy applies to jail: “it was worth it”.
I think I can accomplish more in life by staying alive and keeping myself out of prison.
—-
Also makes me wonder where £100k in donations went – would be a good public awareness campaign while obtaining some PRO BONO legal help.
Who was representing Craig? Which solicitor? Which barrister? £100k is a sizeable chunk of change.
For the moment I was concerned the £100k that was raised was defrauded.
Now I understand better thanks to the latest post – United Nations Human Rights Committee – the fight continues.
I would love to prosecute UK Government for criminal inaction in relation to climate collapse.
#CorporateManslaughter
Starting from releasing all the communication of MPs and Lords (spouses, children, direct family members excluded)
The logic is simple – they are Civil Servants – they work for society – not for the lobbyist, industries, or spheres of influence.
In the meanwhile #OvergrowTheRegime
https://i.imgur.com/Bx7QzP2.jpg – Overgrow The Regime
https://i.imgur.com/YXfMR3X.jpg – Overgrow The Regime🙂
When were those photos taken Marr?
“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has.”
I keep planting seeds: https://twitter.com/marsxrobertson/status/1651625185789845507
The photos near the parliament – during “The Big One” – it felt like a festival, family atmosphere, everyone passionate about climate / metacrisis.
Metacrisis = climate change + food system + economic inequality + education. Nuclear proliferation + pandemics + lost trust in media + lost trust in government.
Despite all of that, I remain hopeful: problem well defined is problem half-solved.
PS. My name should be “Mars” (or “Marsita”) but for consistency I use “Mar” (doesn’t really matter)
Thanks Mar. I was on the Sound & Power team, and on Sunday’s procession to the Shell building.
