Saturday, January 03, 2009
A letter from the Crown Prosecution Service to lawyers for Greenpeace reveals that the Attorney-General is close to referring the case of the Kingsnorth Six to the Court of Appeal in an effort to remove the defence of ‘lawful excuse' from activists.
The Kingsnorth Six faced a charge of criminal damage at Maidstone crown court in September. A year earlier the Greenpeace volunteers had entered Kingsnorth coal-fired power station in Kent before scaling the chimney, closing the station and painting Gordon Brown's name down the smokestack.
If so Baroness Scotland (firstname.lastname@example.org) will be behaving with rare integrity. I previously reported on how I reported a case of mass murder to her which she clearly decided should not be investigated because the murderers are her cabinet colleagues. A previous F0I decision that the public should not only not be allowed to know what the advice of the AG on whether our most important recent war was criminal or not but that we were not even to be allowed to know if the AG had even been asked, also reinforces the conclusion that our senior law officers are merely corrupt political poodles. Or perhaps it is just that even our government recognise that giving the eco-fascists the right to attack our electricity suppliers is potentially infinitely damaging.
I wrote before on this & said that the jury's decision was understandable in light of the alleged "prosecution's" decision to give the great & evil of the eco-fascist movement not only a lot of time to say how important this vandalism was but, more importantly, prevent any defence involving warming scepticism.
I have also written about how James Hansen's witness statement "....What has changed recently is the steady global warming, at a rate of about 0.2°C per decade" was clear perjury (as were some other things he said though, to be fair to him, most of it was merely tendentious & subjective theorising).
I very much hope that if the AG does indeed decide to take this injustice back to court some authoritative sceptical scientists offer to testify. I think it unlikely that such an offer could be refused & have little doubt that in any serious investigation carried out under legal rules, as in Gerald Monckton's case against Gore's lying film, the result would would be a humiliation for the alarmists. It would also be worthwhile seeing Hansen & perhaps others, explaining how previous testimony wasn't really prejured.
If so Kingsnorth could turn out to be a trap for the alarmists of their own making.
This has been true for as long as written records have been kept. Having said that, the people of the UK should be able to make decdisions about politics without the senior officers of the state either criminalizing the dissemination of information, or running a large segment of the media.
I think one of the key mistakes we make is that we keep calling such public officers our 'leaders' when they should be following our opinions, not the other way around. A liberal bumper sticker I saw a few years ago put it well:
When the people lead, the leaders will follow.