Law recognises ‘Direct Action’?
As lawyers you should have wondered about the acquittalof five defendants accused of causing extensive damage to the EDO MBM Technology building in Moulsecoomb along with computer equipment and precision machinery. Their successful defence: Although committing an offence, they are helping to prevent a much more serious crime, in this case a war crime. The factory made components used by the IDF and also although this was downplayed the British Armed Forces.
It sends a clear indication that sometimes direct action is the only option when all other avenues have failed.”Solicitor Lydia Dagostino
There is another alternative for the victims of this clear case of malicious damage, of course. The O.J.Simpson type civil suit AKA tort.
Criminal cases have a high innocent until proven guilty level of proof and there is a reluctance (which I share) to imprison for a political act. Civil cases have a lower what would a reasonable person believe on hearing the evidence level of proof and the penalty is financial. It may be more or less than the amount of damages. Also the double jeopardy defence doesn’t transfer from criminal court to civil court.
The chance of a victory in civil court is much higher and it’s harder for the defendants to portray themselves as English versions of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi. Any takers?
Plenty of for and against links:
- The hellish histrionics of Hove Propaganda Court Melanie Phillips
- Anti-Semitic juries in the UK may start decriminalising crimes committed against Israeli interests Robin Shepherd
- UK: Judge Takes Delegitimisation of Israel to New Depths Jonathan Hoffman
- Magnificent Victory for the Decommissioners at EDO-MBM Arms Factory Tony Greenstein
- Activists cleared over Brighton weapons factory raid BBC