advertisement


The Colston Statue 4

My concern is where does this end?
Beobloke said:
So, to clarify, mindless vandalism is OK as long as you have a good enough 'right-on' reason?
Click to expand...
I think the point is it wasn't 'mindless' vandalism. However I think it sets a dangerous precident; many on here hate Thatcher with a passion, if a statue of her ever gets unveiled in Grantham would that be considered OK to pull down. I think I know what the answer is but I hope you see where I'm going with this.
 
A defence against a charge of criminal damage is 'lawful excuse'. It happened to be the offensive nature of the statue that the jury seems to have found convincing.
 
kensalriser said:
It's naive to imagine history doesn't change.
Click to expand...

Really? History cannot change because 'whatever' happened. It's our perception, evaluation and knowledge of history which is subject to change.

twotone said:
Recompense.Disgusting IMO
Click to expand...
Joe Hutch said:
To compensate slave owners for the loss of their ‘property’
Click to expand...

I just don't see this as anything except a consequence of the British government, against fierce opposition at the time, mollifying the planters by compensating them for their cost of what were then considered goods. How on Earth can we, in these very different (and some say, enlightened) times, pass judgement on the accepted wisdom and standards of the time? Of course the slaves didn't partake of this compensation; it was not them who were compensated! It did, however, oil the wheels of the slaves' eventual emancipation.

I do believe that this did change the living and working conditions in some Caribbean plantations, but it was in the American south that the old slavery strictures continued. Abe Lincoln set out funds to repatriate some of those slaves in 1862 but whether this got off the ground I don't know. He was concerned that Britain (and France) might intercede on the confederate side, esp. as they were in the ascendant under Lee, because of cotton embargoes.

I do wonder what happened to the Carib nation in the two hundred odd years after Spanish and British colonialism.
 
Enfield boy said:
^^^The statue had been the subject of legal attempts to get it removed. Without a big label on it saying evil, dead, murderous racist it remained a stain on the country and a two fingered salute to any person of colour.
Click to expand...

Indeed. Plus the campaigning to get it removed was met by blatant racism by at least one Conservative councillor, i.e. the conventional legal channels had clearly failed.
 
The Colston 4 have an unlikely ally in the shape of Jacob Rees-Mogg:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-59893024

'However, Leader of the House of Commons Mr Rees-Mogg said he did not think the Bristol verdict put other monuments at risk.
Speaking in Parliament, the senior minister said: "I shall not be going out of here immediately afterwards and drawing a moustache on the statue on Oliver Cromwell much though I am opposed to regicides in principle and think they deserve to be removed from pedestals broadly speaking."

He told MPs that monuments should be protected and only removed through "due process", but added that "one of our greatest monuments is the jury system which is the great sublime protector of our liberties".

"Juries must be free to come to decisions that they choose to come to on the facts that are in front of them in relation to a specific case and what they hear from the prosecuting counsel, from the defence counsel and from the judge," he said.'

Any attempt a re-trial must be strongly resisted, otherwise we might as well do away with trial by jury entirely and let the Government decide who is guilty.
 
Darmok said:
What is wrong with these unreasonable people in local government who fail to act in accordance with the will of the local people, ffs.
Click to expand...

Absolutely bizarre, but if a Tory MP wishes to keep her party’s murderous slave-trading past in the public spotlight more power to her. A retrial will obviously never happen, but we can all note her desire to protect the icons of the slave trade.
 
flatpopely said:
My concern is where does this end?
Click to expand...

Exactly. As has been mentioned, the prosperity of the Colston area of Bristol is largely down to the gains made by Colston himself. Do we all stop going to events at Colston Hall until it is re-named and should we throw some bricks through its windows until this happens? Hell, should we pull down all the buildings that he paid for and return the area to unclaimed wasteland?

Wiping unpleasantness from history and pretending it never happened is never the answer and certainly yob culture causing wilful damage is unacceptable to my mind. After all, I'm guessing some on here who are cheering it on would have a different opinion if one of their heroes suddenly finds themselves in the firing line one day?

Edit - just seen that Colston Hall already has ben re-named! When do the bulldozers move in, I wonder?
 
earlier this week there was a very interesting documentary on Billy Graham the famous preacher who influenced millions of lives


He invited Martin Luther King to be involved in his campaigns however they parted company a bit of his campaign of civil disobedience . this is one of the issues here

https://earthbound.report/2020/06/10/toppled-statues-and-how-civil-disobedience-works/

The mayor of Bristol, Marvin Rees, sums up that position well: “I am of Jamaican heritage and I cannot pretend that I have any real sense of loss for the statue and I cannot pretend it was anything other than a personal affront to me to have it in the middle of Bristol, the city in which I grew up.”
I’ll leave the question of contested heritage for others to debate. What I find interesting is how many of the criticisms of the action are identical to the criticisms made against Martin Luther King.
The Colston statue is a dramatic example of how this works.

After years of repeatedly kicking the issue into the long grass, London announced a review of its statuary. A slave trader statue was removed from the Docklands just two days after the Bristol action. Manchester announced a review shortly afterwards. Oriel College in Oxford has reopened the long-running talks about its statue of the white supremacist Cecil Rhodes. There are debates on controversial statues in Edinburgh, Cardiff, Plymouth. As of this morning, 130 councils have opened reviews of their monuments.

Civil disobedience works. Yes, laws have been broken – and Martin Luther King argued that those who engage in nonviolent direct action should take full responsibility for that. But the moment of crisis in Bristol has cracked open a discussion in Britain about heritage, empire, and the sources of white wealth. I hope for new steps in a positive direction as our culture learns to separate remembering and honouring, and that our towns and cities become a better reflection of our multiculturalism.

However it is a fine line to tread . there are many thousands of german war graves in the UK . of course many of these guys bombed the hell out of London and Coventry . Should folks be allowed to desecrate these graves becuase of what these guys did ? no of course not .

. I just love Mavis Staples and to hear here talk of how they refused to budge when they were told to .
 
Joe Hutch said:
Any attempt a re-trial must be strongly resisted, otherwise we might as well do away with trial by jury entirely and let the Government decide who is guilty.
Click to expand...
Re-trials have proved the innocence of those wrongly convicted many times, we should not pick and choose who gets a re-trial based on the cause of the original case; that way danger lies.
 
Joe Hutch said:
The Colston 4 have an unlikely ally in the shape of Jacob Rees-Mogg...
Click to expand...

I wonder if they have the support of Richard Drax, MP for South Dorset, who (unbelievably) still owns the family estate in Barbados, formerly a sugar plantation cultivated by slave labour.
 
Beobloke said:
Wiping unpleasantness from history and pretending it never happened is never the answer and certainly yob culture causing wilful damage is unacceptable to my mind. After all, I'm guessing some on here who are cheering it on would have a different opinion if one of their heroes suddenly finds themselves in the firing line one day?
Click to expand...

That is the exact polar opposite of what this was about. It was the political right’s absolute refusal to acknowledge or retitle this monument that led to it being removed by the local community. No one is looking to deny history, only asking that the establishment no longer whitewash it to hide their past crimes. There was no mention on Colston’s statue’s plinth stating he was a Tory slave trader. It was the equivalent of erecting a statue to Joseph Mengle stating he was rather good at paperwork. It kind of missed the wider picture. Meanwhile the people campaigning to correct this historical anomaly were greeted with racist taunts and even had gollywogs waved in their faces by the local Tory council. This couldn’t be a more legitimate act of protest. It is up there with Emmiline Pankhurst etc. I have huge respect for those who did it.
 
Beobloke said:
Do we all stop going to events at Colston Hall until it is re-named and should we throw some bricks through its windows until this happens? Hell, should we pull down all the buildings that he paid for and return the area to unclaimed wasteland?

Edit - just seen that Colston Hall already has ben re-named! When do the bulldozers move in, I wonder?
Click to expand...

The local band, "Massive" refused to perform in the formerly named venue and many others including "Ronny Size Reprazent."

"Skunk Anansie" did play there though. :(
 
Juries are wonderful and Rees Mogg should be applauded for supporting the jury system.
Juries over the years have rejected what they feel to be excess State power and 'criminal' acts which are done to keep that power in check.
A jury acquitted Clive Ponting of breaching the Official Secrets Act by disclosing info re the sinking of the Belgrano to Tam Dayell. Juries have acquitted protestors charged with criminal damage to power stations, military aircraft and shipping etc.
Not sure there's a power to order a retrial for this type of offence. A Not Guilty verdict used to be the end of the road for a prosecution. Obviously convicted defendants could appeal. A change in the law has allowed, for example the retrial of the Stephen Lawrence murderers who were initially acquitted and Duckenfield re Hillsborough. It is a power that is used very sparingly. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/44/part/10 Part 10 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 reforms the law relating to double jeopardy, by permitting retrials in respect of a number of very serious offences, where new and compelling evidence has come to light.
https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/retrial-serious-offences
Criminal Damage Offences
  • Arson endangering life: An offence under section 1(2) of the Criminal Damage Act 1971 (c. 48) alleged to have been committed by destroying or damaging property by fire
  • Causing explosion likely to endanger life or property: An offence under section 2 of the Explosive Substances Act 1883 (c. 3)
  • Intent or conspiracy to cause explosion likely to endanger life or property: An offence under section 3(1)(a) of the Explosive Substances Act 1883
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top