Following the Colston Four’s release, the Attorney General says the law may need to be reviewed.


Following the Colston Four’s release, the Attorney General says the law may need to be reviewed.

The Attorney General is considering referring the case of four people who were cleared of all charges after destroying a statue of slave trader Edward Colston to the Court of Appeal.

Suella Braverman said the verdict had left her “confused,” and she was “considering” whether to seek a reversal.

Although it would not be able to overturn the Colston Four’s acquittal, it would allow senior judges to “clarify the law for future cases.”

On June 7, 2020, Rhian Graham, 30, Milo Ponsford, 26, Sage Willoughby, 22, and Jake Skuse, 33, were charged with destroying the statue in Bristol.

The toppling became a watershed moment in the UK’s Black Lives Matter protests.

On Wednesday, a jury in the city’s Crown Court cleared the four of criminal damage charges.

Fears that other monuments could be targeted as a result of the verdict arose, as well as criticism of the criminal justice system.

The defendants did not deny their involvement, but insisted that their actions were not criminal, claiming that the statue was a hate crime against Bristol residents.

Since the verdict was reached by a jury, legal experts have pointed out that it did not set a precedent.

“Trial by jury is an important guardian of liberty and must not be undermined,” Ms. Braverman said on Twitter.

The decision in the Colston statue case, on the other hand, has created some ambiguity.

“I am able to refer matters to the Court of Appeal without affecting the outcome of this case, so that senior judges can clarify the law for future cases.”

“I’m debating whether or not to do so.”

Find out what’s going on in your neighborhood by entering your postcode or visiting

“The decision to charge was made following detailed consideration of the evidence,” a spokesman for the Crown Prosecution Service said.

“We’re thinking about it, but the prosecution isn’t allowed to appeal a jury acquittal under the law.”

Judge Peter Blair QC told jurors during the trial that they had to make their decision based on the evidence they had heard.

The identity of Colston was “irrelevant,” according to the prosecution, and the case was one of simple criminal damage.

Former justice secretary Robert Buckland defended the jury. Prime Minister Boris Johnson said the verdict was a matter for the court, but added, “What you can’t do is go around seeking retrospectively to change our history.”

“News from the Brinkwire.”


Comments are closed.