A leading barrister has said that ‘She appears to be simply stating the law.’ Photo: of Trudi Warner courtsy of @JustStop_Oil on Twitter
The trials of Trudi Warner: Sue Bennet objects
‘She could face up to two years in prison.’
On 27 March, Trudi Warner, a retired social worker from Walthamstow, held up a placard outside the trial of ‘Insulate Britain’ protestors at the Inner London Crown Court. It said: ‘Jurors, you have an absolute right to acquit a defendant according to your conscience.’
Trudi has not herself taken direct action with Insulate Britain, but, like many, is deeply concerned with the issues of fuel poverty and climate change that the group highlights. But Silas Reid, the judge, has been forbidding protestors to mention climate change, insulation or fuel poverty in their defence. They are not allowed to discuss their motivations.
Trudi was filmed on CCTV holding her placard. When she returned the following day, the judge instructed police officers to arrest her and hold her in the court cells. She was later told she would have to attend a hearing at the Old Bailey to face a charge of Contempt of Court.
Trudi appeared at the Old Bailey on 4 April. Her case was referred to the attorney general, who may pursue contempt proceedings, or refer her to the CPS for perverting the course of justice. She could face up to two years in prison.
Inside the Old Bailey, in a lobby that is not accessible to the public, is a plaque that celebrates the famous trial of two Quakers, William Penn and William Mead, in 1670. It reads: ‘This tablet Commemorates The courage and endurance of the Jury Thos Vere, Edward Bushell and ten others who refused to give a verdict against them, although locked up without food for two nights, and were fined for their final verdict of Not Guilty… The case of these Jurymen was reviewed on a writ of Habeas Corpus and Chief Justice Vaughan delivered the opinion of the Court which established The Right of Juries to give their Verdict according to their Convictions.’ It’s worth comparing these final lines with Trudi’s placard. A leading barrister has said that ‘She appears to be simply stating the law.’
Penn and Mead had been arrested in London for preaching. Gatherings for worship of more than five people had become illegal under the Conventicle Act (apart from Church of England services). There were twelve judges and twelve jurors. The recorder ordered the jurors to find the two men guilty. Four jurors dissented. The jury was sent back. They returned, finding the two guilty of ‘speaking in the street’ but refused to add ‘in an unlawful assembly’. The jury was then locked up ‘without meat, drink, fire and tobacco’. Penn and Mead were imprisoned.
The jurors, however, were released by writ of habeas corpus, and sued the mayor and recorder, winning a historic decision that stated that ‘judges may try to open the eyes of the jurors, but not to lead them by the nose’. Right now it seems that jurors’ eyes are not even being allowed to open.
Trudi is a friend of my son Sam, who awaits trial on 25 April for his protest with Just Stop Oil. I hope to be there. Trudi is in the Lake District at present taking some space before a decision comes from the attorney general – a political appointee – about her future.
Comments
It feels as if we have a fight on our hands to uphold the independence of the jury system. I am grateful to Sue Bennet for sticking her neck out.
By Richard Pashley on 20th April 2023 - 9:22
I think this should be more widely known. Is there any objection to putting this article on facebook?
By RogerP on 21st April 2023 - 9:26
Please login to add a comment
