Judge educated at the University of Oxford; Crown Prosecutor educated at Merchant Taylor’s, Northwood; jury educated in Bristol.
Onwards and upwards!
Onwards and upwards!
Yesterday was spent with prosecution and defence summing up. Here are a few highlights.
Sir William Scrotesack QC for the prosecution:
‘The council process to deal with the statue moved glacially.’
‘You may be frustrated that you haven’t heard from Marvin Rees or the Society of Merchant Venturers. Concentrate on the evidence you have heard. That is what you try this case on.’
‘It is not a public inquiry, not about politics. It’s not about emotion but cold hard facts and, fundamentally, the rule of law.’
‘Conviction would be wholly proportionate.’
Scrotesack QC also went to great pains to explain that neither he nor the court were in any way racist. Indeed not, he’s merely a public schoolboy who knows on which side his bread is buttered and earns a fantastic living working for the racist institutions of the state.
Tom Wainwright, defending Milo Ponsford:
‘[The Colston Four] showed the world the people of Bristol are willing to stand up for what they believe in’
‘Their actions created history. History is destroyed by not telling the truth. What, if anything, really has the city lost?’
‘What value did the statue have before June 7, 2020? What historical or educational value did it have?’
‘Describing Colston as a virtuous man is a lie.’
Liam Walker, defending Sage Willoughby:
‘Sage Willoughby and each of these defendants were on the right side of history and, I submit, the right side of the law.
Veneration of him [Colston] was an act of abuse and celebrated the achievements of a racist mass murderer.”
‘His actions cannot be categorised as a violent act’
‘[The statue] was itself an offence. Over more than 30 years nothing was done.’
‘The erection of the statue was an attempt to erase history. History cannot be erased but history can be confronted.’
Blinne Ni Ghralaigh defending Rhian Graham:
‘Rhian acted in response to what she saw as a crime of the statue being on display and the abject failure of the council’s duty to remove the statue.’
‘Democracy had broken down around that statue. Cleo Lake said it “was embarrassing that these defendants are in the box.”’
‘This is not bristol: we will not dress up a devil in angels robes.’
‘[The statue was an] obscene glorification’
Raj Chada, defending Jake Skuse:
‘The Council should be on trial. They could have acted. They had a very long time to sort this out.’‘
How dare the council turn up as a witness for the prosecution in this trial.’
‘Jake Skuse showed ‘unvarnished honesty’ in admitting to the jury it was his idea to roll the statue to the harbourside.’
‘Jake Skuse in his own inimitable style said ‘fuck off’ to the statue.’
Today the judge will attempt a summing up of the issues for jury before they retire to consider a verdict.
With hapless clown Crown Prosecutor Sir William Scrotesack QC back home and being comforted by nanny yesterday evening after completing a turgid prosecution case characterised by a conveyor belt into the witness box of awful white male careerists earning a good salary from propping up establishment racism, court returned today.
To sum up the Crown Prosecution case: they spent three days proving the defendants had pulled down the statue, which they have admitted anyway and then pointed and said, “ooh look, they broke a bit of pavement”.
The defence case continued today with a definite frisson of early morning excitement at news that there would be a bit of b-list celeb TV glamour in the shape of historian David Olusuga appearing as a witness.
However, first up was defendant Sage Willoughby continuing his testimony from yesterday. and what a rousing performance he gave. Providing an outline of the difference between what we consider justice in Bristol and the dead hand of British law as practised in our courts and by those spiritual (if not actual) descendants of slavers, the public schoolboy barristers of the Crown Prosecution Service.
“Colston was a racist and a slave trader who murdered thousands and enslaved even more. Imagine having a Hitler statue in front of a holocaust survivor, it feels similar if not worse,” Sage told the jury. Adding, “I think it was a hate crime having that statue left up there so I felt legitimate in what I was doing.”
The court heard Willoughby voluntarily handed himself into police and told them that he climbed the statue and put a rope around its neck “because it was the right thing to do”.
When asked about those unapologetically racist fuckers, the Merchant Venturers’ having contrary views to his, he told the jury they received money from slavery until 2015. He ended by describing the Colston Statue as a “hate crime” and agreed he had caused it damage “but, it had caused more damage when it was in place,” he said.
Next into the witness box for the defence was historian David Olosuga. One of only two black people on the Reverend Rees’s local History Commission until he recently quit without explanation.
David, the first black person to give evidence, provided an overview to the jury on Colston. the Merchant Venturers and the city’s role in the slave trade and detailed some of the horrors of the trade. The jury is reported to have asked for some more information about the Society of Merchant Venturers and why they have had influence over Bristol City Council. We look forward to that explanation too.
When asked if toppling the statue was an act of violence. Olusoga’s response was cut short by The Recorder of Bristol His Honour Judge Ded who called an afternoon break to later return and refuse to let Olusoga answer the question.
That just about concluded day four of the trial of the Four. It will continue tomorrow,