So whatever you find offensive you can rectify

[Barry]

Maybe a civil case for damages and the costs of recovery would make them suck back a bit, SW. We can't tolerate this sort of behaviour. We shouldn't be normalising criminal behaviour. 

[Streetwalker]

They should never have got away with the criminal damage. Can they be tried again?

The short answer is no they can't 

The double jeopardy laws were changed a few years back that allowed retrials in serious cases where compelling new evidence had come to light . This case is niether a serious case or I would imagine linked with new evidence .

Plod can of course charge them with something else or take them down the cells for a 'chat' if they really want them to face the music . 

[Barry]

There's been a ruling on the case where the defendants were found not guilty.

Suella Braverman at the Home Office:
https://twitter.com/SuellaBraverman/status/1575208035353387009

In April, I referred the 'Colston Statue' case to the Court of Appeal for clarification of the law relating to criminal damage and protest rights. My reference was successful on all counts. Well done to all those involved.
Now it is clear: The conduct fell outside the protection of the Convention. This was not a case of peaceful protest. The toppling of the statute was violent, the damage was significant and the proportionality of the conviction could not arise.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-63059300


They should never have got away with the criminal damage. Can they be tried again?

[Borchester]

Oddly enough, the BBC have yet to pick up on this story, although happily the Borehamwood Times has..

https://www.borehamwoodtimes.co.uk/news/national/19843184.man-uses-hammer-statue-bbc-headquarters/

[Borchester]

So now we've all got the green light to topple any statue we don't like.

What uncomfortable facts could be dug up about other historical figures who are represented today by statues?

How about the memorial to the Machine Gun Corps in Hyde Park and which bears the simple, terrible inscription

"Saul has slain his thousands/ but David his tens of thousands"

In short, we won, they lost, tough shit.

Those fellows were simply horrid and probably didn't care if their museli was vegan or not.

[HDQQ]

So now we've all got the green light to topple any statue we don't like. 

What uncomfortable facts could be dug up about other historical figures who are represented today by statues?

[Thomas]

No. But whom we choose to commemorate today should be judged by today's standards. And anything deemed to be morally utterly beyond the pale today - eg mass murder and slavery - should not be commemorated anymore.

Dont agree with you in the slightest steve , and as i said to you on another thread ,reducing history , and all its complications , warts and all down to good guys versus bad guys is simplistic nonsense in the extreme.

Cromwell has summed up my personal view more or less , but the idea mobs can go around tearing down statues or other historical features they dont like as they perceive them as part of the bad guy status in history is wrong.

My home city glasgow was built off the back of slavery , and the same could be said of many cities on the western seaboard of europe. Do we destroy them all as being uncompatible with the modern world?

Its a slippery slope to go down.

It seems to me the history of slavery in these islands ,which spans at least as far back as scholastic research can penetrate , some 2000 years , and even happens in the modern world today , has been condensced down to being all about a 200 year old cherry picked era of black slavery , when the vast majority of the time and people invloved white slaves.

No. But whom we choose to commemorate today should be judged by today's standards.

You may have a point however warped and one sided  , if the statue was sculpted and erected today. It was made 126 years ago and erected than , so your point to my mind is nonsense.

Do we tear down 5000 year old pyramids because they were allegedly symbols of slavery?

You can see where this is going. This is a simple case of left wing ideology overcoming common sense and decency.

There are unplalatable symbols to history everywhere effecting everyone. This is on a par with the taliban blowing up the statues of buddha as it didnt fit the islamist ideology , to worldwide condemnation.

Why was that wrong and this right?

Uneducated backward mobs should never be the judge and jury over what is right or wrong in history.

[Borchester]

Cobblers it's you moving the goalposts,there's a statue of Caesar in Rome.

An invader murderer on a large scale as well as taking and supporting mass slavery.

There are places standing and tourist attractions in Rome where such people were forced to fight to the death,

There are also statues in other places of vikings who besides exploring engaged in pillage and rape,slavery too.

why is it Romes business they conquered here took slaves,Bristol is a modern city........with a history.

Like Baz said there's a statue to my namesake,he did some pretty awful stuff you and that lot are puddled,it's history get over it.

Sure point out the bad bits but Cor Blimey  you cannot judge nor rewrite history by todays standards,well obviously you do but you're the one comparing apples to your sour acidic bloody crisps.

You know your history and context of that,I'm surprised at you.

True.

Edward Colston helped the poor, set up schools and paid for hospitals, but is now out of fashion. That won't worry him because he is dead. But it does raise the question of what good it will do Bristol now that the judiciary has decided that it is on the side of the mob.

[cromwell]

You are comparing apples with salt and vinegar crisps, .

Rome is a modern city with a few historic monuments in it, none of them commemorating the actions of any individual. Besides which, Rome is something for Italians to make decisions about. Leave their decisions on such matters to them whilst we honestly and morally address our own dirty linen.

If the movement of goalposts registered  on the Richter scale, there would be a few rumblings at the moment,

Cobblers it's you moving the goalposts,there's a statue of Caesar in Rome.

An invader murderer on a large scale as well as taking and supporting mass slavery.

There are places standing and tourist attractions in Rome where such people were forced to fight to the death,

There are also statues in other places of vikings who besides exploring engaged in pillage and rape,slavery too.

why is it Romes business they conquered here took slaves,Bristol is a modern city........with a history.

Like Baz said there's a statue to my namesake,he did some pretty awful stuff you and that lot are puddled,it's history get over it.

Sure point out the bad bits but ffs you cannot judge nor rewrite history by todays standards,well obviously you do but you're the one comparing apples to your sour acidic bloody crisps.

You know your history and context of that,I'm surprised at you.

[srb7677]

Right so when are we going to bomb Rome?

You are comparing apples with salt and vinegar crisps, .

Rome is a modern city with a few historic monuments in it, none of them commemorating the actions of any individual. Besides which, Rome is something for Italians to make decisions about. Leave their decisions on such matters to them whilst we honestly and morally address our own dirty linen.

If the movement of goalposts registered  on the Richter scale, there would be a few rumblings at the moment,

[cromwell]

No. But whom we choose to commemorate today should be judged by today's standards. And anything deemed to be morally utterly beyond the pale today - eg mass murder and slavery - should not be commemorated anymore.

Right so when are we going to bomb Rome?

[srb7677]

So basically you're saying erase history because those in the past should've lived by todays standards.

No. But whom we choose to commemorate today should be judged by today's standards. And anything deemed to be morally utterly beyond the pale today - eg mass murder and slavery - should not be commemorated anymore.

[cromwell]

It's very presence was an incitement to disorder, when all legal means of removal were blatantly ignored.

So basically you're saying erase history because those in the past should've lived by todays standards.

[srb7677]

Steve you've still not explained why the statue was there illegally.

It's very presence was an incitement to disorder, when all legal means of removal were blatantly ignored. 

[cromwell]

Prosecuting anyone for doing what the council should have done years, if not decades, ago is clearly not in the public interest. If the council had given a damn about it's own citizens, this should never have needed to happen anyway.

And statues commemorating mass murderers are clearly an incitement to all decent people. I mean would we prosecute anyone for tearing down a statue of Hitler? Did we think ill of those ripping down the statues of Saddam Hussein in Iraq? Would it have been in the public interest to prosecute them? And when a statue commemorating a mass murderer and enslaver is allowed to stand and all legitimate calls for it's removal blatantly ignored by the authorities, that itself is a de facto incitement to disorder, for the people themselves to defy authority and do the right thing.

I applaud those for doing what they should never have had to do because the council should have done it years ago. I applaud those who had the courage to tear it down. Generally, it is those willing to defy bad law in pursuit of a better cause who get things changed. The suffragettes broke the law because the authorities refused to do the right thing. No one would say their cause was not just today. Likewise the chartists. History will be on the side of those who tore this moral affront to decency down. But for once the law has decided to be on the right side of history.

Steve you've still not explained why the statue was there illegally.