News / Colston 4
Colston 4 acquittal verdict to be referred to Court of Appeal
One of the barristers who defended the Colston 4 during their recent trial in Bristol Crown Court has questioned the timing of the attorney general’s decision to refer the case to the court of appeal for legal direction.
The referral cannot overturn the not guilty verdicts of Jake Skuse, Rhian Graham, Milo Ponsford and Sage Willoughby.
Attorney general and Conservative MP Suella Braverman is asking appeal judges for clarification on whether defendants can cite their human rights as a defence in a case of criminal damage such as that which was caused to the statue of Edward Colston.
is needed now More than ever
Raj Chada, head of criminal defence at Hodge Jones & Allen, who represented Skuse, said that the decision from the attorney general “is extremely disappointing and should give everyone who cares about the integrity of our legal system cause for concern”.
He said: “Referrals such as this are very rare and must be made expeditiously. It is over three months since the jury’s verdict.
“It is of serious concern that the public announcement of this decision coincides with and seeks to deflect from the prime minister being fined for his lock down parties.
“We appear to be seeing the real-time politicisation of jury trial to distract the public from the prime minister’s own legal difficulties and to stoke up culture wars.”
Raj Chada says that the attorney general’s decision “should give everyone who cares about the integrity of our legal system cause for concern” – photo: Martin Booth
Braverman’s office said she would ask the court of appeal for clarification over whether defendants such as the Colston 4 can use a human rights defence in a criminal damage case.
During the trial, the Colston 4 said that they acted out of conscience, claiming the statue was offensive and a hate crime towards Bristol’s Black community, with David Olusoga being called as an expert defence witness to put the statue into its historic context.
Braverman said: “Trial by jury is an important guardian of liberty and critical to that are the legal directions given to the jury.
“It is in the public interest to clarify the points of law raised in these cases for the future. This is a legal matter which is separate from the politics of the case involved.”
Main photo: Martin Booth
Read more: Colston 4 barrister: ‘The prosecution was not in the public interest in any shape or form’
Listen to the latest Bristol24/7 Behind the Headlines podcast:
Our top newsletters emailed directly to you
