Greenpeace protesters (from left) Ben Stewart, Huw Williams, Tim Hewke, Emily Hall, Will Rose, and Kevin Drake stand outside Maidstone Crown Court in Kent before facing charges of criminal damage and aggravated trespass after they attempted to close down Kingsnorth power station. The six activists were subsequently found not guilty. (Chris Radburn/PA Wire URN:6295287 (Press Association via AP Images))
Greenpeace activists cleared of damaging UK power plant
By Eoin O'Carroll | 09.11.08
A British court cleared six Greenpeace activists Monday of causing more than $50,000 of criminal damage to a coal-fired power plant. The court ruled that, by shutting down the plant, the activists were preventing greater property damage from climate change.
Five of the activists scaled the 650-foot smokestack at Kingsnorth power station with the intention of painting “Gordon bin it” on it (that would be British English for “Prime Minister Gordon Brown, throw it out”). They got as far as writing “Gordon” before someone climbed up there to serve them a court injunction.
The activists argued that they possessed a “lawful excuse” for trying to shut the plant down, because they were trying to prevent the coal plant from causing greater property damage around the world by way of global warming. An example of lawful excuse, as cited by the prosecution and quoted in a Greenpeace blog, would be breaking a window to rescue a child from a burning car.
The Guardian details the expert testimony marshaled by the activists:
The court had heard from Professor Jim Hansen, one of the world’s leading climate scientists, that the 20,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide emitted daily by Kingsnorth could be responsible for the extinction of up to 400 species. Hansen, a Nasa director who advises Al Gore, the former US presidential candidate turned climate change campaigner, told the court that humanity was in “grave peril”. “Somebody needs to step forward and say there has to be a moratorium, draw a line in the sand and say no more coal-fired power stations.”
It also heard [opposition leader] David Cameron’s environment adviser, millionaire environmentalist Zac Goldsmith, and an Inuit leader from Greenland both say climate change was already seriously affecting life around the world. Goldsmith told the court: “By building a coal-power plant in this country, it makes it very much harder [to exert] pressure on countries like China and India” to reduce their burgeoning use of the fossil fuel.
The court was told that some of the property in immediate need of protection included parts of Kent at risk from rising sea levels, the Pacific island state of Tuvalu and areas of Greenland. The defendants also cited the Arctic ice sheet, China’s Yellow River region, the Larsen B ice shelf in Antarctica, coastal areas of Bangladesh and the city of New Orleans.
The jury was told that Kingsnorth emitted the same amount of carbon dioxide as the 30 least polluting countries in the world combined – and that there were advanced plans to build a new coal-fired power station next to the existing site on the Hoo peninsula.
The jury – nine men and three women – found the testimony compelling, and found the six activists not guilty.
Greenpeace is delighted at the ruling. “This verdict marks a tipping point for the climate change movement,” said Ben Stewart, one of the six defendants, as reported by Reuters:
“If jurors from the heart of Middle England say it’s legitimate for a direct action group to shut down a coal-fired power station because of the harm it does to our planet, then where does that leave government energy policy?
“We have the clean technologies at hand to power our economy, it’s time we turned to them instead of coal.”
Emily Highmore, a spokeswoman for E.ON, the German energy firm that operates the plant, told the BBC that she was less than thrilled at the outcome.
<< Communities plan for a low-energy future | MainShe said: “We respect people’s right to protest, but what Greenpeace did was hugely irresponsible. It put people’s lives at risk and that is clearly completely unacceptable.”
Ms Highmore called for an “open and honest debate” about the challenges of energy and climate change, but added: “That’s a debate that shouldn’t be taking place at the top of a chimney stack.”
Comments
2. Duh… | 09.11.08
Actually, Hansen didn’t send it out from a NASA e-mail address, but a separate Columbia University address… thus one has to assume he did so on his own time and that it was a personal expression, protected by the first amendment.
As to the rest… see a doctor.
3. Chris | 09.11.08
Yet China will continue to build a new coal fired power each and every week for years to come in complete disregard of these noble heroes. Its like they didn’t even do something important. How can this be explained?
4. Alan Russell | 09.12.08
So how many people can we kill at a coal plant and still get off with this new ‘twinkie’ defense?
Did they use all natural paint that had no environmental impact?
5. Josephus | 09.12.08
Next these Greenpeace People can be cleared from any misschief if they slash tires to prevent cars from driving and polluting the atmosphere.n. They can also shoot a missile to an airlainer, sas that brings more pollution than a coal-fired power plant. They shoiuld be disconnected from electric power thtaq may come from one of these polluting power plants.
Way to go, brains in the justice field!
7. Andre | 09.13.08
The jurors were morons, considering the size of the earth’s atmosphere one lowly coal plant will have no effect on the climate. Like previous posters have said now they have a license to cause as much damage as they want to other people’s property.
8. Green | 09.17.08
At Last! Us persecuted activists get some respect! That Emily Highmore is sure an idiot.
9. Nancy Beckmann | 09.18.08
You know the saying: A journey of a 1000 miles begins with the first step…etc.
What is wrong with wake-up calls? Loving Mother-earth is not a crime nor should her welfare be ignored. Listen to the opinions of experts who are seriously concerned and not consign them to a”wacko” group.
Trackbacks/Pingbacks
Leave a Comment
We do not publish all comments, and we do not publish comments immediately. The comments feature is a forum to discuss the ideas in our stories. Constructive debate - even pointed disagreement - is welcome, but personal attacks on other commenters are not, and will not be published.
Tip: Do not write a novel. Keep it short. We will not publish lengthy comments. Come up with your own statements. This is not a place to cut and paste an email you received. If we recognize it as such, we won't post it.
Please do not post any comments that are commercial in nature or that violate copyrights.
Finally, we will not publish any comments that we regard as obscene, defamatory, or intended to incite violence.
1. Leslie Markham | 09.11.08
What’s disturbing is that Hansen, in direct violation of NASA’s code of ethics posted on the NASA Office of General Council webpage, would actually defend persons who admit their guilt. From the Goddard Institute for Space Studies web page:
GISS is a component laboratory of Goddard Space Flight Center’s Earth Sciences Division, which is part of GSFC’s Sciences and Exploration Directorate. Thus Hansen falls under these ethics rules.
Specifically, Dr. Hansen’s defense of vandalism in the name of a cause he believes in fails under the NASA Misuse of position rule. If he received compensation of any kind, such as airfare, rooms, board etc. to appear as a NASA expert, he would also be breaking other NASA conduct rules.
And if you don’t believe the crazier whackos of the green movement won’t use this to justify more and dangerous damage, wake up. They’ve been waiting for jury nullification and now they have it. I’d like to see the jurors’ faces when they have no heat this winter in their homes because activists they cleared have sabotaged a power plant.