A woman named Angela Ditchfield, who had been a parliamentary candidate for the Green Party, was arrested for having defaced the offices of the county council by spray-painting them with symbols of “Extinction Rebellion,” the radical ecological movement whose demonstrations have brought chaos to London and elsewhere.
She was charged with criminal damage. Her defense was that, by so doing, she was defending her property (her house) from imminent damage caused by climate change. Astonishingly — and alarmingly — the magistrates accepted her defense and acquitted her. In delivering their judgment, the magistrates said:
We find that you have a very strong and honestly held belief that we are facing a climate emergency, that you acted on the spur of the moment to protect land and homes under threat from climate change, believing that immediate protection was necessary, and the action could be said to have been taken to protect property, and that you believed action chosen was reasonable in all circumstances.
The socially destructive effect of this judgment, if it were to be generalized, hardly needs emphasis. The judgment made honestly held belief, however absurd, a defense against what would otherwise be a criminal act, and it therefore made everyone a law unto himself. …
Obviously, the magistrates, as weak of mind as of character, were acting in a politically biased manner.
Would that make assault on “climate deniers” self defense too?
Selective enforcement and judgement. Funny how, under the control of the current ruling class, the law only gets used to enforce their political beliefs:
If a person with “a very strong and honestly held belief” that Britain was being Islamized had daubed the council offices with a slogan to that effect, he would (quite rightly) not have been acquitted.