Picture courtesy of BBC

 

In a dramatic conclusion at Salisbury Crown Court, three Just Stop Oil activists have been acquitted of causing a public nuisance after spraying Stonehenge with orange powder. Rajan Naidu, Niamh Lynch, and Luke Watson denied all charges of damaging the monument during their fossil fuel protest. The court cleared them after a 10-day trial, citing their rights under the European Convention on Human Rights.

 

The protest took place on June 19, 2024, a few days before the summer solstice, with the expectation of approximately 15,000 visitors to Stonehenge. In their demonstration, the activists used colour blasters filled with cornflour, talc, and orange dye. They argued that their actions were a peaceful protest and that their cause was just, with no lasting damage inflicted on the ancient stones.

 

The prosecution alleged that the protest was a "carefully planned" act of vandalism, filmed by other members of the activist group. However, Judge Paul Dugdale highlighted the jury's task to consider whether a conviction would unjustly interfere with the protestors' rights. He underscored the safeguarding of freedom of speech and protest, even in the face of challenges to government actions.

 

Following six hours of deliberation, the jury found the activists not guilty. Francesca Cociani, their solicitor, expressed relief at the verdict, stating that the public nuisance charge was unfounded and an affront to protest rights. She reiterated the importance of the right to peaceful protest in a democratic society.

 

 

 

Key Takeaways

 

• Three Just Stop Oil activists were cleared of charges related to a protest at Stonehenge.
• The jury found their actions protected under human rights, with no lasting damage done.
• The case highlighted the legal balance between public nuisance and freedom of protest.

 

  Adapted by ASEAN Now from BBC 2025-11-01

 

 

 

 

Considering these actions, and the fact that they were acquitted in this particular case, it’s hard to see how it contributes positively to their "cause" in any way.

 

 

Pathetic scumbags no matter what side of the fence, although we all know where they lie. Watch out for the pushback. It won’t be nice. 

23 hours ago, Nick Carter icp said:

P.A caused extensive damage , they couldn't claim that they didn't cause any damage  

Wait. I don't believe that 'damage' against property is violence. Violence can only be used against people. Every one of the groups involved in chasing Israeli arms manufacturers out of the UK stood up, were arrested, and sentenced where appropriate, including the red paint on a warplane. (Big deal, eh? Sounds like, whoo, 'terrorism'! Except nobody was hurt.)

 

That's the heart of nonviolent direct action. Make it real so the public can see it and thereby change govts. Regardless of the personal consequences of one's actions. That's called courage and commitment.

Off Topic post removed & reply also.

 

@unblocktheplanet

On 11/1/2025 at 8:47 AM, Bacon1 said:

 

 

Considering these actions, and the fact that they were acquitted in this particular case, it’s hard to see how it contributes positively to their "cause" in any way.

 

 

 The knuckle draggers should at least be made to clean it up.

48 minutes ago, soalbundy said:

 The knuckle draggers should at least be made to clean it up.

Yes I agree, or in this case they should have been made to foot the bill for the clean up as a minimum.

This sets a precedent now that other protesters will use to justify future damage, not good.

On 11/2/2025 at 6:02 AM, unblocktheplanet said:

Wait. I don't believe that 'damage' against property is violence. Violence can only be used against people. Every one of the groups involved in chasing Israeli arms manufacturers out of the UK stood up, were arrested, and sentenced where appropriate, including the red paint on a warplane. (Big deal, eh? Sounds like, whoo, 'terrorism'! Except nobody was hurt.)

 

That's the heart of nonviolent direct action. Make it real so the public can see it and thereby change govts. Regardless of the personal consequences of one's actions. That's called courage and commitment.

Yes I wondered why the ones who sprayed paint on a plane are terrorists and these ones got off free. As did plane stupid when that invaded Heathrow and the women who smashed up Hawk jets at BAe Warton.

3 hours ago, BexMan said:

Yes I agree, or in this case they should have been made to foot the bill for the clean up as a minimum.

This sets a precedent now that other protesters will use to justify future damage, not good.

No the precedent has already been set.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/pounds-1-5m-hawk-attack-women-freed-1331285.html

I might have been wrong on the plane stupid one. Seems they got suspended sentences so as good as getting off free.

On 11/1/2025 at 8:47 AM, Bacon1 said:

 

 

Considering these actions, and the fact that they were acquitted in this particular case, it’s hard to see how it contributes positively to their "cause" in any way.

 

 

Well it’s got your attention which was exactly the reason for “Just Stop Oil” action.

43 minutes ago, Red Forever said:

Well it’s got your attention which was exactly the reason for “Just Stop Oil” action.

 

 

Yes, it’s got my attention — but the wrong kind. Actions like these just make people see them as vandals, not activists. It doesn’t win support; it pushes people away. If they truly believed in their cause, they’d find a productive, positive way to make their point instead of resorting to vandalism.