In September 2020, Scientist Rebellion co-founders Mike and Tim took non-violent direct action at the UK's most prominent scientific body: The Royal Society @royalsociety

The legal defense of "consent" was used - that given a true understanding of ecological breakdown and climate crisis, and the power of social movements and civil disobedience to bring rapid change, members of the Royal Society would consent to the non-violent direct action. #NVDA

They were found not guilty of this trial, but Mike is still in custody, in relation to later trials. You can write to him at mikeonremand@protonmail.com

#scienceinjail

Tim was also on trial this week for taking part in an act of civil resistance at Shell, part of the global scientist rebellion of April 2022 alongside over 1000 other scientists worldwide.
---
RT @ScientistRebel1
Over 1,000 scientists in over 25 countries worldwide took disruptive, non-violent actions and engaged in civil disobedience targeting governmental, scientific and corporate institutions to highlight the urgency and injusti…
https://twitter.com/ScientistRebel1/status/1511878550584016898

⚠️Tim was found guilty of criminal damage. Mid-way through the trial, Shell increased their cost estimate of paint damage from an initial £5001 to £70,000. It seems that the jury was not made aware of this change and was presented only with a cost estimate of approximately £1000.

Shell didn't provide any evidence for this figure, the same way that they didn't provide evidence of an XR action on the 13th of April last year, for which all the charges were dropped.

https://extinctionrebellion.uk/2022/10/21/breaking-court-finds-xr-scientists-not-guilty-for-action-at-beis-while-charges-are-dropped-against-shell-hq-occupation-defendants/

Legal arguments for non-violent direct action are more and more constrained in UK courts. In both cases, legal defence through "right to life" and "necessity" were ruled out by the judge. Out of 45 pieces of evidence against Shell, only two pieces of evidence were accepted.

Expert witnesses were denied the opportunity to talk about Shell's human rights abuses and failure to meet legally binding targets of the Paris climate accord.

Other examples of this in recent trials to JSO and Insulate Britain: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/feb/07/insulate-britain-activist-david-nixon-jailed-for-eight-weeks-for-contempt-of-court

The justice system is broken. If Tim would have been allowed to make arguments based on human rights he would be innocent, so that's why those arguments aren't permitted.

The system is not prosecuting criminal organisations like Shell, but prosecuting those who stand up to them