What should replace the Colston statue in Bristol? | Page 18 | Vital Football

What should replace the Colston statue in Bristol?

Buddha said:
Colston 4 Not Guilty 😁🎊🎉🍺
Click to expand...

they were guilty as charged but as has happened on numerous occasions in history a jury made their own interpretation of a law.
this seems clever but tomorrow the boot could be back on the other foot. Exactly which lives were improved

In my opinion this tokenism is historically irrelevant and makes no difference whatsoever to any fight for justice or social change.

maybe working towards real change and not tokenism to just make ones self feel better for a short period would be a better use of political energy.

This whole woke puppet movement manipulated by the elites just meaningfully deflects from the real battle for change. They are not the actual left but simply 'cultural revolution' maoist totalitarians.

The old left are virtually extinct.
 
Great news for anti racists 🙂


Jerryattrick said:
In my opinion this tokenism is historically irrelevant and makes no difference whatsoever to any fight for justice or social change.

.
Click to expand...
Yep, you might be right. I wonder for example how bothered the families of the 30 London teenagers killed this year care about the removal of a statue, but I don't know for sure
 
ThreeSixes said:
Seems ok for white middle class people called Milo and Sage
Click to expand...
Apparently, if you hold a petition and lots of people agree with the removal and destruction of property, you can just go ahead and do it.
What's the point of the law and courts?
Absolute disgrace. The system was my reason for leaving response team policing, I had a number of cases that were similarly dismissed or had dubious results so moved to protection where I have little or no dealings with crime and the judicial system. Helped my blood pressure immensely 😡
 
Nobby_66 said:
What's the point of the law and courts?
😡
Click to expand...

If public opinion was against the actions of the four, then they would have surely been found guilty. However as their actions were overwhelmingly popular in the local area in particular, a jury nullification wasn't really that unlikely was it.

I mean, the quote pretty much says it all doesn't it...

"In this case, they determined that a conviction for the removal of this statue - that glorified a slave trader involved in the enslavement of over 84,000 black men, women and children as a 'most virtuous and wise' man - would not be proportionate."
 
MedwayModernist said:
If public opinion was against the actions of the four, then they would have surely been found guilty. However as their actions were overwhelmingly popular in the local area in particular, a jury nullification wasn't really that unlikely was it.

I mean, the quote pretty much says it all doesn't it...

"In this case, they determined that a conviction for the removal of this statue - that glorified a slave trader involved in the enslavement of over 84,000 black men, women and children as a 'most virtuous and wise' man - would not be proportionate."
Click to expand...
But they are still guilty of the offence. If the judge or CPS felt prosecution was "inappropriate" they could have dismissed the case on those grounds. Plus, they didn't just remove it, they damaged it and chucked it in the drink.

The offence states.....
A person who, without lawful excuse, destroys or damages any property belonging to another, intending to destroy or damage any such property, or being reckless as to whether any such property would be destroyed or damaged.

Nothing there about how appropriate it is.
If a local community was unanimously against a community of travellers moving into the area so trashed their caravans, would that be an appropriate case to prosecute, considering the jury would most likely be locals?
 
Nobby_66 said:
Nothing there about how appropriate it is.
If a local community was unanimously against a community of travellers moving into the area so trashed their caravans, would that be an appropriate case to prosecute, considering the jury would most likely be locals?
Click to expand...

Local people deciding whether something is a crime or not does sound a bit Afghanistan.
 
MedwayModernist said:
If public opinion was against the actions of the four, then they would have surely been found guilty. However as their actions were overwhelmingly popular in the local area in particular, a jury nullification wasn't really that unlikely was it.

I mean, the quote pretty much says it all doesn't it...

"In this case, they determined that a conviction for the removal of this statue - that glorified a slave trader involved in the enslavement of over 84,000 black men, women and children as a 'most virtuous and wise' man - would not be proportionate."
Click to expand...

if public opinion was in favour of rounding up jews in nazi germany or beating academics in mao's china then was that ok lol?
 
Coming from a different angle. Colston was a business man and philanthropist funding many things for the people of Bristol. At the time he lived the slave trade was seen as a respectable business, and he was highly regarded. To judge him by todays standards is futile, he was of his time. Both sides of his story should be treated with respect or if you want disgust, but his generosity to the people of Bristol should not be ignored. There are a lot of people throughout history with a chequered life, they were of their time we should not judge them by modern standards.
How far back will some people go for retribution, should Britain claim against the Vikings for selling Britons in the slave markets of Dublin or the Romans for taking our people to Roman slave markets.
. Those 'demonstrators' should have been found guilty of criminal damage and punished. The past is the past, study it by all means, but leave it there
 
Last edited:
The Roone said:
Coming from a different angle. Colston was a business man and philanthropist funding many things for the people of Bristol. At the time he lived the slave trade was seen as a respectable business, and he was highly regarded. To judge him by todays standards is futile, he was of his time. Both sides of his story should be treated with respect or if you want disgust, but his generosity to the people of Bristol should not be ignored. There are a lot of people throughout history with a chequered life, they were of their time we should not judge them by modern standards.
How far back will some people go for retribution, should Britain claim against the Vikings for selling Britons in the slave markets of Dublin or the Romans for taking our people to Roman slave markets.
. Those 'demonstrators' should have been found guilty of criminal damage and punished. The past is the past, study it by all means, but leave it there
Click to expand...

maybe seek reparations from the africans that actually captured and sold approx 21m africans to the atlantic slave traders.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.