A Quaker is appealing her climate conviction after a judge threatened the jury with contempt of court if they found defendants not guilty according to their conscience.

On Thursday 4 December the Royal Courts of Justice will hear the appeal of five women convicted of criminal damage for breaking a bank’s windows in protest at their fossil fuel investments.

The main ground for the appeal from the five appellants is that Judge Reid wrongly directed the jury.

Liverpool Quaker Amy Pritchard was sentenced to 12 months in prison for her part in the action at JP Morgan’s European head office in London in September 2021.

She has set up an open letter to the court, outlining how the judge’s actions undermines her Quaker faith.

What the judge told the jury

At the trial in February 2024, Judge Silas Reid told the jury that they would be committing a criminal offence if they made a verdict on anything other than the evidence.

This direction is counter to the centuries-old principle of the independence of juries. This was established during the trial of two Quaker preachers in 1670. There’s even a marble plaque in the Old Bailey to commemorate it.

Under jury independence, or equity, jurors can acquit a defendant as a matter of conscience, irrespective of the directions of the judge.

Yet Judge Silas Reid directed the jury:

It is a criminal offence for a juror to do anything from which it can be concluded that a decision will be made on anything other than the evidence.

The appeal against his court’s convictions comes as Justice Secretary David Lammy plans to limit jury trial.

Critics say this would undermine a vital counterbalance for the people in resisting the power of the state.

Pritchard said:

Quaker faith and persecution are the origins of this vital legal principle of conscience, reaffirmed in the Warner case at the Old Bailey.

This appeal reaches much further than this case and aims to contribute to protecting what democracy we have left, whilst holding this abuse of power to account.

Previous form

Judge Reid has previously banned people charged for climate-related protests from referring to their motivations in their defence.

In 2023 he imprisoned three people for using the words “climate change” and “fuel poverty” in his courtroom. This was after he had forbidden the use of those words.

In February this year, the UN highlighted UK courts in an international report on state repression of environmental protest.

Featured image via Extinction Rebellion

By The Canary

This post was originally published on Canary.