Press Releases & Updates 2000

The jury of eight men and four women were sworn in after being asked if they or their partners worked in the nuclear or arms industry, or in the armed forces, or were members of CND or any other ’peace protest movement’. The two charges of criminal damage to radar testing equipment and to the submarine were read out. The Judge agreed to allow Rosie and Rachel out of the large cage-like dock since he agreed that there was no security danger in this case.

The prosecution opened by saying that Rosie and Rachel’s intention was to cause damage to the submarine and to gain publicity for their cause. The hammer which was used on the radar equipment was passed round the jury, who were able to examine its beautiful decoration of painted trees, birds and peace symbols. The banner saying Women Want Peace was also displayed in court. The prosecution emphasised that the ’sincerity’ of the defendants was not in dispute, but maintained that they had a duty not to break the law (a rather similar position to the defence!).

The first prosecution witness was the Royal Navy mechanic who accompanied the two off the boat. He agreed with the defence cross examination that it was widely publicised that Vengeance was leaving Barrow in September for the more heavily guarded Faslane. He was then questioned about National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB) guidelines on safety. He admitted that he was not very familiar with these, and that his only role in the event of a nuclear reactor leak at Barrow was to shut the hatches. When asked whether the recent events involving the Kursk and the submarine at Gibraltar had had any effect on safety measures concerning Vengeance, he replied no. Most importantly, he agreed that the submarine had been delayed in sailing after the action, although he was ’not quite sure if it was directly because of them’. (After all, the prosecution have had eighteen months to brief him!)

Next the head of security for Marconi was questioned about his responsibility for safety in the event of a reactor leak. His sole role would be to evacuate workers to an assembly point about three quarters of a mile from the sub, and ensure that potassium iodide was distributed to workers and local people, though the mechanism for making it available to local people was unclear. He believed that the iodide was to prevent radiation sickness and cancer. He had heard of Trident Ploughshares, and agreed emphatically that members of TP often attempted to engage workers in discussion, but that so far this had not led to an end to the production of nuclear submarines.

In the afternoon more witnesses were called in an attempt to establish the cost of the damage. A witness employed by Racal was unwilling to put a total value on the equipment, changing his estimates from £82,000 for one component to £44,000.

The court adjourned until Wednesday morning, as the judge is not available tomorrow. It is likely that the prosecution will be finished on Wednesday.

Printer friendly version

Home | Top