Press Releases & Updates 2000

Most of the day was taken up by a cross-examination of Mr Stovell, a Racal test engineer, who has supplied one of the several contested estimates of the value of the damage. This dealt with literally almost every nut and bolt that was damaged, with Mr Stovell providing estimates of the value of damage, several times larger than that provided by an independent report commissioned by the defence. (This was commissioned after the adjournment and then abandonment of the last trial which foundered on the issue of costs.)

The defence are seeking to establish the real value of the damage - estimated according to evidence presented today at between £318,000 and £915,000 - as this will relate to the length of sentence if Rosie and Rachel were to be found guilty.

At the end of the prosecution case, extracts from Rachel’s interview were read out in court. Rosie had made a ’no comment’ statement.

At 3.10 the defence opened the case and Rosie was called to the witness stand, and talked in a very moving way about how she had grown up under the shadow of the bomb, and had come to realise through her own experience - including her year at the peace camp outside Alvis tank factory - that direct action was the only way to make a difference.

At this point, the prosecution stood up and - after the jury had been dismissed - made a submission regarding the possible lines of defence being pursued, and referred to Judge Openshaw’s ruling on which defences could - and could not be used - at the Bread Not Bombs trial in Lancaster. This was the moment we had all been dreading, but fortunately Judge Humphreys - at this stage at least - having heard both the prosecution and Vera Baird for the defence - stated that he was not going to take Judge Openshaw’s ruling as a precedent, and that he was "not ruling anything out at this stage".

The trial resumes tomorrow at 11.am.

Printer friendly version

Home | Top