PICKERING MAGISTRATES' COURT

4/5 May 2004

Tuesday 5 May 2004

Lindis Percy was arrested and charged under s.68 'aggravated trespass' (Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994) on 9 February 2004.  This was another attempt by her to bring a case to court under the RAF Fylingdales Military Land byelaws in order to test the validity of this law.

Lindis had no intention to 'disrupt, obstruct or intimidate lawful activity' (s.68 requires this) and made this clear throughout the trial.   Her sole intention was to bring a case to court so the matter could be resolved. 

On 9 February 2004, Lindis had been quietly walking on the base for about half an hour before meeting two Ministry of Defence Police Agency (MDPA) officers, PC Proud and Grainge, who were returning from a patrol on 'quad' bikes.  She immediately told them that she was committing an offence under the byelaws.  Both ignored this and refused to enter into any discussion about the byelaws.  This has been a pattern by the MDPA over many years.  There are  notices posted all round the base saying MINISTRY OF DEFENCE PROPERTY, KEEP OUT, BYELAWS IN FORCE.

Lindis had prepared a carefully worded statement with her with her concerning the history of the byelaws at Fylingdales. This  set out the clear manipulation and abuse of this law by the MDPA and the Crown Prosecution Service over many years.  She had a tape recorder with her and had immediately let the officers know that she would be recording the conversation.  When asked to leave by the officers Lindis declined, so committing a further offence under the byelaws.  They took no action but called for assistance.

Some time later, PC Thompson and Hughes arrived and Lindis was eventually arrested for alleged 'aggravated trespass'.  In reply to caution she gave her statement to PC Thompson (the arresting officer).  For some reason Inspector Musto (Senior Police officer on shift duty) arrived after Lindis had been arrested.  A female officer (PC Critchley) came to search Lindis.  Naturally nothing was found on her.

Lindis defended herself and throughout the trial had to struggle to keep the Magistrates focussed on the issue of the byelaws as this was central to her case. She cross- examined each officer in turn (except PC Critchley who did not attend).  All officers particularly PC Proud, were reticent when answering about the byelaws, despite intensive questioning.  Each officer giving evidence revealed a disturbing evasiveness concerning the issue of the byelaws. 

The case was adjourned for a while after PC Proud revealed that Lindis had previous convictions (not permitted in a trial as this information may prejudice the Magistrates' final decision).  Lindis objected to this and the Magistrates retired to rule as to whether they would have to disqualify themselves from the case.  They decided that the trial should continue.  The day ended at 5 pm with the completion of the Prosecution case (Zilma Vodanavic  - Barrister CPS).

Second day - Wednesday 6 May 2004

Lindis presented her case with an application to the Magistrates to put evidence  into court (copy of byelaws, the tape recording and a sample letter of some of her arrests under these byelaws which had been discontinued by the CPS).  Ms Vodanavic strongly objected to this as she said the byelaws were not relevant as  Lindis had been arrested for  'aggravated trespass'.  However the Magistrates ruled that the first two applications be allowed on the advice of the Clerk.

After giving evidence, Lindis was closely cross-examined by Ms Vodanavic who concentrated on her 'intention'.  She pressed Lindis to say that she had intended all the time to disrupt the security of the base and the duties of the MDPA.  Lindis quietly maintained that her only intention was to commit an offence under the byelaws.  Having told the MDPA officers that she had broken the law, Lindis had expected that they would uphold and apply the law, prevent a crime from continuing and arrest her under the byelaws.  Lindis has done this in the past, concerning invalid byelaws surrounding several US bases and was successful with John Bugg in 1993 in overturning the first set of byelaws at NSA Menwith Hill. 

Summing up her case, Lindis told the Magistrates about her long struggle (17 years) to bring the  issue of invalid Military Land byelaws to court.  She tried to show that the MDPA had again manipulated and abused the law when they chose to arrest her for 'aggravated trespass' instead of under the Fylingdales byelaws, which they probably knew to be  unsafe. (Note - Parliament did not intend that this law should be used for peaceful protest). 

Because of the refusal of some officers to answer any questions relating to the byelaws, it became abundantly clear throughout the trial that there was a problem.  The MDPA were deliberately using any other available law to arrest rather than use the Fylingdales byelaws.  However emphasis was placed by the MDPA on the 'discretion' of an officer as to which law they choose to use.   Any alleged 'disruption' to the security of the base was entirely due to the MDPA allowing the incident to escalate.  They could and should have immediately arrested Lindis under the Fylingdales byelaws.  They had insisted during cross-examination that their job was to patrol the base and dealing with Lindis had prevented them from doing this.

After two and a quarter hours, the Magistrates returned with the verdict.  In a brief ruling they agreed that it had been unnecessary that four of the officers to attend the incident (particularly Inspector Musto who had chosen to be there).  They ruled that Lindis must have known that her action would cause 'disruption' to the base (as laid down in section 68)  because of her experience over many years. No mention was made concerning the byelaws or the behaviour of the MDPA when they gave evidence. 

The Magistrates found Lindis 'guilty as charged'.   She was fined £160 and costs of £300 awarded against her.  Ms Vodanavic had applied for £600.

Lindis will be discussing with lawyers the possibility of an appeal by way of 'case stated'.

 

"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world: indeed it's the only thing that ever does."     Margaret Mead