On April 29th we heard the closing defence speeches of the Filton 6 retrial, with all defendants except Sam choosing to dismiss their lawyers and represent themselves. Corner, remained represented in court, by barrister Tom Wainwright.
Here is Jordan’s closing speech:
KC Heer seemed to have a lot to say to me in her closing speech. [A reference to Deanna Heer KC – the prosecution Counsel]. I would firstly like to touch on some of these points. Some of the ideas she had were not put to me on the stand. This is because the prosecution know excessive force was used against me and was completely unjustified. She works hard to undermine my testimony, because it is the truth of my account that undermines the case she advances.
KC Heer told you that we take no responsibility, that we leave that to you – that is correct in law – it is for you to decide, not me. It’s for you to decide the verdicts.
But you know what? We’re here. It’s Elbit who are avoiding accountability for their actions. Where is Volante and where is Witness Alpha?
In the context of us all being born with good character, Ms Heer says that if people were acquitted on good character, the law would be incapable of providing protection to anyone. The law has already failed to protect those innocents born of good character killed by Elbit weapons.
Now KC Heer put it to you that I could see [PC]Buxton arrest Sam [Corner]. She failed to ask me if I recognized this person was the same as the one who had had me in a headlock, or if I was even looking at the arrest. This is all to suggest I knew that he was police. She calls it a fanciful explanation. Well, perhaps she’s glossed over the fact Volante [Elbit security guard] was assisting with that arrest – security guard, not police – and that is in your evidence. If she calls my account fanciful, I describe her account as desperate.
KC Heer remarked, contrary to what Mr. Devlin said, that security were entitled to use force. I’m afraid KC Heer has taken creative licence. I in fact said they do not have the right to be violent. I wouldn’t hope KC Heer asserts that Volante had the right to hit me in the face with a sledgehammer, because he did not.
Now, I’ve decided to represent myself so that I can tell you my truth, but this is my fantastic barrister, Andrew Morris, over here, still standing with me and guiding me through the whole process.
The only evidence that I damaged any property was when asked, I said, yes, I did it. And I was honoured to do so, because although it has been nice to be free since February, and despite being beaten up, I do not regret signing up for this action. Nothing Volante could have done to me would make me regret this, because the effect world events had on my mental health was hell.
You the jury have massive power in shaping the future of British protest law and British history. We did the right thing, and you do not need to explain your verdicts, you have the independence to make your own minds up about all of the facts you’ve heard. Make the right decision according to all of these facts.
You might find that there is no case to answer. The burden of standard of proof must account for the value of products damaged. Well, is it not true that the value of these products is actually deeply in negative territory? You have heard evidence of what this property is, that I’m accused of damaging. Consider what this property is and what it takes away from society.
Ladies and gentlemen, I would love to tell you so much more, and I can’t talk on these topics, and I can’t tell you why. I invite you to find a verdict of not guilty. I invite you to find that the answer to question two is no.