The trial of four Insulate Britain protesters suffered a minor delay because the heating failed again at Hove Crown Court.
The defendants – one of them a Sussex University professor – turned up this morning (Monday 6 November) but jurors were left out in the cold until after lunch.
The protesters face trial charged with causing a public nuisance for gluing themselves to the M25 and jamming up the traffic – common enough even without protesters.
Judge Christine Henson said: “The heating is not working in this courtroom. I’m not prepared to just keep ploughing on.
“It’s been over a month. I was told an engineer was coming on Friday. That didn’t happen. I’m told one is in the building now.
“I’ve had a jury sitting in coats and blankets in the past week and that’s not good.”
The judge said that she was not prepared to empanel a jury until the engineer who was in the courthouse had tried to fix the problem.
After lunch, the court was told that the heating had been repaired and worked briefly but then conked out again.
Standalone heaters were plugged in to warm up the climate in the courtroom as the climate change protesters waited for their trial to get under way.
And a jury was sworn in, with Judge Henson advising them to layer up for the delayed opening of the trial – now due tomorrow (Tuesday 7 November).
The 50-year-old court building is due to close in the spring for a few months for a refurbishment although it is not known whether the schedule of work includes any insulation. Earlier, the video link also played up.
Four years ago at the same court, Dame Bobbie Cheema-Grubb, known as Mrs Justice Cheema-Grubb, sent the jury home for a day because the heating had packed up and the courtroom and cells were so cold.
She was presiding over the trial of two people for the murder of Brighton teenager Abdul Deghayes.
In February this year, the opposite problem led to delay in a case at Lewes Crown Court where another Brighton teenager, Pietro Addis, was on trial after killing his grandmother, restaurant boss Sue Addis.
Off-site facilities management staff left the heating on all weekend, leaving everyone who went into the courtroom on a Monday morning sweltering in conditions more akin to a sauna.
Judge Christine Laing, the honorary recorder of Brighton and Hove, ruled that it was too hot to expect jurors to sit and concentrate.
At Hove, those facing trial this week might be wishing for the climate to change a little and the courtroom to be warmer when their case resumes in the morning.
Before the court started sitting today, several protesters, mostly from Brighton and Hove, held up signs outside court urging jurors to follow their conscience.
The signs on display drew on the words on a plaque at the Central Criminal Court, better known as the Old Bailey, in London.
The plaque marks a ruling in 1670 by the then Chief Justice Sir John Vaughan that enshrines the independence of juries.
One of the signs said: “Jurors, you have an absolute right to acquit a defendant according to your conscience”.
The protesters – part of Defend Our Juries – were prompted by the arrest of another campaigner elsewhere in an earlier case who made a similar point outside court.
Defend Our Juries said that the signs – far from being illegal – were instead a clear and just statement of the law.
Assuming that this is proven in law, then it is up to the defense and/or judge to remind the jury of this, not be presented as pressure on juries as they enter or leave court. That much is pretty clear. I have to wonder if the people with the placards are made aware of this by the people urging them to do this ?
Love the Headline!
Hope the Jury sympathises and the Mad Professor beats the wrap and the Engineer is sent on a refresher course.
Spitfire wonders if he’s Corgi?
Chris, unfortunately it’s not quite as clear as you think. Any attempt by a defendant to inform the jury of their rights is considered contempt of court and could result in imprisonment. This has already happened to other climate protesters this year, hence the placard campaign.