Palestine Action activist compared to suffragettes in court

A Palestine Action activist accused of taking part in a break-in at an Israeli defence firm’s UK site is a “remarkable woman”, her barrister has told jurors as he likened her to the suffragettes.Charlotte Head, 29, is on trial at Woolwich crown court, south-east London, accused of being involved in a “meticulously organised” protest at the Elbit Systems factory in Filton, near Bristol, on 6 August 2024.Head, together with Samuel Corner, Leona Kamio, Fatema Rajwani, Zoe Rogers and Jordan Devlin, is accused of aggravated burglary, criminal damage and violent disorder. Corner is also charged with causing grievous bodily harm to a police officer, Kate Evans. They deny the charges.On Thursday in closing submissions, Head’s barrister, Rajiv Menon KC, detailed his client’s years of activism, including her work with refugees in Calais. He said the suffragettes were celebrated publicly for their heroism but in their time were accused of being “a threat to the social order” and “unladylike, feral, aggressive, violent” by MPs and in the mainstream press.“The reality, of course, is very different,” Menon told the court. “The suffragettes were remarkable women from all walks of life united in their hope, their despair, their defiance and their dedication.“Charlotte Head is also a remarkable woman and I say that without any reservation. This is not something that lawyers defending clients in criminal trials often say … we are taught to avoid the personal. But it must be said in this case, not only because it is true but also because it is relevant.”Menon described Elbit Systems, of which Elbit Systems UK is a subsidiary, as a “dreadful company” that “has played a critical role in the killing of tens of thousands of Palestinians” but is “wined and dined” in the corridors of power.He said any violence carried out by defendants on 6 August was unplanned and it was fanciful to suggest that Palestine Action would “suddenly abandon non-violent direct action”, which he said had been the hallmark of its previous activities.Earlier on Thursday, the prosecutor Deanna Heer KC, completing her closing submissions, rejected Corner’s defence, heard during the trial, that he struck Evans with a sledgehammer after he had been sprayed with Pava spray in order to protect one or more co-defendants whom he had heard screaming.Heer said his actions were “nothing to do with self-defence or defence of anyone else” and that the level of force Corner used against Evans, who sustained a fractured spine, was “completely unreasonable, completely disproportionate”.When she began her closing submissions on Tuesday – the court did not sit on Wednesday – Heer told the court that jurors may have views about the conflict in the Middle East but said: “For the purposes of this trial, however, your views about those matters don’t matter.”The judge, Mr Justice Johnson, addressed the jurors in a similar fashion before closing arguments began.“The nature of this case may excite strong emotions,” he told the jury. “But you must each keep cool heads. Your decision should be a decision in which bias, emotion, sympathy, prejudice, political views and matters of that sort play no part.”Barristers representing the other defendants are expected to give their closing submissions on Friday before the judge sums up the case for the jury, which is likely to be sent out to reach its decision early next week.