Post by sandypine on Sept 14, 2024 8:02:12 GMT
Protester who depicted Sunak and Braverman as coconuts found not guilty of racial slur
A pro-Palestinian protester who held a placard depicting Rishi Sunak and Suella Braverman as coconuts has been found not guilty of a racially aggravated public order offence.
Marieha Hussain, 37, denied the prosecution’s allegation that the placard was “racially abusive”, and her trial at Westminster magistrates’ court heard that she “quite obviously does not have a racist bone in her body”.
Ms Hussain was acquitted of the charge on Friday, prompting claps and cheers from supporters in the public gallery.
Speaking outside the court after the hearing, she said: “The damage done to my reputation and image can never be undone. The laws on hate speech must serve to protect us more, but this trial shows that these rules are being weaponised to target ethnic minorities.
“It goes without saying that this ordeal has been agonising for my family and I. Instead of enjoying my pregnancy, I’ve been vilified by media, I’ve lost my career, I’ve been dragged through the court system.
“Nearly a year on from the genocide in Gaza, and despite this trial, I’m more determined than ever to continue using my voice to defend Palestine.”
The court was shown the sign, which had cut-out pictures of Mr Sunak and Mrs Braverman placed alongside coconuts under a tree - @hurryupharry
The court was shown the sign, which had cut-out pictures of Mr Sunak and Mrs Braverman placed alongside coconuts under a tree - @hurryupharry
Clearing Ms Hussain, district judge Vanessa Lloyd said: “I find that it was part of the genre of political satire and, as such, the prosecution have not proved to the criminal standard that it was abusive.
“The prosecution has also not proved to the criminal standard that you were aware that your placard may be abusive.”
www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/coconut-placard-racist-sunak-braverman-protest-marieha-hussain-b1181968.html
It seems the law is uncertain of what is and is not racially abusive.
Bristol 'coconut' row councillor's conviction is upheld
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-12685953
As a white person I can see the slur is very offensive as it indicates that blackness as seen on the outside should have certain attributes and outlooks and if one is white inside that implies one is hiding attributes that are unpleasant and clearly affixed to a racial group. I would have thought that was the very essence of racism. It is a slur against the two brown people as indicating they are lesser people because they are being white people.
A pro-Palestinian protester who held a placard depicting Rishi Sunak and Suella Braverman as coconuts has been found not guilty of a racially aggravated public order offence.
Marieha Hussain, 37, denied the prosecution’s allegation that the placard was “racially abusive”, and her trial at Westminster magistrates’ court heard that she “quite obviously does not have a racist bone in her body”.
Ms Hussain was acquitted of the charge on Friday, prompting claps and cheers from supporters in the public gallery.
Speaking outside the court after the hearing, she said: “The damage done to my reputation and image can never be undone. The laws on hate speech must serve to protect us more, but this trial shows that these rules are being weaponised to target ethnic minorities.
“It goes without saying that this ordeal has been agonising for my family and I. Instead of enjoying my pregnancy, I’ve been vilified by media, I’ve lost my career, I’ve been dragged through the court system.
“Nearly a year on from the genocide in Gaza, and despite this trial, I’m more determined than ever to continue using my voice to defend Palestine.”
The court was shown the sign, which had cut-out pictures of Mr Sunak and Mrs Braverman placed alongside coconuts under a tree - @hurryupharry
The court was shown the sign, which had cut-out pictures of Mr Sunak and Mrs Braverman placed alongside coconuts under a tree - @hurryupharry
Clearing Ms Hussain, district judge Vanessa Lloyd said: “I find that it was part of the genre of political satire and, as such, the prosecution have not proved to the criminal standard that it was abusive.
“The prosecution has also not proved to the criminal standard that you were aware that your placard may be abusive.”
www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/coconut-placard-racist-sunak-braverman-protest-marieha-hussain-b1181968.html
It seems the law is uncertain of what is and is not racially abusive.
Bristol 'coconut' row councillor's conviction is upheld
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-12685953
As a white person I can see the slur is very offensive as it indicates that blackness as seen on the outside should have certain attributes and outlooks and if one is white inside that implies one is hiding attributes that are unpleasant and clearly affixed to a racial group. I would have thought that was the very essence of racism. It is a slur against the two brown people as indicating they are lesser people because they are being white people.
