The Charming Judge Serves Poison - Occupy LSX .

Judgement Day for Occupy LSX

The City of London Corporation vs Occupy London Stock Exchange.

Judgement is served on whether the tents can stay or go.

Dim lights Embed Embed this video on your site

All photos below are courtesy of Rodwey2004. Check out his site for fantastic images of Occupy LSX since its inception

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rodwey2004/

John Cooper QC, Justice Lindblom, Occupier Max

In the far left corner is the City of London's legal representative.

Justice Lindblom visited the site after being invited in court by the occupiers to see what what the camp was about.

 

Occupier Max with Justice Lindblom

Judge Lindblom with Max in the University Tent at the St.Paul's Catherdral Site.

 

Map of St.Paul

The above map was used in court to specify the areas in question. The video explains Area 1 and Area 2 and the rest in green and orange as Area 3

The City of London now have been given the power through an indefinite injunction to remove any person with sleeping equipment from the entire shaded areas.

 

 

All Rise - Part 1

Standing just outside Court 25, the guard at the Royal Courts of Justice informed me that the courtroom was too full to allow anyone else in, so I diligently waited for the moment when the guard, looked elsewhere and then I dived in without his blessing.

During the trial they had been very strict about not allowing for standing room. If there were no seats you were left in the cold. Through the glass window on the doors I could see that for the judgement, today, was a different story and to me, personal agenda noted, I figured there was room for one more...just. It was a tight squeeze.

"All rise" and we rose.

"Be seated" and we sat.

For the contents of many a kettle we were an obedient bunch really. The judge had charmed us all during the hearing into believing that he would be even handed in his role and with substantial hope that the inevitable blow would not hurt too much we (occupiers) all pretended in unison to understand what was being said in court that morning.

Much was said. Little was understood, by me at any rate.

The court room is quite theatrical. I use to work in theater. My mind starts to drift. The City of London were saying their piece and I wondered what motivated lawyers to defend corporations. The son of the woman who my brother is dating is studying to be one, I thought. It would be nice to have loads of cash I guess. I would like to have property. Before my day dream of winning the Euro Millions lottery kicked in, I had fallen asleep on the seat I had stolen from a corporate lawyer who asked me to mind it for him. What a strange request I thought in the packed courtroom where I had been standing for an hour. Sure I will mind it. Mind you, I am not giving it back I thought, shamelessly.

When I awoke the judge was doing his delivery. I caught myself squinting. Maybe my eyes could not believe my ears? Maybe I should just go back to sleep? Was is as bad as I figure it? The language used is English and I do understand English, but what did that bit mean?

---------------------------------------------------

The judgement was always going to be City of London 1 vs Protesters 0 , but in the end  the judge given this powerful corporation 5 penalty goals just for the hell of it. Fundamentally his judgement read like a mouth piece for the Corporation. All the work that had been put into showing the blisteringly obvious factor that no one was obstructed from anywhere by the protest was deleted with the ease , or so it seemed, of a man washing his hands. The blow was made all the more bitter when the Judge thanked us for our good behavior. I could not understand immediately why that sat in me like rotting cheese until Tammy loudly thanked the City of London for their good behavior and expressed a desire to see them keep it up.

 

All Rise - Part 2

I was among many occupiers who had accepted the shivering reality that protesting outside St.Paul's Cathedral in tents had a time limit and that in the end the authorities would find a law, or design and pass one, that would have us moved. Simultaneously however I had faith in the legal system of Britain that some form of justice would prevail. I had willingly allowed myself to be charmed by the judge during the trial and I believed that although he would move us on somehow, he would also extend to us some decent comments in his the judgement which could benefit any ground up movements in the country.

Justice Lindblom had another agenda it seemed. What that is, is anyone's guess but it turns out that judging on the truth of matters at hand is not one of his strengths after all.

Appeals have been lodged and will be deliberated on 13 February. The camp has been allowed to stay until further notice. The City of London have expressed a desire that we go of our own accord which will be done, when some real changes have been implemented in the financial system of the United Kingdom... or else the freezing protest is not going anywhere.

It is getting hard to stay and I myself cannot do February in my tent. I handed it over to a homeless lady three days ago. (8 Feb 2012) I am not built for the biting cold. Many occupiers, myself included have been hit hard by the practical needs of life in the city. The spiritual release of knowing that you are truly giving it your all to make this world a better place makes up for it to a degree but as the rent is due and the bills keep coming and the lovers are leaving, this eskewed judgement hurts all the more.

Protest is a legitimized part of the political and democratic structure of free countries and yet we are kettled and treated like criminals in most protests and then ignored. Setting up camp is a new form of protest to counter act the endemic apathy to the people's needs and desires and clearly Justice Lindblom saw no need to help encourage the voice of a protest.

I hope you enjoy the video. In a little while I will put up a video of Brian Mooney, a member of the Town and Planning Committee who had voted against taking us to court. His response to my query of "Do you think we are blocking the highway" .... "Absolutely not" he gruffed "but don't be so naive, its a game" he followed.

I have to confess I am naive and I am proud of it.

I do expect a judge to judge on the truth of things, and to bind his judgement to the law,whether that law is fair or not. We (occupiers) all did I believe. If that is naive then I want a world where the naive get to run the joint.

x inka x

Occupy London Links