{"id":339,"date":"2006-09-17T11:22:18","date_gmt":"2006-09-17T11:22:18","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2006-09-17T11:22:18","modified_gmt":"2006-09-17T11:22:18","slug":"defences-to-criminal-damage","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.sixthform.info\/lawblog\/?p=339","title":{"rendered":"Defences to Criminal Damage"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Paul Milling, 60, and Margaret Jones, 57, will face a new trial next year for criminal damage after a jury at Bristol Crown Court failed to reach a verdict. Milling and Jones argued they were justified in disabling trailers used to transport bombs for US B-52 bombers and fuel tankers in order to prevent war crimes in Iraq. The pair also put forward the statutory defence of reasonable excuse (<strong>Criminal Damage Act 1971<\/strong>) and &#8220;necessity&#8221; or duress of circumstances because they claimed to have been preventing a greater evil. Originally they put forward the defence that they were acting to prevent war crimes by attempting to prevent US B-52 bombers from taking off to launch the first air raids on Baghdad. However, the House of Lords said that waging an unlawful war is not a crime in domestic law. So they argued that their action was aimed at preventing individual war crimes in Iraq such as damage to non military property. <br \/>News report <a href=\"http:\/\/www.telegraph.co.uk\/news\/main.jhtml?xml=\/news\/2006\/09\/04\/uairbase.xml\">here<\/a> <img decoding=\"async\" alt=\"Milling and Jones outside court\" src=\"http:\/\/sixthform.info\/lawblog\/files\/milling_jones_02.jpg\" border=0> <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Paul Milling, 60, and Margaret Jones, 57, will face a new trial next year for criminal damage after a jury at Bristol Crown Court failed to reach a verdict. Milling and Jones argued they were justified in disabling trailers used to transport bombs for US B-52 bombers and fuel tankers in order to prevent war [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-339","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.sixthform.info\/lawblog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/339","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.sixthform.info\/lawblog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.sixthform.info\/lawblog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.sixthform.info\/lawblog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.sixthform.info\/lawblog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=339"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.sixthform.info\/lawblog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/339\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.sixthform.info\/lawblog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=339"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.sixthform.info\/lawblog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=339"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.sixthform.info\/lawblog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=339"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}