ARTICLE UPDATED 6th May 2026:
Yesterday, two of the #Filton6 were found not guilty of causing criminal damage, in a strange verdict that found the other four guilty, seeing them returned to prison pending sentencing in six weeks’ time. By destroying Israeli military drones, their actions likely saved lives in Palestine. As lead defence barrister Rajiv Menon KC said in the first trial, “This is not a factory that makes fluffy toys. They specialise in producing weapons which obliterate Palestinians in Gaza and destroy their communities”.
Now the second trial is over, some reporting restrictions have been lifted, and we can reveal that Judge Johnson instigated criminal contempt of court proceedings against lead defence barrister Rajiv Menon KC for comments made in his closing speech in the original trial of these six defendants. Other restrictions remain in place, and defendants and supporters are angry that the jury has been kept in the dark about many things, and that no witness from Elbit Systems took the stand.
The government has consistently tried to lie not just about these defendants, but about Palestine Action itself, painting it as a violent organisation because of the actions of Sam Corner. The court heard that Mr Corner (found Not Guilty of Grievous Bodily Harm With Intent) was trying to protect Ellie Kamio, whom he believed was being seriously injured. Sam had just been blinded by PAVA spray, and he reacted in the moment, hearing Ellie screaming after being Tasered twice – the second time by accident. Immediately after the incident he said, “I was protecting her”. The court heard how the injured police officer was swiftly discharged from hospital, with a recommendation of painkillers and physiotherapy. Expert medical reports confirmed there would be no long-term consequences to her injury. Sam was found guilty of the lesser offence of Inflicting GBH (without intent).
Jordan Devlin and Zoe Rogers spent 18 months in prison and are now finally free, without a single conviction. Judge Johnson sent the four other defendants back to prison pending sentencing, even though they’ve already served the equivalent of a nearly four-year sentence, which would normally be the upper limit of a sentence for a criminal damage conviction for a first-time offence.
A claim of over a million pounds worth of damage at the Elbit Filton research and development facility is based on a statement from an anonymous witness, with no breakdown or inventory. Lawyers are expected to challenge the figure and demand more detail, but this trial has been notable for the almost total absence of any information about Elbit Systems, the complainant in the case. As Rajiv Menon KC told the jury in the original trial “Elbit remains in the shadows, hidden and protected, but not, ladies and gentlemen, in the corridors of power where no doubt they are welcomed, wined, and dined.”
The sentencing hearing is expected to take place on Friday 12th May.
ORIGINAL ARTICLE – 5th May
After some closing directions from Judge Johnson, the jury at Woolwich Crown Court began their deliberation at around 10.30 last Thursday morning.
In the afternoon they asked for some clarifications about the number of security guards who were present, who was controlling video cameras that had failed to capture alleged violence by those guards, and why the court had excluded an Elbit security manager witness who has been labelled ‘Witness Alpha’. After another hour or so of deliberation they had not reached a verdict and were sent home for the day.
On Friday there were no further questions, and at 4pm Judge Johnson sent them home for the weekend.
Just before lunch today (Tuesday 5th May) another note from the jury asked whether the court would accept partial verdicts and/or majority verdicts. After discussion with counsel, the judge told jurors that they must reach verdicts on all the counts, and to continue to try to reach unanimous verdicts, but that he would accept majority verdicts of 10 or more if they couldn’t agree.
The six men and six women are considering a count of CRIMINAL DAMAGE TO PROPERTY, contrary to section 1(1) Criminal Damage Act 1971, against the “Filton 6”:
CHARLOTTE HEAD, SAMUEL CORNER, LEONA KAMIO and FATEMA ZAINAB RAJWANI were found GUILTY, with unanimous verdicts.
ZOE ROGERS, and JORDAN DEVLIN were found NOT GUILTY.
On the count of CAUSING GRIEVOUS BODILY HARM WITH INTENT, contrary to section 18 Offences Against the Person Act 1861 against SAMUEL CORNER, he was found NOT GUILTY of that charge, but GUILTY of INFLICTING GRIEVOUS BODILY HARM by a majority verdict of 11..
Following the bizarre split verdicts on the Criminal Damage charge, emotions were high amongst bemused and shocked defendants, their friends and families. Among supporters or the legal team no-one was able to point to particular differences in the cases against those found guilty against those acquitted. Of course it’s the nature of the jury system that we can never know what was discussed or how decisions were arrived at.
—
Later in the afternoon, defence barristers returned to court and announced they were now acting once more on behalf of their clients (after being discharged shortly before closing speeches).
There were various matters to discuss – the first being submissions on continued bail. Defence counsel argued that there was no material difference post-verdict to the position the defendants were in when Judge Johnson granted bail on 4th Feb. Judge Johnson said that he had used ‘residual discretion’ to grant bail at that time, but he had no reason to believe they had changed their opinion that they were morally justified in their actions, and so he was withdrawing that discretion and refusing bail until sentencing on 12th June.
In subsequent discussion about defence submissions on sentencing, lead defence barrister Rajiv Menon pointed out that the prosecution have produced no evidence around ‘quantum’, i.e. the value of any damage caused. He revealed that a claim of over a million pounds worth of damage has been made, but it is based on zero particularisation and is from an anonymous witness. He said it was wholly inappropriate to sentence on the basis of this, and that the court should be told by a named Elbit witness – drone by drone, and quadcopter by quadcopter – what each item is worth, and what damage was done.
Judge Johnson claimed it was not necessary to know the amount, as he only needed to assess the seriousness of the offence, which can include the harm intended or the foreseeable harm caused. Mr Menon responded that this has to be viewed in context – we’re talking about an Israeli weapons manufacturer complicit in genocide in the Middle East, and this must be assessed rather differently to a company that makes fluffy toys.
Sentencing is set for Friday 12th June.
