The Observer
News 09.01.22 15‘Don’t misuse our
acquittals as part
of this feeble war
on woke,’ says
Colston protester
Rhian Graham, cleared
last week of criminal
damage, tells Tom Wall
in Bristol that a vital
debate about Britain’s
history is being hijacked
Conservative MPs and rightwing
commentators have misrepresented
the jury’s verdict in the trial of the four
protest ers who toppled the statue of
the slave trader Edward Colston in
order to fan the fl ames of a divisive
culture war, one of the defendants has
told the Observer.
Rhian Graham said the jury had
accepted the argument put forward
by the protesters’ lawyers – that they
had a lawful excuse to remove the
statue because continued veneration
of a slave trader responsible for the
brutal transportation of thousands of
enslaved African people in the centre
of Bristol amounted to a hate crime.
“None of us denied toppling the
statue. But we defi nitely did not admit
to criminal damage. We all believed
what we did was right and necessary
- and the jury listened for 10 days and
found we acted lawfully,” she said in a
pub garden in the city.
“The verdict does not give peo-
ple the right to go around smashing
things up willy-nilly.”
Graham, 30, and Jake Skuse,
33, Milo Ponsford, 26, and Sage
Willoughby, 22 , were cleared of crim-
inal damage last week for their role
in pulling down the Colston statue
during a Black Lives Matter protest
in Bristol in June 2020.
However, the attorney general,
Suella Braverman , said on Friday she
was considering referring the case to
the court of appeal to clarify the law as
the verdict was “causing confusion”.
The acquittals cannot be overturned
and the re cannot be a retrial without
fresh evidence, but judges could be
asked to clarify points of law.
This came after a backlash from
Tory MPs, who claimed the verdict
was “perverse” and “a vandal’s char-
ter” that “allows anyone to rip down
statues, vandalise public art and
memorials or desecrate buildings”.
John Hayes MP , who wrote to
Braverman on behalf of the “anti-
woke” Common Sense Group of Tory
MPs , claimed the jury was devoid of
an understanding of criminal damage
because if “you damage, destroy or
deface property without permission,
you are guilty by defi nition”.
The Daily Mail columnist Richard
Littlejohn asserted the four cleared
protest ers had made no attempt to
deny they had been caught on camera
“committing criminal damage”.
However, legal experts have
pointed out the law does allow
property to be damaged if there is “a
lawful excuse”. The Colston verdict
follows similar cases where juries
have found environ mental and anti-
war campaigners were justifi ed in
damaging property to prevent greater
crimes.
Graham – who brought rope to the
demonstration and helped the crowd
drag the statue from its pedestal –
said misleading comments by some
MPs were preventing vital conversa-referred to the four cleared protest-
ers as “vandals” and “woke statue-
topplers” in the days that followed.
“The war on woke is a feeble
attempt to fi nd another scapegoat- a sort of mythical enemy to blame
every thing on,” said Graham. “Woke
is actually a colloquial term for being
aware of social injustice – it’s been
appropriated by the right as a way
to demonise young people who care
about equality and making the world
a better place.”
While Graham has become the
unofficial spokesperson for the
Colston Four, she has been careful
to closely guard her privacy, partly
out of fears about “being targeted”
by “malicious people” enraged by the
culture war stoked by Tory MPs.
But last week a reporter working
for the Sun turned up at the place
where she is living, which is different
to the postal address given in court.
“I’ve intentionally kept where I live
out of the news – so where did they
get that information? It made me feel
intimidated,” she said. Her father also
had to fend off unwanted approaches.
The felling of Colston by a crowd of
black and white protest ers 18 months
ago has forced Bristol to examine
its pivotal role in the transatlantic
slave trade. Colston’s name has been
removed from two schools, a univer-
sity building, a concert hall and a pub.
A stained-glass window dedicated to
Colston has also been taken down.
But the eventual fate of the statue
is still unclear. It was put back into
storage last week after being displayed
for more than seven months in a
Bristol museum, where thousands
came to see the graffi ti-sprayed mon-
ument laying on its side, without its
notorious plaque celebrating “one of
the most virtuous and wise sons of
the city”.
The commission set up by the
city’s mayor, Marvin Rees , after the
toppling, is due to make detailed
recommendations next month about
the future of the statue and the empty
plinth from which Colston once sur-
veyed the city centre.
Prof Tim Cole , the commission’s
chair, said there had been 14,
responses to a consultation on the
statue. “I’ve spent the last week
reading through millions of words.
We were really surprised by the level
of engagement: this is a subject peo-
ple in the city really care about,” he
said. “We are almost there with some
very specifi c recommendations about
the future of the statue and plinth.”
Cole said the verdict last week was
now part of the statue’s history. “It
is put up in the late 19th century, it’s
taken down in the early 21st century.
And four of those who took it down
are put on trial and found not guilty
by a jury in the city,” he said.
“They are very much part of the
story of the statue. It is a historic
moment.”LEFT
The moment the
statue of Colston
was thrown into
Bristol’s harbour
in June 2020.
Ben Birchall/PAFAR LEFT
The Colston
Four celebrate
the jury’s verdict
on the steps of
Bristol crown
court. Finnbarr
Webster/GettyLEFT
Graham says
the protesters’
actions were
‘right and
necessary’.
Karen Robinson/
the Observertions about the country’s history.
“These tactics are really damaging
to unity because people hang on to
these taglines and buzzwords rather
than delving into the nuances of each
situation,” said Graham, who works in
the events industry.
“I keep hearing that this case is a
green light for pulling down statu es.
But it’s not – it’s about this statue, in
this city, in this time.”
The group’s impassioned, tear-
ful remarks on the steps o f Bristol
crown court after they were exon-
erated were derided as “woke plati-
tudes” by the Daily Mail. Other papersON OTHER PAGESConservatives are fundamentally
undermining the rule of law
Observer Comment, page 40‘I keep hearing this
is a green light for
toppling statues.
It’s not – it’s about
this statue, in this
city, in this time’
Rhian Graham