Outlet logo

Judge throws out Sunak home protest charges

The image shows a large building partially covered with black fabric draping down one side. Several people in red clothing are positioned on the roof. A yellow sign reading
Activists draped one side of Rishi Sunak’s home in black fabric last summer

Greenpeace activists who were charged with causing criminal damage at the home of former prime minister Rishi Sunak have had their case thrown out by a judge.

Michael Grant, 64, Mathieu Soete, 38, Amy Rugg-Easey, 33, and Alexandra Wilson, 32, were given the ruling at York Magistrates' Court on Friday following a two-day trial in July.

District Judge Adrian Lower said that the evidence was too "tenuous" for them to be convicted after they climbed on the roof of Mr Sunak's constituency home in Kirby Sigston, North Yorkshire, last August.

The activists also draped one side of Mr Sunak's home in black fabric, with a sign that read "No New Oil".

Mr Sunak was on holiday with his family in California at the time and the activists were found by members of staff who were staying at the house.

A trial was held after they each pleaded not guilty to a single count of causing criminal damage to 15 of the tiles on the roof of the house.

The image shows people standing outside a Magistrates' Court building. On the left is a person with short hair wearing a white polka-dotted shirt. In the center is a bearded man in a blue jacket. On the right is an older man in a dark suit with glasses and a red tie, looking downward.
Speaking after the hearing, Michael Grant said "justice and common sense prevailed"

Defence lawyer Owen Greenhall submitted that there was no case to answer because it could not be proved the roof damage was caused during the protest. The trial heard from Malcolm Richardson, a foreman and roofer who had a contract to carry out work at the house, who was asked to check the roof after a police officer investigating the protest said he believed there had been some damage caused.

However, it was found that three of the 15 pictures used by the prosecution were actually of the same tile taken from different angles, and some had been taken after Mr Richardson had moved the tiles to carry out repairs. Mr Greenhall said there appeared to be cracks to tiles in parts of the roof where the protesters had not gone, and applied for the case to be thrown out because Richardson was only asked to look in one area when "what should have been done is an examination of the entire roof".