Skip to content or view screen version

SHAC trial ends - defendants jailed with disproportionate sentences!

Netcu Watch | 21.01.2009 14:16 | SHAC | Animal Liberation | Bio-technology | Repression | World

We expected the worst, so it is no surprise that massively disproportionate sentences were handed down today after the SHAC trial ended.

SHAC trial ends with ridiculous sentences, Heather Nicholson jailed for 11 years; Gregg and Natasha Avery sentenced to nine years each; Gavin Medd-Hall an eight-year prison sentence Daniel Wadham jailed for five years Gerrah Selby and Dan Amos were both sentenced to four years in prison.

More mainstream bullshit can be viewed in the usual locations. We will be responding on our website against each lie that the media pump out of there pharma funded anuses as so keep your eyes pealed!

Netcu Watch
- e-mail: warn at rise up dot net
- Homepage:


Hide the following 15 comments

Support the Prisoners

21.01.2009 17:16

Natasha Avery NR8987 and Heather Nicholson VM4859 are at:

HMP Bronzefield
Woodthorpe Road
Ashford, Middx
TW15 3JZ

Dan Amos VN7818, Gregg Avery TA7450, Gavin Medd-Hall WV9475 and Dan Wadham WV9474 are all at:

HMP Winchester
Romsey Road
SO22 5DF

Addresses may change shortly but letters etc still appreciated.

no justice
- Homepage:

judge is a liar

21.01.2009 18:42

This is a POLITICAL trial leading to imprisonment SIMPLY FOR BELIEFS HELD. Only in a police state could this happen.

The judge, Justice Butterfield, said he accepted that the seven had genuine deeply held beliefs and had the right to protest against animal research. But he added companies "had the right to conduct vital biomedical research."
He might as well have said "right to protest AS LONG AS IT IS INEFFECTIVE". There is no right of companies to conduct research in any of the basic human rights treaties/documents - this judge is effectively saying that continuation of the system is at least as important as basic liberties, maybe more so. This is effectively an admission of fascism. Even a fascist can say that people have the "right" to conform, to do the things the state permits.

"I expect you will be seen by some as martyrs for a noble cause but that would be misplaced. You are not going to prison for expressing your beliefs, you are going to prison because you have committed a serious criminal offence."
Yet NOT ONE OF THESE PEOPLE WAS ACCUSED OF A SPECIFIABLE CRIMINAL OFFENCE. They were accused of involvement in a political campaign, which was construed as blackmail.

The animal rights movement is always prepared for this kind of thing and will take it in their stride. Doubtless action will be stepped up to close down HLS by other courageous people. Persecution of the above-ground movement might lead to increasing below-ground activity of the kind the state condemns so viciously.

I would say however, that three more things must be sought.

FIRST: This judge has committed a crime against humanity as well as against animals. Let the campaign be taken directly to such bigots, not simply the direct supporters of HLS. And not only by animal rights activists but by all lovers of freedom. Perhaps such bigots would appreciate home demos, mail, phone calls from abroad, etc. Let them live with the reputation of a Hitler or a Stalin.

SECOND: The laws under which this trial occurred should be challenged at higher levels. Take Britain's conspiracy laws to the higher courts, up to the European Court for imprecision and for violating basic rights (to freedom of association, protest, etc, and to standards of evidence because they permit trawling based on political views). It is not impossible they could be struck down - this happened with the EDO injunction for instance.

THIRD: Try to get this issue on the map for international human rights organisations. Lobby Amnesty International to list these people as prisoners of conscience and their trial as unfair (they have not been convicted on clear evidence of using or advocating violence, but simply for running a campaign). Create a human rights watchdog for the UK to cover cases of abuse across the spectrum and expose them to the world.

civil liberties

anyone have any details of the judge?

21.01.2009 19:20

Does anyone know who the judge was or have any information about him/her?

Specifically, any connections to animal abuse - a large percentage of judges are hunt scum or have their fingers in other dirty pies.

I think this kind of information should be exposed.


activists or sadists?

21.01.2009 19:50

remind me - are these Shac people activists or sadists?


details online

21.01.2009 20:10

The guy's name is Judge Neil Butterfield.

This government site:
gives the following details:
"2. Mr Justice (Neil) Butterfield (60) was educated at Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge. He was called to the Bar by the Inner Temple in 1965 and was appointed Queen’s Counsel in 1985. His practice was in criminal law and he served as Leader of the Western Circuit from 1992 to 1995 when he was appointed a Justice of the High Court, assigned to the Queen’s Bench Division. He served as a Presiding Judge of the Western Circuit from 1997 to 2000."
So his contact details would probably be on the lists of Cambridge alumni organisations.

I'm guessing not the same Neil Butterfield who crops up regularly on poker websites, though I wouldn't rule it out.

This link:
connects this Butterfield to Islamophobic show-trials, suggesting he's a regular in political cases. Notice the almost identical "no noble cause" rhetoric used in this case. He also expresses the view that mass murder is less extreme than undermining the security of the state.

Looks to me like he could be some kind of deep-state agent, active in the British equivalent of Ergenekon, who gets handed political cases on a nod and a wink.

This case:
suggests he's pretty extreme-right given that it is almost unknown for details of underage offenders to be publicised.


Butterfield's Details

21.01.2009 20:32

Butterfield's details were posted on Indymedia but removed. Not before I had a chance to write them down though :-)

[Personal details removed as per: ]



22.01.2009 09:43

About where the Judge lives? According to The Association of the British Pharmaceutical (ABPI), ALF actions on peoples homes are down from over 230 in 2003 to 10 in 2008... Butterfield to our knowledge has never tortured an animal for money, whilst he has messed up 7 peoples lives for the next 3 years or so, HLS collaborators are killing over 500 animals every day. Which is worse, murder or inconveniencing a hand full of people?

I'm not advocating illegal activity, but if people want to target something (lawfully of course), target HLS, and get them closed down, save the vendettas for when we've won!


Alfred, you need to get in touch with some Humans fella!

22.01.2009 16:04

Your an angry middle class young/old man Alfred. You need to get in touch with your human side. Some of us folks are alright you know. Broaden your teeny weeny mind and embrace reality or you will be stuck in that single issue pretty fucked up sense of weirdness forever.


Alfred, you need to get in touch with some Humans fella!

22.01.2009 16:46

Your an angry middle class young/old man Alfred. You need to get in touch with your human side. Some of us folks are alright you know. Broaden your teeny weeny mind and embrace reality or you will be stuck in that single issue pretty fucked up sense of weirdness forever.



22.01.2009 19:37

Always. But in regards to my last comment - perhaps it was not made correctly. My point was simply this; whatever campaigns we are involved in we should be focused on effective strategies to win them. In regards to the SHAC / anti-HLS campaign (which is after all what this thread is about...) the focus should be on those who can stop the cruelty in HLS. Butterfield can do absolutely nothing. Sentences have been passed, he can hardly reverse them.

Therefore by publishing his address, all we are doing is distracting people from the focus of the campaign, as well as jeopardising the second SHAC trial. If the police can make the argument the judge (and therefore potentially the jury) are at risk, can no one else envisage armed police (as at Keith's first trial), and jurors behind screens and shuttled into court by police? How is that going to make the jurors view the defendants? As nice people who wanted to do the right thing? Hardly.

At no point did i mean to suggest we should be posting peoples addresses up here. I appreciat people will be angry, but their anger should be channeled in the right direction. And @narchist, I know plenty of people - 7 of them have just been locked up.


Exactly, seven of them have just been locked up Alfred!

23.01.2009 11:09

So therefore comments like " Which is worse, murder or inconveniencing a hand full of people?"

Seem to show that you dont quite understand the severity and inconvenience of 5 or 6 years in a prison
or what messing up peoples lives for a few years can do!


Protecting the rich and trampling our rights

23.01.2009 12:45

This is a clear case of propaganda and misinformation being spoonfed to the public in order to protect the interests of the rich pharmaceutical bigshots who are in bed with the government.

SHAC, regardless of what the media tries to say, conducts only peaceful and legal demonstrations (protests) against companies involved with Huntingdon Life Sciences. Social justice movements throughout history have all used the same "tactics" of continuous protest and economic disruption.

Would one call the lunch counter protests of the United States civil rights movement "terrorism?" Of course not, but under today's draconian government repression against activsts in the UK and USA, those same people could easily be labeled "terrorists."

Shame nobody realises that once civil liberties are stripped from one group of people (animal activists) that it sets a dangerous precedent for the rest of us

The real terrorists are the monsters inside HLS who brutalize animals for profit.


Who's Who?

23.01.2009 13:58

Butterfield is listed in the 2009 edition of Who's Who, so quite a bit of information on him in a source avaiable to the public.

This shows his club as the Athaeneum.

Remember The Angry Brigade? I think they visited the clubs, bastions of the British Establishment.


SHAC 7 are compassionate people

23.01.2009 20:26

Let’s be real here. Huntingdon Life Sciences is not working on the miracle cure for cancer. They are mostly testing things like suntan location, caramel coloring and other household products. In fact over 12,000 animals including primates and beagle puppies were killed to test Splenda. The suffering these animals endure is beyond comprehension. The sit in their cold cages scared and alone until the human comes to overdose them with the chemical. They are put back in their cages and some lay in their own vomit and excrement until the next dosing. Then finally they are killed. Other experiments require them to be burned in their eyes or skin or have their limbs broken or inhale toxic gases until they die. The restrained bunnies break their own backs and necks to try to get away from the searing pain when their eyes are dosed with chemicals. It’s just horrible.
Even if the testing is for a new drug do we really need a new medicine that works the same as something already on the market, but only needs to be taken every 12 hours instead of every 4? Do animals need to suffer and die for someone to make more money? I think these SHAC people are compassionate people. They would not do the things they did for these animals if there was not pain in their hearts for them. I wish more human beings were like them.

mail e-mail: