Hidden Article

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

Two UK Animal Rights activists released from prison on conditional bail

Anon | 11.05.2009 14:43 | SHAC | Animal Liberation

Dean and Luke have been released on conditional bail

Dean Cain and Luke Steele were remanded on 13th October 2008 after being charged with 'Conspiracy to interfer with contractual relationships so as to harm an animal research organisation' And 'Conspiracy to commit criminal damage to property'.

They have today been released on conditional bail. And their co-defendant Victoria Waterhouse-Taylor was last week found not guilty.

To find out more look on: www.myspace.com/supportthehighgatefour

Anon

Comments

Hide the following 31 comments

Great news

11.05.2009 15:51

This is great news. After the finding of not guilty last week maybe the legal people are connfused as to how they can plead guilty to a crime that the judge has decided never happened. Maybe they will be found innocent despite their guilty pleas!! At very least hope they will be released on time-served.

I think questions have to be asked whether they received sound legal advice when they pleaded guilty. Too many activists have been pleading guilty these days even when they are not guilty! Who are Dean Cain and Luke Steeles solicitors?

Great news they are out

HappyClappy

Great news

11.05.2009 16:19

Not sure if they can be found innocent after pleading guilty (somebody correct me if I'm wrong though). I think they will be released on time-served though, hence being released...

On the basis of pleading guilty to crimes they did not commit, its quite a gray area. Some will no doubt do so because of poor legal advice, others such as a few from the SHAC 7 just don't want to media circus and would prefere to just get on with serving time...

Sounds stupid, but if people are pleading guilty because they don't want to have to go through the entire court case etc, then we need to respect these individuals choices. Even though it may make it worse for others, its people's right not entire into a legal defence.

I'm not saying that Luke, Dean & Tom suffer from severe stress, but I could understand somebody physchologically unable/unwilling to go through the entire process. Given that they were remanded before pleading guilty, and despite the potential criminal record, it can seem simpler to just get on with serving time and not have to deal with court proceedings.

I do think its best to plead not guilty always, but as pointed out above, I can fully understand taking the other route when you are already under potential stress from prison life etc.

All the best to the Highgate three!

@ntispeciesist

Please delete this article.

11.05.2009 16:25

One of the defendants has asked that this be taken down. Please could someone action this ASAP. Until they have found out exactly what is happening with the case.

Thanks

Chris - NW

Netcu Watch

Two UK Animal Rights activists released from prison on conditional bail

11.05.2009 16:54

Great................defamation petition be moved against the fake complainants who leveled false allegation against these activists.................... responsible to put them behind bars for nothing

Naresh Kadyan, Representative of OIPA in India - Chairman PFA Haryana
mail e-mail: kadyan.ipfa@gmail.com
Homepage: http://www.pfaharyana.in/

Why delete?

11.05.2009 18:05

This is NEWS. This is a NEWS WIRE. Why do people like Chris-NW think they have the right to determine what goes on an open news wire? Who do you think you are? Copper not wanting to let people see a victory?

News Watch

Calm Down

11.05.2009 18:09

a) The Judge found during the trial that the 'crime' didn't happen as no loss had been caused. Thus Vicky was NOT GUILTY.

b) Three others have already pleaded guilty - they are guilty as they have said they are. They MAY choose to apply to have their pleas nullified - IF they are happy that the Crown dosn't have a strong alternate case to put in place of their admissions - this is a gamble as there would be no discount on the new case.

c) as they have already served a considerable time in prison they are highly likely to get 'time served' - which is probably why they have been bailed.

d) Watch out for NETCU's current favourite trick - ASBO's - all four admit night time trespass and the Judge commented on it!

Leagal Eagle

Delete requests to protect SHAC

11.05.2009 18:24

SHAC do not want any suggestion that activists are arrested and tried - particularly very young ones like these.

BUAV

Please...

11.05.2009 19:03

Give it a rest, one of the defendants has expressed that they did not want them being released from prison being banded around everywhere. They ASKED if we could request any news on Indy to be removed. FULL STOP.

Netcu Watch

Please delete this thread.

11.05.2009 19:07

As said in one of the previous comments, one of the defendants wish this thread to be removed.

Thank you on his behalf.

Ⓐ

Ⓐ

Pow!

11.05.2009 19:25

If my co-defendants/friends wish for this to be removed, please respect them and do so.
I don't know the reasons behind it and I personally think it's important news for everyone but it's no longer my case and I know how frustrating it was when I heard gossip...So please remove this asap.

Thanks

Vikki

.

12.05.2009 00:10

This is NOT gossip, it is not a specific persons "news".

Someone has been released from prison. This is a fact. This is good news for the movement, it is good news for them.

The media exists to relay facts - and I thank whoever did in this case.

Why on earth would anyone want it hidden that AR people have been freed? The only reason I can see is that they want people too scared to do any AR related direct action.

at @

12.05.2009 08:11

I find it interesting that the only ones calling for this to be taken down are Lynn Sawyer and Chris-NW both from Netcu Watch. Lynn has even claimed that it's for "legal reasons" but with no back up. Both have claimed "one of the defendants" all very vague. Makes people question how anti-Netcu Netcu Watch really is!

@ too

Why hidden ? I'll tell you why

12.05.2009 08:43

Why do they want this hidden you wonder ?

Well let me enlighten you, one of the bastards sold us out, did a deal with the pigs - information for release early. To hide the identity of which one it was they released the both of them. We have our suspicions but have no proof so it would be wrong to speculate.

We have no idea why Chris and Lynn are trying to hide this, I'm all for it being in the open so we can identify the little git.

Ex friend

I AM A GRASS....

12.05.2009 09:12

HAHAHAH YES I FAT CHRIS AND IM SURE I CAN SPEAK FOR LYNN SAWYER THAT WE ARE BOTH THE REASON LUKE AND DEAN WENT TO PRISON WE ARE BOTH GRASSES. I AM DEFINITELY NOT A COP THAT IS SHIT STIRRING ON INDYMEDIA BECAUSE THAT IS UNHEARD OF. LOADS OF LOVE. STEVE DISCOME.
FUCK I MEAN CHRIS AND LYNN.

Netcu Watch

Please sir.

12.05.2009 09:17

Can I have some more money from the police? I need to dob in my friends and pretend to run an anti police site for cash, when does my magic envelope run.

Chris

Chris

To all those who think it is OK to keep up a post.

12.05.2009 09:22

AGAINST the wishes of a defendant, presumably when it is you in court you will have no right to say that you want something which may jeopardise your case taken down?

This is really simple. This post may influence sentencing. I have no idea why, Chris has no idea why we have simply been asked to relay the message. It is utterly ridiculous that someone should have to explain the ins and outs to anonymous posters, frankly it is no one elses business.

News watch Who the hell do you think YOU are dictating to someone just released from prison that he should not ask that a post concerning him and his co defendants be taken down?

This is nothing to do with SHAC. In fact the case is well known already it would be good news for SHAC if it were broadcast.

So @ when you are in court it is OK for any post to be kept up against your express wishes?

@too I have not been vague for any other reason than all I know is that a defendant wants this taken down for legal reasons. I do not think that it is my business to pry into the whys and wherefores, why is it yours?

Ex friend, pure speculation, pathetic. Released early? They should never have been in prison in the first place. Putting the knife into activists just released after a long ordeal is despicable.

Lynn Sawyer

Idiots...

12.05.2009 09:26

The case is not yet over, it is clearly obvious WHY the defendants would want this post removed. The cops on Indy that are questioning our motives haven't addressed one thing? What would we NW (or the Cops even) have to gain by asking for this release information to be removed. Don't you think that the cops ALREADY KNOW that they have been released??

We don't give a fuck about your idiot comments, NW report on the police and don't rely on information from other activists.

Like we have said 1000 times before, people know us in the AR movement, if you don't trust us don't talk to us.

Cheers

Chris

Netcu Watch

Makes sense

12.05.2009 09:26

OK 'ex friend' thanks for that. This confirms what I had heard last night so I am inclined to think it is true. the actions of the nectuwatch people are more easily understood now following the last revelation about police informers within shac, I guess they want to try and keep this quiet.

Some people never learn, grasses and infiltrators must be revealed and details of their damage spokenabout openly, trying to surpres information is always a bad tactic.

Which ever one of them decided to 'turn' I hope they one day have the guts to say sorry but then I have never been in prison, maybe I would crack as well. It's easy to be judgemental from the outside.

Val

Reliable Info

12.05.2009 09:49

I have to say Lynn Sawyer I would have had more faith in you and the nectuwatch site if you had not lied to us here on Indymedia over the Adrian Radford affair. Both you and Chris knew he was a grass when you were posting all over the Indy network that this was lies and disinformation, indeed your nectuwatch website said the same thing and accused those who were trying to bring this into the open as being trolls. In fact they were proven to be right and you were shown to have lied, now we read that others already know about a plea bargain in return for information agreement between one of the defendents and the police while you still continue to post vague details of legal reasons without explaining why.

Perhaps it would be better if you just kept out of it ?

bemused

To Val

12.05.2009 09:51

Some advice. Try and be more discreet you are far too obvious. Go back and play on your own website. Really this attempt to defame good activists is very amateur. Could do better.

Lynn Sawyer

To Lynn Sawyer

12.05.2009 10:16

What the hell are you on about ?

What website, I don't have any website and what is it I am being obvious about ?

Please explain and stop make vague accusations without foundation.

Val

In reference to a previous comment

12.05.2009 10:22

Lynn,

We all know you have done great work in the cause of animal rights but I agree with a previous poster when he or she said,

'Perhaps it would be better if you just kept out of it ? '

Please refrain from posting here about this issue until we have had the chance to investigate the full facts. You have your own website devoted to nectu and it would be best if you stuck to that for the time being.

Thanks

IMCista

Bemused

12.05.2009 10:47

Now then, the first I knew of Radford was when I read about it in the Sunday Times. If anyone did actually have evidence that he was an infiltrator they did not bother to release it did they? All that happened was a few unfounded allegations were posted anonymously. The reason of course that Radford's name was never released was probably due to the fact that it was probably the police behind this shit stirring. Of course an infiltrator can also plant seeds of fear into the minds of activists and stir up distrust and hatred whenthey are exposed. Of course we have never denied that infiltrators, informers and grasses are a potential problem and that everyone should keep their defences up. We as individuals though do not accept vague, anonymous crap as "evidence". If someone had released Radford's name, photo etc with proper evidence that might have been very useful no-one did though. A bit mysterious eh?

We all strongly suspect that Radford watches Indymedia and indeed posts as well.

Divide and rule is a great tactic used by the police. But really the sour grapes flying around from those who feel upset by the fact that 2 activists are at liberty are enough to make me very happy indeed.

To repeat what we said all last year, anyone genuine who actually has partial evidence or suspicions about someone being a grass would not post this on Indymedia unless they are a fool. Anonymous accusations about something so serious do nothing for me I'm afraid

Lynn sawyer

To IMCister

12.05.2009 10:48

Some advice for you as well. Do not try to censor me. I have as much right to post here as anybody else. With my background perhaps more so. I will post whenever I wish.

Yes Luke has spoken with the police but that is nobody's business but his. I repeat please delete this entire post and all of the comments to it.

Lynn Sawyer

In reply to Lynn

12.05.2009 11:04

Now then, the first I knew of Radford was when I read about it in the Sunday Times.

LIE - YOU AND S AS WELL AS T SPOKE ABOUT RADFORD IN OCTOBER WELL BEFORE THE SUNDAY TIMES ARTICLE. YOU KNEW IT WHEN YOU WROTE YOUR ARTICLE FOR NECTUWATCH

If anyone did actually have evidence that he was an infiltrator they did not bother to release it did they? All that happened was a few unfounded allegations were posted anonymously.
LIE - WITHIN AR CRICLES HIS IDENTIFY WAS KNOWN AND FOR VERY GOOD REASONS
NOT POSTED TO INDYMEDIA - YOU KNOW THIS

The reason of course that Radford's name was never released was probably due to the fact that it was probably the police behind this shit stirring.
LIE IT WAS ACTIVISTS PISSED OFF AT HOW THIS WAS BEING CONCEALED AND TRYING TO GET IT IN THE OPEN

Of course an infiltrator can also plant seeds of fear into the minds of activists and stir up distrust and hatred whenthey are exposed. Of course we have never denied that infiltrators, informers and grasses are a potential problem and that everyone should keep their defences up. We as individuals though do not accept vague, anonymous crap as "evidence". If someone had released Radford's name, photo etc with proper evidence that might have been very useful no-one did though. A bit mysterious eh?
LIE - AS I SAID ABOVE HIS NAME WAS WELL KNOWN BY SOME, YOU INCLUDED, YOU AND OTHERS DECIDED NOT TO SHARE THIS INFORMATION

To repeat what we said all last year, anyone genuine who actually has partial evidence or suspicions about someone being a grass would not post this on Indymedia unless they are a fool. Anonymous accusations about something so serious do nothing for me I'm afraid
AND INDIVIDUALS LIKE YOU WHO TRY TO CONTROL THE MOVEMENT AND KEEP INFORMATION AWAY ORDINARY ACTIVISTS DISGUST ME

Bemused

Luke's details

12.05.2009 11:29

You just couldn't keep your mouth shut could you Lynn ?

ACAB

The devils hands....

12.05.2009 11:51

Are busy today, is it a national holiday for cops or something? Get back to work. I love how SHACWATCH suddenly gets buzzing whenever this shit stirring starts, ANYONE MIGHT THINK THEY ARE POSTING ON HERE AND SHACWATCH.

Looks like Steve Discombe took a second off masturbating into Ian Skivens mouth to post this crap. Like Netcu Watch have already stated. People who know Chris and Lynn know them to talk to and trust them. The defendants of the Sequani trial discredited all the shit that was posted in the past about them being grasses during the S7 trial, this ain't no different.

The case is not over yet and anything on Indy could be used as evidence, DELETE IT NOW.

Veg@narchist.

Lynn Sawyer

12.05.2009 11:59

Change the bloody record. The defendants are NOT grasses btw the last post with my name was not from me How naughty!. Same MO as from a certain crappy little pro HLS website who are posting on this matter right now as those posting all this crap. Never mind keeps us all amused that the police are so livid that they have engineered some pathetic story about grasses and infiltrators.

Lynn Sawyer

Hang on

12.05.2009 12:02

Has anybody here got an idea what it is like in prison, if Luke has broken then I will not condem him. The pressure of being in prison is beyond what most here could understand and he is surrounded by people who have committed real crimes not animal freedom actions like his. Luke is very young don't forget and the pscological pressure that can be applied by the prison authorities can be immense.

This is a time when he needs our support and love and solidarity.

Thinking of Luke

To 'Lynn Sawyer'

12.05.2009 12:13

Whatever !

Nobody believes you anymore Lynn, why don't you just fuck off.

Big long yawn

DELETE THIS POST

12.05.2009 12:16

The decisions made by Luke are his own and none of our business.

Chris
Netcu Watch

Nectu Watch