SnowBall archive
[Index][Thread]
GE - press coverage on Devon court case
- To: <genetics@gn.apc.org>
- Subject: GE - press coverage on Devon court case
- From: genetics <genetics@gn.apc.org>
- Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 02:45:47 +0100
- Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
- Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
- Resent-From: snowball@gen.free.de
- Resent-Message-ID: <"1kteLB.A.iE.hZvA3"@bakunix.free.de>
- Resent-Sender: snowball-request@gen.free.de
1) Crown drops case against two 'who wrecked GM crop'
The Guardian By Geoffrey Gibbs Monday March 29, 1999
2) GM RAIDS FOLLOWED WEEKS OF LOCAL PROTEST
By Chris Court, PA News PA 03/29 1230
3) COURTS GM SUBSTITUTE (MEM TO CSEs: This amends damage estimate from
snap in
view of later information) GM FOOD RAID CASE DROPPED
4) Frankenstein foods crop case dropped
Evening Herald (Plymouth) March 29, 1999
5) Financial Times (London) March 30, 1999, Tuesday
Largest farming business snubs GM crop trial
6) The Mirror March 30, 1999
GM COURT CASE FAILS
7) Protesters are cleared over gene crop raid
The Times (London) March 30, 1999
8) Herald Express (Torquay) March 30, 1999
Protests, 'Eco warrior' looks for Totnes home
9) THE DAILY TELEGRAPH(LONDON) March 30
Women cleared as GM food raid case is dropped
10) 29 March 1999 Farmers Weekly Website
CPS drops case against anti-GM women
11) Evening Standard Tuesday 30th March 1999
Words that led GM activist to risk 10 years in prison
======================================
1) Crown drops case against two 'who wrecked GM crop'
The Guardian By Geoffrey Gibbs Monday March 29, 1999
Campaigners opposed to trials of genetically modified crops were last night
celebrating after prosecutors decided to drop charges against two women
accused of destroying a Devon test site. Jacklyn Sheedy and Elizabeth Snook
were arrested last August after protesters uprooted a crop of herbicide
resistant maize at Hood Barton Farm,near Totnes. The site is only a few
hundred yards from a leading organic vegetable farm. The two women were
charged with conspiracy to cause criminal damage, said to amount to
£605,000, and will appear before Plymouth crown court this morning.
Supporters are planning to demonstrate against GM crops outside the cour
The trial, in which the women intended to plead lawful excuse for their
action, had been expected to last up to five weeks reflecting the volume of
detailed expert evidence lined up by the defence.
But in an astonishing about-turn, the defendants have been told that 'for
complex reasons' the Crown intends to offer no evidence in the case. The
womens' lawyer, Mike Schwarz, of solicitors Bindman and Partners, said the
decision was taken at the highest level after Crown Prosecution Service
officials referred the case to the Directof of Public Prosecutions.
'This was a political, and, in my experience, unprecedented, decision,' he
said yesterday. By withdrawing the case from the jury, the Crown have
accepted there was compelling evidence tha the defendants had a lawful
excuse to remove the
genetically modified maize.
'The last thing the Crown wanted was to see was a jury... acquit people who
took direct action against genetically modified organisms.'
The Hood Barton site, where trials were being carried out on GM maize
developed by Sharpe Seeds, was the subject of intense concern in the area
before last summer's action. Hundreds marched on the site before the crop
was planted, and last July organic farmer Guy Watson took court action to
stop the trials because of concern that his sweetcorn crop was threatened
by cross-pollination from the GM maize.
However, that legal move failed as - despite finding that seed regulations
had been broken - the Court of Appeal said it had no power to order the
destruction of the GM crop.
Ms Sheedy, 33, from Finsbury Park, north London, a longstanding campaigner
against genetically engineered foods and crops, said she took part in the
action because the Government was not listening to the people and the
courts had
failed them. 'There was no consultation with the local community beforehand
and they were releasing genetic pollution into the countryside,' she said
yesterday, adding that she had mixed feelings about the CPS decision.
'I didn't see this as putting me on trial, I saw it as putting genetic
engineering on trial, so I feel the public have been cheated out of a
really good chance to scrutinise the expert evidence that would have backed
our concerns. On the other hand
I feel it can only be seen as a victory for the local community.' She
believed the case was dropped because the authorities could not have
allowed a not guilty
verdict on direct action. 'If they had given a not guilty verdict it would
be saying to everybody that they have a legal right to remove GE crops.'
In court today defence lawyers will try to discover why the Crown dropped
the case and who made the decision.
* Waitrose said yesterday it had completed the removal of GM soya and
maize from its own label products.
2) GM RAIDS FOLLOWED WEEKS OF LOCAL PROTEST
By Chris Court, PA News PA 03/29 1230
The raid on the field of genetically modified "Frankenstein
maize" was the culmination of weeks of local protest against the
trial crop being planted 200 metres from an organic farm. Vegetable
producer Guy Watson feared that sweetcorn worth 20,000 at his farm at
Staverton, near Dartington, Devon, could lose its organic status if there
was
evidence that it was contaminated with genetic material via cross
pollination from the GM trial. In April last year, even before the
GM maize trial had been planted at Hood Barton, Dartington, some 600
local people turned up for a protest march against the crop.
Early the following month the National Institute of
Agricultural Botany (NIAB) planted the GM maize crop, which was
being tested for a company called Sharpes, at the site, which it
ran for the Ministry of Agriculture. A spokesman for Totnes
Genetic Engineering Group, which opposed the trial, said: "Over
the summer, increasing evidence of the dangers of GM was coming
to light, and a growing body of organisations and independent
scientists were calling for an immediate moratorium."
Guy Watson, backed by the Soil Association and Friends of the
Earth, decided to seek a judicial review of the Government's
failure to halt the trial -- the first court action of its kind
by an organic farmer.
Mr Watson claimed the Government had not acted on information
about the risks of genetic pollution submitted by FoE, and did
not take into consideration the possible effects on his farm
when consent for the trial was given. But at the High Court
in July last year Mr Justice Jowitt refused Mr Watson leave to
seek a judicial review, saying that the Government was entitled
to accept expert advice that the risk of contamination was
"likely to be zero". The case followed a warning by the
Government's own advisers that the spread of GM crops posed a
serious threat to wildlife.
Mr Watson went to the Court of Appeal, where three judges
rejected his bid to halt the crop trial.
The judges said there had been a statement from the
Government admitting the approach taken to such trials in recent
years had been "contrary to law". But they ruled that in law
no action could be taken against the crop, because it was not
proved to have caused harm.
A few days later a pressure group calling itself the South
West Ethical Consumers Group (Devon branch) claimed they had
attacked the site where the GM crop was planted -- but targeted
the wrong crops.
Of the 1,200 plots at the NIAB site, only six were being used
for the GM maize crop trials.
On August 3 around 30 people wearing protective clothing --
many of them were thought to be from the Totnes area -- raided
the trials site, and pulled up all the GM plants, which were due
to pollinate the following week. Jacqueline Sheedy, 33, and
Elizabeth Snook, 22, were among the dozen people arrested.
They were charged with causing damage to the GM maize, while
10 other people were released on police bail.
Totnes Genetics Group said the NIAB subsequently told it that
all the GM maize was removed in the protesters' action.
The Soil Association later told Guy Watson the organic status
of the sweetcorn he feared would be contaminated by cross
pollination would be retained.
Following the arrest of the two women, 300 people attended a
public meeting at Totnes to demonstrate support for their
action.
More than 1,000 [3,000] people signed a petition supporting the
women's act, because of the Government's failure to halt the
maize trial despite deep concern in the local community.
===========================================
PA 03/29 1303
3) COURTS GM SUBSTITUTE (MEM TO CSEs: This amends damage estimate from
snap in
view of later information) GM FOOD RAID CASE DROPPED
By Chris Court, PA
News Two eco-warriors accused of causing 44,000 damage
to a trial crop of genetically engineered maize walked free from
court
today when the case against them was dropped. There were cheers
in court from their supporters when Recorder Sir Peter Badge discharged
Jacqueline Sheedy, 33, and 22-year-old Elizabeth Snook after
prosecutor Andrew Oldland offered no evidence. Sheedy, of Finsbury Park,
north London, and Snook, of Central Avenue, Pinner, north-west London, were
respectively awarded 608 and 660 costs by the Recorder at Plymouth
Crown Court.
The women were accused of jointly destroying the maize on
August 3 at Hood Barton farm near Dartington, Devon, last
August.
Originally the cost of the damage was valued at 605,000, but
in court today the prosecutor said the amended figure was
44,000.
The trial crop was being grown by the National Institute of
Agricultural Botany on behalf of Sharpes (Advanta) at the site,
which it ran for the Ministry of Agriculture.
Before the case began, about 200 supporters of the two women
demonstrated in the rain outside the court, some dressed as
vegetables.
Many of them packed the public gallery while the two women
appeared in the dock.
Mr Oldland, from the CPS, told the court it was important to
understand that the decision to offer no evidence against them
set no precedent. "Any future acts of criminal damage in
similar circumstances will be considered on their merits," he
said.
It was clear that Sheedy and Snook were not the ringleaders,
said Mr Oldland. The two women claimed they acted in the way
they did because the GM maize was on the verge of pollination
and they feared cross pollination of crops on a nearby organic
farm.
Mr Oldland said the prosecution did not feel they had
disproved that the defendants believed pollination was imminent
and carried with it dangers, and that in the circumstances they
were acting reasonably.
Then this month the Government entered into negotiations with
companies involved in the development of GM crops, including the
one involved in this case, and English Nature recommended a
moratorium on the issue. After considering the implications
of these matters on the evidence, the decision was taken to
discontinue the prosecution because of "evidential difficulties"
caused by "unfolding events" during the prosecution, said Mr
Oldland.
Dexter Diaz, for Sheedy, said it was no coincidence that
following hard on the heels of political negotiations and
machinations that the decision had been made in this case.
He said Sheedy was protecting the environment from the risk
of GM organisms, as there was a risk from the test crops of
cross pollination in the immediate vicinity.
There was also the risk of transfer of genes from the test
maize to other species, which was in the minds of the two women
and justified their action. David Bentley, for Snook, said she
now took the view she had been vindicated, adding that she had
been through "a lot of torment".
After the case Sheedy said her reaction was that "direct
action has been justified".
She went on to say that "further action will be taken"
despite the prosecution's warning about the case not setting a
precedent. "This will help things along the way, and we are
here for advice if anyone wants advice on how to put a defence
together," she added. The Government negotiations on the GM
issue had a lot to do with the decision to drop the case.
But she added: "They could not afford a not guilty verdict,
and could not afford to put genetic engineering on trial."
Snook said she was "stunned" at the decision, adding that the
reasons for dropping the case were "clearly a vindication of our
actions and based on the political climate".
"They do not want a jury to hear the truth about genetic
engineering, and they have withdrawn that option from us, which
was disappointing. "But this indicates that direct action is
effective and justified," she added.
======================
4) Frankenstein foods crop case dropped
Evening Herald (Plymouth) March 29, 1999
BODY: TWO women accused of causing
thousands of pounds worth of damage to a 'Frankenstein Food' crop
near a South Devon organic farm have dramatically had their case dropped,
it was confirmed today. Jacqueline Sheedy, 33, and 21-year -old Elizabeth
Snook were due to appear at Plymouth Crown Court to face a charge of
jointly destroying the crop at a test site near Totnes, south Devon. But
the Crown Prosecution Service today confirmed it had decided to offer no
evidence against the two women. Crowds of environmental
campaigners, including musicians, banner wavers, performers and organic
farmers,
celebrated outside Plymouth Crown Court this lunchtime as Sheedy and
Snook were discharged.
Recorder Sir Peter Badge was told by prosecuting solicitor
Andrew Oldlands no evidence would be put forward, due to
unfolding events over the last few months. But he said: "This
decision sets no precedent. Any future acts of criminal damage
in similar circumstances will be considered on their merits."
The court heard the amount of damage was estimated as GBP
44,000 not GBP 605,000 as had been previously stated by the
prosecution. Both defendants were granted costs of more than
GBP 600. Sheedy said: "Direct action has been justified. Further
action will be taken definitely." Sheedy, of Finsbury Park,
north London, and Snook, of Central Avenue, Pinner, north west
London, were arrested last year.
The crop being grown there belonged to Sharpes (Advanta) and
the National Institute of Agricultural Biology, which ran the
site for the Ministry of Agriculture.
The Genetic Engineering Network pressure group said lawyers
representing the two women had received a letter saying "for
complex reasons the Crown intend to offer no evidence in the
above case".
GRAPHIC: FREE TO GO: Jacqueline Sheedy, left, and Elizabeth
Snook today LANGUAGE: English
LOAD-DATE: March 29, 1999
========================
5) Financial Times (London) March 30, 1999, Tuesday
Largest farming business snubs GM crop trial
BYLINE: By John Willman, Consumer Industries Editor
BODY: CWS
Agriculture, the largest farming business in the UK, has refused to
take
part in the government's proposed farm-scale trials of genetically
modified crops. The trials, announced in October, are intended to
monitor
the ecological impact of weedkiller-tolerant oilseed rape and maize
when
planted on a commercial scale. If successful, they could permit the
commercial planting of such crops from next spring.
But CWS, the farming wing of Europe's largest co-operative
enterprise, which had been asked to provide two of the four test
sites for planting this year, said yesterday it had decided not
to participate in the experiment. "We feel there is no clear
consensus of opinion among the various interest groups as to how
this should be achieved," said Bill Shannon, head of corporate
affairs. "We have decided not to take part."
CWS's refusal, only weeks before planting was due to start,
is the latest setback for the government's plans to restore
confidence in GM crops following a wave of public concern. The
new trials were part of a four-year programme to evaluate their
impact on wildlife and on biodiversity.
In February Novartis, a developer of GM sugar beet, said the
government trials might not go ahead because of the difficulty
in finding growers. It warned that farmers feared the crops
would be targeted by environmental activists such as Genetix
Snowball, which plans to destroy test sites. Later that month
Monsanto, the life sciences group that has pioneered many GM
crops, was fined for a breach of safety regulations at a test
site for GM oilseed rape in Lincolnshire. This led to renewed
calls for a five-year moratorium on commercial planting of GM
crops.
So far trials of GM crops have been limited to small plots which
are typically 36 metres by 10 metres. The next round is to test
the environmental impact when they are planted over much larger
areas in fields of 10 acres. These tests are to help in
devising procedures to monitor the impact of GM crops over the
next three years when surveillance will be continued. They could
also yield sufficient data to allow the government to give the
go-ahead for the commercial planting of these GM crops.
Friends of the Earth, the environmental campaign
organisation, said government advisers believed two trials per
crop was less than was needed to produce scientifically sound
results. It said 15-20 trials were needed to produce
statistically robust conclusions.
CWS farms more than 80,000 acres throughout the UK - on its
own land and under contract for other landowners. It describes
itself as a leading exponent of environmental farm management
techniques, which has pioneered farming methods that reduce the
need to use chemicals.
It said yesterday it was not against genetically modified
crops in principle, but it believed the design of this year's
trials would do little to allay environmental and consumer
concerns.
* A charge brought against two women of destroying a trial crop
of genetically modified maize near Dartington, Devon, last
August was dropped at Plymouth Crown Court yesterday.
======#======
6) The Mirror March 30, 1999
GM COURT CASE FAILS
BYLINE: Geoffrey Lakeman
BODY: TWO eco-warriors who destroyed
genetically modified maize walked free from court yesterday.
Jacklyn Sheedy, 33, and Liz Snook, 21, were greeted by hundreds of
supporters
after prosecutors dropped charges. Ms Sheedy said: "This shows direct
action is justified." Ms Snook added: "They didn't want a jury to hear the
truth about genetic engineering." The court was told that the
prosecution case was undermined by Government negotiations aimed at halting
experimental planting of GM food for three years. The judge at Plymouth
Crown Court awarded the women over pounds 1,200 costs.
======#======
7) Protesters are cleared over gene crop raid
The Times (London) March 30, 1999
BYLINE: Susie Steiner
THE public backlash against genetically modified crops has helped
to clear two environmental protesters who destroyed a field of
experimental maize. Jacklyn Sheedy, 33, and Elizabeth Snook, 22, were
awarded
costs at Plymouth Crown Court despite having caused an estimated Pounds
44,000 of damage to the genetically modified maize crop in Devon last
August.
he women's lawyer told the court that they had acted reasonably because
they believed there was an imminent risk of cross- pollination with crops
planted 200 metres away on an organic farm.
The Crown Prosecution Service offered no evidence against
them. Andrew Oldland, for the prosecution, admitted that
"unfolding events", including a swing in public opinion against
genetically modified foods, had contributed to the decision not
to pursue the case.
Outside the court, Ms Sheedy, from Finsbury Park, North
London, was cheered by about 200 supporters, some of them
dressed as vegetables. She said that the charges had been
dropped because the Establishment "could not afford to put
genetic engineering on trial", and gave warning that protesters
would take "further action" against GM crops.
Ms Snook, from Pinner, northwest London, said that the
decision was clearly "based on the political climate. This
indicates that direct action is effective and justified."
Mr Oldland had earlier told the court that abandoning the
case did not set a precedent. "Any future acts of criminal
damage in similar circumstances will be considered on their
merits," he said.
The raid involving Ms Snook and Ms Sheedy came after weeks of
protest about GM crops being planted near an organic farm at
Staverton. The National Institute of Agricultural Botany had
planted the maize last May as a test in conjunction with Sharpes
International Seeds, a part-owned subsidiary of the
biotechnology company Zeneca. The site is managed by the
institute on behalf of the Ministry of Agriculture.
Guy Watson, the owner of the neighbouring organic farm,
feared that his Pounds 20,000 sweetcorn crop would be
contaminated by the GM maize and that his farm would lose its
organic status.
He sought a judicial review of the Government's failure to
halt the crop trial in July. The three judges ruled that they
were powerless to intervene. On August 3, about 30 people
wearing protective clothing raided the trial site and pulled up
the plants, which were expected to pollinate the following week.
Ms Sheedy and Ms Snook were among 12 people arrested. They were
charged with causing damage to the maize. The others were
released on police bail and are unlikely to face charges.
Ø ====================
======#======
8) Herald Express (Torquay) March 30, 1999
Protests, 'Eco warrior' looks for Totnes home
BODY: ONE of two South Devon eco warriors who walked free from court after
the
collapse of a high profile "Frankenstein Food" trial today revealed she
plans
to
move to South Devon - to grow organic crops. Jacklyn Sheedy, 33, hopes to
find a smallholding in the Totnes area following yesterday's last minute
decision to drop charges of criminal damage to genetically modified
maize growing near Riverford Organic Farm at Staverton. The collapse of
the trial, as reported in yesterday's Herald Express, came as Britain's
biggest farmer announced it has refused to take part in the Government's
trials of GM crops this year.
The Co-operative Wholesale Society, which farms 80,000 acres
across Britain, said it had pulled out because it believed the
trials would do little to allay fears over the safety of GM
foods.
And Ms Sheedy said experts' evidence on GM foods - gathered
as she and 22-year-old Liz Snook prepared for the trial - had
served to make them even more deeply concerned about the issue
than when they pulled up the maize growing in a field at Hood
Barton Farm, Dartington, last August.
Campaigners claim it was that evidence - handed to the
prosecution last week - which led to the Crown Prosecution
Service decision not to offer any evidence on charges of
conspiracy to commit criminal damage.
Precedent Mr Andrew Oldland, from the CPS, told the court it was
important to understand the decision set no precedent.
"Any future acts of criminal damage in similar circumstances
will be considered on their merits," he said.
There were cheers in court from their supporters when Recorder
Sir Peter Badge discharged Sheedy, of Finsbury Park, London, and
Snook, of Pinner, London, and awarded them GBP 608 and GBP 660
costs.
Originally the cost of the damage was put at GBP 605,000, but
the prosecutor yesterday amended the figure to GBP 44,000.
Speaking from the home of Totnes Genetics Group spokesman
Luke Anderson, Ms Sheedy - a permaculture student - revealed her
hopes to set up in the area. "I'd like to buy a piece of land
down here and start living off it. We hadn't been able to make
plans as while we didn't really believe we would go to prison,
we were expecting a long hearing."
She went on to say she was sure further direct action will be
taken despite the prosecution's warning.
"This decision will help the campaign along the way, and we
are here to offer advice to anyone who needs it on how to put a defence
together."
GRAPHIC: From left: Jacklyn Sheedy, Luke Anderson and Liz Snook
=======================
9) THE DAILY TELEGRAPH(LONDON) March 30
Women cleared as GM food raid case is dropped
BYLINE: By Sean O'Neill
BODY:
MINISTERS' doubts about the safety of genetically modified food led
yesterday to the acquittal of two women who admitted vandalising a
field of experimental crops. The Crown said it would offer no evidence
against Jacklyn Sheedy and Elizabeth Snook because its case had been
undermined by changing Government policy on GM crops. Sheedy, 33, and Snook,
22, said that they damaged the test crop of maize in a field at
Dartington, Devon, to protect the public from the potential dangers of GM
foods.
Andrew Oldland, prosecuting, told Plymouth Crown Court that
talks between ministers and food companies about a three-year
moratorium on growing GM crops had created "evidential
difficulties".
He said: "The possible implications of such negotiations on
evidence were considered by the prosecution, particularly the
inevitable perceptions that would arise from those discussions."
Supporters of the women in the public gallery cheered and
applauded as the Recorder, Sir Peter Badge, entered not guilty
verdicts and awarded them costs. Outside court Sheedy, of
Finsbury Park, north London, said her actions in destroying the
crop had been vindicated and said her acquittal would encourage
campaigners.
"Direct action has been justified," she said. "I would be
prepared to do it again and I am here for advice if anyone else
wants to do the same. "The case has been dropped because they
could not afford a not guilty verdict and they could not afford
to put genetic engineering on trial." Snook, of Pinner,
north-west London, said she was stunned that the case against
her had been abandoned.
"They do not want a jury to hear the truth about genetic
engineering and they have withdrawn that option from us, which
is disappointing," she said. The women were among 20
environmental campaigners who attacked the crop growing in
fields at Hood Barton farm last August, causing damage estimated
at pounds 44,000.
The maize, grown by the firm Advanta, was 400 yards from land
owned by Riverford Foods, Britain's largest organic producer.
Guy Watson, the proprietor of Riverford, had taken unsuccessful
court action to attempt to stop the growth of the GM maize
because he feared his crops would be contaminated by cross-
pollination.
Sheedy and Snook had waited at the field to be arrested and
never denied trespassing on to the field and tearing up plants.
Dexter Dias, for Sheedy, said talks about a moratorium on GM
crops showed that the Government shared her concerns over the
safety of such foods. "The trouble with this technology is that
its consequences are unknown, untried and untested. There are
potentially massive dangers.
"My client believed she had the right to protect the
immediate eco-system, the food chain and the population. She has
not been acquitted on a technicality, but because the
prosecution are unable to disprove her defence. The unfolding
of events over genetically modified food technology justifies
and vindicates what she has done.
"It is a matter which has gone to the highest offices of
Government. She does not benefit, she has not profited, it has
not been a matter of self-interest. It is a matter which she
passionately believes is in the public interest." David
Bentley, for Snook, said: "She had not been ashamed of her
actions. She took the view that her actions, although extreme,
were necessary. The Crown is, in effect, accepting that. If they
did not accept it, a jury would be here to try the matter."
=================
10) 29 March 1999 Farmers Weekly Website
CPS drops case against anti-GM women
THE Crown Prosecution Service has dropped charges against two women accused of
destroying a test site for genetically modified (GM) crops in Devon.
Jacklyn Sheedy and Elizabeth Snook were arrested last August after protestors
uprooted a crop of herbicide-resistant maize at Hood Barton Farm, near Totnes.
The site is only a few hundred yards from a leading organic vegetable farm.
The two women were charged with conspiracy to cause criminal damage and will
appear before Plymouth crown court this morning. But the defendants have been
told that "for complex reasons" the Crown intends to offer no evidence in the
case.
30 March 1999 Farmers Weekly
Case dropped against GM protestors
THE Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has dropped charges against two women
accused of causing an estimated £44,000-worth of damage to genetically
modified
(GM) crops in Devon.
Jacklyn Sheedy and Elizabeth Snook were arrested last August after protestors
uprooted a crop of herbicide resistant maize at Hood Barton Farm, near
Totnes.
The two women were charged with conspiracy to cause criminal damage. The CPS
offered no evidence against them at yesterday's hearing.
The damage was originally estimated at £605,000.
================================
11) Evening Standard Tuesday 30th March 1999
Words that led GM activist to risk 10 years in prison
It was the words of third world farmers opposed to the genetic manipulation of
crops that drove Jacklyn Sheedy to uproot a field of maize and become the
latest star of the green movement [oh please].
With her friend Liz Snook, she was formally cleared yesterday of conspiracy to
cause criminal damage to a genetically modified crop after the crown dropped
all charges.
For Miss Sheedy and Miss Snook, the case was a vindication of their direct
action to resort to direct action in the battle against the biotechnology
companies they claim threaten the food we eat and the planet itself.
“The government could not afford to put genetic engineering on trial,” said Ms
Sheedy, 33, as she walked free from Plymouth Crown Court. It certainly was not
a course of events she anticipated when she attended an environmental
conference in Rome in 1996 and heard Third World farmers denounce genetic
modification.
“They were horrified this technology was being foisted on them in their name,”
she said. “That’s what impressed me most they didn’t want it despite Western
Governments saying it was for their benefit.”
Fired by what she heard, Ms Sheedy returned to London where she set up an
email
information service on genetics. She quickly became part of an anti-GM
activist
group, the Genetic Engineering Network, and now works full-time and unpaid for
the network which runs on donations.
Brought up in Stockport, Ms Sheedy describes herself as a “good convent
schoolgirl” [this was meant as a joke]. After spending several years
travelling
following school, she arrived in London four years ago and became involved in
the ecology movement.
The defining moment came about after Rome, when she heard about the legal
action being taken by Britain’s largest organic farmer, Guy Watson, allowing
Advata Holdings to plant GM maize at the National Institute for Agricultural
Botany’s Hood Barton Farm in Devon. When the appeal Court ruled that despite
the Government breaking seed regulations, the court had no power to order the
destruction of the crop, around 20 activists, including the two women, decided
to act.
“On 3rd August last year we walked onto the site and pulled up or snapped the
corn” said Miss Sheedy. “We didn’t have long because we knew that the security
and police were on their way, but it wasn’t a big site only 30 square
meters.”
When the police turned up, neither woman made any attempt to deny their
actions.
Ms Snook, 21, who was brought up in Rayners Lane, near Harrow, became involved
in the eco-movement after quitting an arts foundation course in her first
year.
“Out of curiosity”, she visited the anti-Newbury bypass protest camp in 1996
and after that lived on similar camps around the country. She also worked
on an
organic farm outside Basingstoke and earned money working as a care assistant
for the elderly.
“I never thought direct action was the answer but I began to think about it
more at Newbury”, said Ms Snook, who emphasised she had never signed on the
dole during her few years as an activist.
When word spread about the planned invasion of Hood Barton Farm, she
decided to
join in. “After the arrest, I was concerned about being sent to prison, of
course, but I knew we had a good case,” she said.
In the end, the Crown said it could not disprove the women’s defence of lawful
excuse of protecting nearby non-GM crops from cross-pollination. Furthermore,
the prosecution admitted current Government negotiations on a GM crop
moratorium had undermined its case.
For the two women, it was a victory that denied them a platform to air their
beliefs. “We’ve had our lives disrupted for eight months,” said Miss Snook.
We’ve been under strict night curfew and we’ve had the threat of ten years in
jail hanging over us. I think we’ll both have a bit of a break before
continuing our work against genetic engineering.