
Activists attack police with sledgehammer during Bristol break-in
Activists attack police with sledgehammer during Bristol break-in
- Six activists from Palestine Action broke into the Elbit Systems factory using a prison van and sledgehammers.
- Police bodycam footage was presented at the trial, showing the violence against officers during the incident.
- The trial continues as the accused activists deny the charges, raising concerns over the implications of their actions.
Story
In the early hours of August 6, 2024, a group of six activists affiliated with Palestine Action allegedly conducted an attack on Elbit Systems, a defense firm based in Bristol, United Kingdom. The activists reportedly broke into the company's factory using a prison van, armed with sledgehammers and dressed in red jumpsuits. Amid the chaos, police officers arrived at the scene to confront the suspects. Officer Ps Evans testified in court that she was struck in the lower back by a sledgehammer during an arrest, which left her paralyzed with pain, thinking her spine was shattered. A colleague, PC Adams, corroborated her account, describing the violent moments of the attack as he witnessed one of the activists swing the sledgehammer multiple times at Evans and another officer, PC Buxton. Bodycam footage showed these incidents occurring as officers engaged in managing the situation. The injuries sustained by Evans prevented her from returning to work for three months, leading to concerns for her recovery and the impact of the attack on police operations. The trial, taking place at Woolwich Crown Court, involves the six accused activists—Charlotte Head, Samuel Corner, Leona Kamio, Fatema Rajwani, Zoe Rogers, and Jordan Devlin—who face charges for aggravated burglary, criminal damage, and violent disorder. They all deny the charges, with Corner facing an additional allegation of causing grievous bodily harm. Prosecutors emphasized the aggressive nature of the activists' actions during the break-in, including the splattering of red paint and destruction of property, which they argue exemplifies their intent to harm. As the case resumes, questions arise regarding the role of such protests and the appropriateness of the activists' chosen methods to voice their dissent against the defense sector in the UK.