Quartet ordered to pay £155 each in court costs after a three-hour protest that brought city centre to a standstill

This article is more than 3 years old

This article is more than 3 years old

Four Black Lives Matter activists have been ordered to pay £155 each in court costs after a three-hour protest that brought a city centre to a standstill.

Eshe Graham, 20, Yvonne Francis-Parmar, 50, Lisa Robinson, 48, and 30-year-old Malachi Thomas were convicted of unlawfully obstructing a highway following a trial at Nottingham magistrates court.

The day-long hearing was told the protesters, all from Nottingham, used foam-filled “lock-on devices” to link themselves together before lying across tram lines outside the city’s Theatre Royal during a “national day of action” in August.

They were each found guilty of a single charge brought under the 1980 Highways Act.

Sentencing the protesters to a three-year conditional discharge, the district judge, Richard Marshall, said: “The obstruction was clearly very real in nature – tram and bus timetables were subject to considerable disruption.

“It seems clear to me that the defendants were not exercising a reasonable right to protest on a highway and I find all four guilty. I accept your motives were very sincere but as I have indicated, you did cross the line in terms of obstructing the highway.”

The judge also imposed a £20 victim surcharge on each defendant and ordered them to pay equal shares of the crown’s costs of £620.

All four admitted being part of the protest but denied obstructing the highway on the grounds that their actions were reasonable.

At the start of the trial, Neill Fawcett, prosecuting, said the transport shutdown occurred against the backdrop of a series of demonstrations following police shootings in the US.

Police video footage was played to the court, showing the start of the protest at about 8am and officers using cutting gear to bring it to an end at about 11.05am.

Giving evidence in her defence, Robinson described Black Lives Matter as a movement rather than an organisation.

She told the court the protest location was chosen because it would have been relatively easy to redirect traffic.

She said of Black Lives Matter: “It’s a social justice movement – some people would say it’s the new civil rights movement of our time.”

As well as highlighting deaths and brutality linked to state institutions, Robinson said, the protest aimed to highlight everyday racism and border control issues.

Asked by her lawyer, Haroon Shah, to explain the purpose of the protest, Robinson added: “I considered what the consequences to my action would have been.

“I have got a son who is 18 years old and I want to hand over a better society to him. That is why I believe that my actions were reasonable. I had the chance to do my bit in my lifetime for a cause I believe in. That’s why I did it.”

Under cross-examination by Fawcett, Robinson was asked if the protest had aimed to garner maximum media attention.

“We wanted to raise awareness of issues affecting the black community in the UK and globally,” she said. “A lot of people supported what we did.

“I have heard more support than negative comments. I put my body on the line for something that I believe in … physically on the tram lines.”

As supporters outside the court celebrated the end of the case with air horns and party poppers, Francis-Parmer said: “I have no regrets whatsoever. I will do something else but not what we did. Maybe another tactic.”

Asked by reporters if she had a message for bus and tram users who were inconvenienced, she joked: “Get walking.”