Pro-Palestine activists sentenced as terrorists over damage at Israeli arms factory in UK

Protesters outside Woolwich crown court on Friday. Photograph: Denise Baker/Getty Images View image in fullscreen Protesters outside Woolwich crown court on Friday. Photograph: Denise Baker/Getty Images Pro-Palestine activists sentenced as terrorists over damage at Israeli arms factory in UK Four found guilty will face tougher conditions as judge says actions were ‘designed to intimidate the UK government and a section of the public’ Four Palestine Action activists who smashed up drones and other equipment at an Israeli arms manufacturer’s UK factory will be sentenced as terrorists, a judge has ruled. Mr Justice Johnson made the ruling at a sentencing hearing on Friday for Samuel Corner, 23, Charlotte Head, 30, Leona Kamio, 30, and Fatema Rajwani, 21, who were all found guilty of criminal damage last month in relation to a 2024 break-in at the Elbit Systems UK site in Gloucestershire. Corner was also convicted of grievous bodily harm without intent for striking Sgt Kate Evans with a sledgehammer. A report relied on by the prosecution at Friday’s sentencing hearing said the raid on the factory had caused £1.2m of damage, including to 41 military assets. The report referred to £395,056 of damage to six units in an unnamed drone system as well as damage to other unmanned aerial vehicles. Announcing his finding of a “terrorist connection” under section 69 of the Sentencing Act, ahead of deciding on the sentences, Johnson said: “I am sure that each defendant’s offence of criminal damage involved serious damage to property, was designed to intimidate the UK government and a section of the public [Elbit employees and those of other businesses linked to Elbit] and was for the purpose of advancing a political or ideological cause.” He added that the fact that each acted out of conscience would be taken into account when imposting sentence. Representing Head, Rajiv Menon KC had told Johnson that it was unprecedented for the prosecution to apply for a judge to sentence a defendant as a terrorist for a non-violent offence. Menon said it was “an invitation to chilling, creeping authoritarianism that undermines the very fabric of our society”. In written arguments, Mira Hammad KC, representing Kamio, said the defendants had initially been arrested on suspicion of involvement in acts of terrorism but not charged with those offences “showing that a deliberate decision was taken not to submit the crown’s case [that there was terrorism] to the arbitrament of a jury …[therefore] the court should not allow the crown to use [section 69] as a vehicle for enhancing sentence in circumstances where it has determined that a conviction for the same offence by the jury is unlikely”. Tom Wainwright KC, representing Corner, said a terrorist connection finding against the defendants would also mean the suffragettes, the Greenham Common women and the Trident Ploughshares movement were terrorists. “It’s wrong for someone to be sentenced for a more serious offence of which they h