Thread by @JohnWRees

Mark Summers KC for the defence now cross examining Cmd. Slonecki from the Met. Suggests that his previous account was a fabrication. Rejected by Slonecki.

Slonecki asked why Zionist counter protest allowed in line of sight of Palestine protest when Palestine protests were allowed anywhere near BBC because of synagogue.

Met police Cmd says Zionist threats were just PSC accusations and he’d seen no proof. Summers says he did not put himself ‘at pains’ to protect Palestine protesters as he’d previously said.

Judge: did the Stop the Hate protest actually be removed from line of sight. Met police: no they were in sight and sound of PSC demo. Slonecki caught misrepresenting by Judge.

Police have to admit that Palestine coalition works to organise safe demos

Summers: you do understand that Palestine Action are not part of the Palestine coalition as you previously stated. Refers to deliberate attempt by prosecution to confuse a banned organisation with PSC.

Summers: questions Police about low figures given about previous demonstrations. Why didn’t police plan for 5,000 if that is what they thought were attending. Police have to admit that they planning according to PSC/STWC figures.

Summers forces Police to admit that the stewards are the people who keep discipline and organise the marchers.

Summers: all 25 marches previously been well organised. Police admits that those there were disagreements there had been no illegal protests.

Summers: police change position as a result of public debate initiated by Palestine solidarity.

Summers: all previous 21 marches had been without serious incident was a ‘considerable achievement’. Police have to agree that this was true. Conditions had never been necessary to prevent disorder. All marches peaceful. Police forced to agree.

Average of 15 arrests per march over 21 marches. Summers: before this all marches were in police words ‘peaceful’.

Police agree that conditions have been altered on the ground.

Two marches had previously started at the BBC. Had been agreed and then conditioned by Police.

Amazing Met Cdr Slonecki admits that he has no idea what ‘Nakba’ means.

Nakba Day demonstration forms up at BBC.

Summers: this one worked. Police: yes.

PSC then proposed a third demo at BBC. Black Friday sales were a problem, and PSC agreed to move date.

The next time was 18 Jan demo publicised at starting at the BBC. 15 Nov meeting had agreed it Palestine coalition argues, police deny this.

Record of meeting shows that forming up at BBC was agreed with police. Chris agrees that police have OK’d this. Police agreed.

Slonecki agreed that the BBC was fine was to form up at the BBC.

Same day Ben Jamal sends email to Slonecki noting 18 Jan date and BBC as form up, and says will announce. Slonecki didn’t respond. Claims he never saw email. Admits he can see why PSC thought the BBC was agreed.

Then 18 Nov: Jewish Leadership Council send 18 page letter to Met. Lobbies against demo.

Jewish Leadership Council (JLC) directs police to law on ‘cumulative’ demos, claims community feels intimidated.

Next meeting with police 10 Dec. BBC form up discussed without police objection.

Police are told that demo has already been announced.

Local synagogue writes drawing police attention to JLC letter. Slonecki meet with Jewish Police Association, Jewish Forum, spoke with Board of Deputies and other Jewish organisation. None of it logged.

Summers: so there is no log where people can see all these meetings you’ve had. Slonecki admits there is not.

Meeting with Jewish Forum is not logged. Slonecki admits it is not. Summers: you were being lobbied and did not record. Slonecki PSC meetings were recorded, but not these meetings.

Summers: that period where there is no log was when you contacted the Chief Rabbi to ask for material. On 19 Dec, day before log begins, lawyers write again and threaten Slonecki with judicial review. JLC lawyers record Slonecki approaching Rabbi for material.

JLC lawyers threaten judicial review if police don’t like the route of the march. Slonecki ‘we had to respond to representations’.

Meets PSC next day, 20 Dec., and repeats the JLC arguments without saying where they came from. PSC reacts and says that they police are listening only to Zionist organisations, not anti Zionist Jews.

Jewish bloc letter sent to Met never gets to Slonecki, apparently.

Summers: even if the harassment claim was in good faith, it wasn’t reasonable because no one was being harassed or threatened. No evidence of confrontation, marches not anti-semetic.

Summers: you never gave those arguments any serious consideration. By the end of the meeting you were already refusing to consider the already agreed route. Slonecki disagrees.

Summers: but that evening you started to draft a document justifying the ban on the BBC route.

Summers: you had not met the Jewish Bloc? Slonecki: No.

Summers: you didn’t care whether these views were reasonable or not?

Summers quotes Slonecki’s statement which says it’s irrelevant whether or not there was actually a threat or not, if ppl feel there is.

Summers: you can’t act without threat of serious disruption, so that is why you accepted the representations made to you.

Slonecki: didn’t matter to me if the congregation was only one person.

Summers: so that person could be a tourist? Slonecki: yes.

Summers: so you are imposing conditions on grounds that may or may not be reasonable, for a congregation of one, that may be a tourist? Is that reasonable? Slonecki: no, tourists would have nowhere to go.

Court rises for lunch

@ThreadReaderApp unroll