I agree with the Leader of the House

I agree with Jacob Rees-Mogg.

This isn’t something I could ever have envisaged myself writing. It’s a surprise. And the surprise is compounded by the fact our agreement relates to the trial of the “Colston Four”, the people acquitted earlier this month of criminal damage to the statue of a slave trader, which they helped to dump into Bristol harbour in the summer of 2020.

At the end of a trial (held suspiciously speedily, at a time when the court system of England and Wales has been ravaged by Covid restrictions, to the point where many current serious cases will not come to trial until next year at the earliest) in which the four defendants walked free, a number of Conservative MPs from the (let’s call it) anti-woke wing of the party suggested that the verdict called the legitimacy of trial by jury into question. “If the jury is a barrier to ensuring they are punished then that needs to be addressed,” said one, apparently expressing the view of several others.

Those of us who actually own a moral compass felt rather that the verdict demonstrated the ongoing necessity of jury trials – the right to be tried by our peers – in our legal system, a system which in many other respects is skewed towards the interests of those who do not value the rights of people of colour. Somewhat surprisingly, the Leader of the House agreed with us.

“One of our greatest monuments is the jury system which is the great sublime protector of our liberties," said Rees-Mogg. "Juries must be free to come to decisions that they choose to come to on the facts that are in front of them in relation to a specific case.”

Leaving aside the pomposity of his language, the facts in this case are these. For many years, a significant number of the people of Bristol have been appalled and diminished by the presence in their midst of a statue celebrating the life and ‘philanthropy’ of a man who profited directly from the enslavement, murder and rape of their ancestors. During those same years, the political institutions of Bristol have ignored the sentiments of those citizens, affording them less weight than a nonsensical need to ‘protect statues’ or ‘perpetuate history’.

Thankfully, twelve wise and true citizens, saw that the punishment that would attend a guilty verdict was disproportionate to the ‘crime’ under consideration. Put simply, no-one deserves to go to prison for removing from public display a celebration of a slave-trader.

If we want our country, or our sport, to be a place where we all feel welcome and valued, it is vital not only that we seize our own agency, but also that we have the support of those whose privilege is embedded in the system which we challenge to do and be better. If Jacob Rees-Mogg can do that, then so can you.