Animal Rebellion protesters guilty of causing criminal damage to Buckingham Palace fountain
Red dye was released into the fountain in 2021, causing thousands of pounds of damage
Last updated 28th Aug 2024
A group of Animal Rebellion protesters have been found guilty of causing thousands of pounds of damage to a Buckingham Palace fountain by releasing red dye into it.
Louis McKechnie, 23, Christopher Bennett, 27, Riley Ings, 27, Claire Smith, 26, and Rachel Steele, 48, were found guilty at Southwark Crown Court on Wednesday of causing £7,080 of criminal damage to the Queen Victoria Memorial water feature on August 26, 2021.
The jury of 11 reached verdicts after seven hours and 56 minutes of deliberation.
The prosecution said the dye not only turned the water red, but also stained the stonework of the fountain, and CCTV footage shows a number of the protesters dyeing their hands red and then leaving hand prints on the stonework of the fountain.
Prosecutor Ailsa McKeon said in a closing speech on Friday: "There is no dispute that red dye was in fact added to the water on that day and all of them have accepted that they intended for that water to be turned red... to create the impression of a bloodbath.
"What they each deny is that they intended or were reckless as to causing any damage and in fact that damage was caused at all."
Emergency clean cost extra
The court heard previously that the fountain, which is cleaned once a month, received an emergency clean at an extra cost after the protest.
Michael Robert Turner - an assistant manager for Royal Parks at the time of the incident - previously told the jury the marble is "porous" and there was a risk the dye would seep in and stain the stone if it was not immediately cleaned.
Laura Stockdale, defending Steele and Bennett, argued the dye was designed to be added to bodies of water, including fountains, and Royal Parks "could have just left the red dye in the water to weaken as time passed".
She said turning the water red did not interfere with the structure of the monument nor affect its value.
"The most that the Crown can sensibly say is that it affected the aesthetics," Ms Stockdale said. "But members of the jury, isn't that just subjective? Is that really damage?"
Shina Animashaun, defending Ings, McKechnie and Smith, made the same point that the dye was "fit for purpose".
Of his clients, he said: "They came there to say just because you are a royal member of the family does not mean that you should have different responsibilities to us (in relation to the climate)."
Both defence barristers said their clients neither intended to cause damage nor were they reckless as to whether the Grade I-listed fountain would be damaged.
Bennett, of Fish Ponds Road, Bristol; Ings, of no fixed address; McKechnie, of Claremont Road, Dorset; Steele, of Capworth Street, east London; and Smith, of Chadwick Street, Leeds, had each denied one count of criminal damage.
They will be sentenced on October 18.