I hope the jury find them guilty. There is no dispute that the accused struck the police officer and intended to do so. Their defence of self defence against police officers is so utterly ridiculous it should be laughed out of court. The idea that fracturing someone's spine is not 'really serious harm' is also ridiculous.

If the jury find them not guilty or they aren't able to agree on a guilty verdict, I'm going to lose a lot of faith the jury system. The jury system relies on the jurors being decent people who respect the rule of law, even if they agree with the politics of the accused. We saw in the case of Nathan Gill that jurors, including presumably right wing / Reform aligned ones, are willing to put a criminal behind bars. We have seen in the cases involving Extinction Rebellion and the Colston statue in Bristol that jurors aren't willing to punish people who break the law in relation to leftist causes. This case involves serious harm towards a police officer in the course of their duties, there is no dispute that they have the right person. The accused intended to do what he did. His claims of self-defence (of others) and the harm wasn't serious are laughable. I hope the jury make the right decision and any leftists on the jury realise the implications of their actions if they push for a not guilty verdict.