The trials of bulding workers' pickets taking place in Shewsbury have so far run according to form. The prosecution of these militants on conspiracy charges de monstrates vividly the ability of the ruling class to use the law against any workers who organise effective picketing. In the first leg of the trials, 6 of the Shrewsbury 24 are charged with 'canspiracy to intimidate workers to abstain trom work, along with "unlawfal assembly" and fighting and making an affray?.
CONSPIRACY In law a person can be convicted of Conspiracy if he merely makes an agreemenr with someon, to do an unla wiul act-even if that act is never actually committed. The prosecution in the Shrewsbury cases is not, thercfor, primarly concurned to prove that these six men actually committed any violent acta themselves. Their main allegation is that the six went to Shrewsbury with a 'common purpose, an agreement betwoon them to intimidate blacklegs and damag: property". The mere fact that volence occurred and that these six men (all branch secretaries or chairmen) organised the fiying pickets is enough to prove their guilt, accord- The authoritics claim that this is a simple ing to the prosecution.
To show premeditation, the prosecution has had to portray the pickets as a band of hooligins who descended without provocation. beating up anybody und everybody in sighta "horde of Apaches', as the prosecutor put it. The defence has, therefore, not simply to rebut the specific charges of the prosecution, but also to show that the pickets were rational men, In doing so, they have had to draw a picture for the jury of what the class struggle in mally like.
For esample, a reporter for a local newspaper told the court that pickets had threatened to sa ba sia ano larow nim in the hvet when he tried to photograph them. But, as the defenc pointed out, if the men's pictures had appeared in newspapers they would be identified as "troublemakers" and stand a good chance of being blacklisted throughout the industry. (Ironically, an important part of police evidence in the case is in the form of photographs), INSURRECTION The prosecution has tried to paint a picture of the flying pickets as a kind of small scale Insurrection. But this seems to have backfired, inspiring the imagination of some of the employers, and bringing out their true class instincts. One commented that he felt very annoyed that we didn't have four machine guns on the top of the site, because that was the only way we could have stopped them". The defence have tackled the charge of "conspiracy" by trying to show that "leadership" ina workers organisation 'is not the same thing as boing a licatenant or a serpeant issuing instructions', It may be that in the organisations of the ruling class the commande or the boss determines the actions of those under him; but in a workers organisation, responsibulity is collectively aharod, with Teadeis representing the common will, not some power on high that can order people aDopE WIL -uy.
ciminal case, The hollowness of this claim is shown by tho manoeuvres of the Government lo ensure a conviction. For example, carler tlis year trials of some of the Shrewsbury 24 in Mold led to acguittals, In part this was due to the defence's use of informaton about the occupations of proposed jurors to got a jury that had some trude unionists on it, and therefore understood the issues involved. In the Shrowsbury trial, however, the defence-at the instruction of the Goverment-was refused this information.
If the Shrewsbury trials are simply an everyday somuma proscunon, why is il that the oniy person to threaten any really scrious violence in Shrewshury last yoar has been neither charge d nor investigated? This is the man who threatened pickets with a shotgun, Yes, that's right-he's a witneas for the prosecution. Scenes of law and order outside the court at Shrewsbury Moriden are a thind higher than at BSA Small Houth,