Just Stop Oil eco-zealots risked causing 'serious damage' to £72.5million Van Gogh Sunflowers masterpiece with Heinz tomato soup attack, court hears
Two Just Stop Oil protesters who threw a tin of Heinz tomato soup over Van Gogh's masterpiece Sunflowers risked causing 'serious damage' to the painting, a court has been told.
Phoebe Plummer and Anna Holland, both 22, threw the liquid at the Dutch artist's painting while it was on display at the National Gallery on October 14, 2022.
The pair, who also glued themselves to the wall after the act, damaged the 17th century Italian frame the artwork was housed in.
On Monday Plummer and Holland appeared in court where they admitted throwing the soup.
Two protesters threw tins of Heinz tomato soup over Vincent Van Gogh's Sunflowers at the National Gallery on October 14, 2022
Anna Holland (left) and Phoebe Plummer (right)
Francesca Kolar, prosecuting, told jurors: 'At around 11am on 14 October 2022 the defendants attended The National Gallery in Trafalgar Square, London, purporting to be visitors just like any member of the public visiting the gallery that day.
'In fact, they were at the gallery to protest on behalf of Just Stop Oil.
'You may have heard of Just Stop Oil. It is a well known organisation that undertakes direct action whose aims are - the clue is in the title - to stop oil and gas.
'On 14 October they walked around to gallery 43, which housed one of the most sought after artworks by the visiting public - 'Sunflowers' by Vincent Van Gogh.
'When the coast was relatively clear, they went up to the 'Sunflowers' painting.
They took off their jackets to reveal white t-shirts emblazoned with the slogan 'Just Stop Oil'.
'They took two tins of Heinz tomato soup out of bags and simultaneously threw the contents of the tins of tomato soup onto the painting.'
'They kneeled down and began to open tubes of superglue and lathered it over their left hands. They fixed their hands to the wall of the gallery behind them.'
'Targeting one of the most famous paintings in the world in The National Gallery, in Trafalgar Square in the heart of the national capital, the Crown say is a publicity stunt to bring attention to the aims of Just Stop Oil.'
'Whilst this risked serious damage to a priceless painting by one of the greatest artists - Vincent Van Gogh - there was, we say, actual damage to the seventeenth century Italian frame.'
The court was told that the painting was protected by a glass covering, but damage was done to the 17th century Italian wooden frame surrounding it
The painting is considered to be a masterpiece and is one of the most recognisable artworks in the world
The painting wa done in 1888 by Dutch artist Vincent Van Gogh who is pictured here in a self-portrait he created the same year
Ms Kolar told the court people were heard saying 'Oh my gosh' as the painting was attacked during the protest which was filmed: 'This is unlikely to be a coincidence, because within minutes the protest had been uploaded onto Just Stop Oil's twitter page.
She said the Italian frame was 'a piece of art in itself.'
Larry Keith, the Head of Conservation at The National Gallery, said he had been giving a lecture to postgraduate students when he was informed of the incident, and went down to the gallery.
'At the time I entered there appeared to be two people attached to the wall... The painting itself was covered in liquid.'
He told the court that the painting was taken from the gallery on a trolley to be examined.
'We weren't sure if the liquid had penetrated the frame and made the picture wet. That would potentially have been very serious.'
'My principal concern was to make sure that the painting itself had not been damaged.
'It was clear that the frame had been affected by the attack. It had changed in terms of its surface.'
Ms Kolar asked him if anyone had asked permission from the gallery to stage a protest there.
'I certainly wasn't. I'm not aware that anyone was.'
Judge Christopher Hehir quipped: 'I can't imagine that Mr Keith is keen on people throwing soup over paintings.'
Just Stop Oil co-founder Roger Hallam (pictured) was one of five Just Stop Oil protesters jailed for conspiring to organise protests that blocked the M25 motorway
From left to right: Lucia Whittaker De Abreu, Cressida Gethin, Louise Lancaster, Daniel Shaw and Roger Hallam. Hallam was sentenced to five years' imprisonment while the remaining four defendants were each handed four years' imprisonment
French activist Michel Forst (centre) outside Southwark Crown Court with the five Just Stop Oil protesters who have been jailed
Prosecutors said the protests, which saw 45 people climb up the gantries (pictured) , led to an economic cost of at least £765,000, while the cost to the Metropolitan Police was more than £1.1 million
Police watch as traffic is held back as an activist from Just Stop Oil occupies a gantry over the M25 near Godstone in Surrey
Specialist rope officers were deployed by Kent Police to remove the activists and limit disruption on the motorway
The protests caused more than 50,000 hours of vehicle delay, affecting more than 700,000 vehicles, and left the M25 'compromised' for more than 120 hours
Dale Vince, the millionaire Labour donor, who helped finance Just Stop Oil
Int'l law expert: ICJ ruling is a legal obscenity from start to finish
Prof. Anne Bayefsky, Director of the Touro Institute on Human Rights, tells Arutz Sheva following ICJ ruling on "Israeli occupation": The UN has purportedly decided the outcome of all the items that were supposed to be subject to negotiation.
Pictured: International Court of Muslim Injustice, located in The Hague
Professor Anne Bayefsky, Director of the Touro Institute on Human Rights and the Holocaust and President of Human Rights Voices, commented to Arutz Sheva-Israel National News following the International Court of Justice's (ICJ) ruling which stated that Israel has illegally occupied Judea and Samaria and annexed Jerusalem.
"The so-called legal 'opinion' is a legal obscenity from start to finish," she said, noting, "The Court is the 'World Court' of the United Nations, a body controlled by an anti-Israel mob. The members of the Court are elected by the United Nations. Its legal 'experts' include alleged authorities from such legally-challenged places like China and Somalia."
"The ICJ President - the man who read the opinion aloud to the world dressed up in judicial robes with pomp and circumstance - was a Lebanese politician. Nawaf Salam was on the ballot for Prime Minister of Lebanon in the last two elections. Before that he was Lebanon's representative to the United Nations - a country that doesn't recognize Israel's right to exist," continued Prof. Bayefsky.
She further noted, "The request for the non-binding 'advisory opinion' from the Court came from the UN General Assembly. The question posed by the mob was framed as: Israel is guilty of the following violations of international law, so what are the consequences? ('What are the legal consequences arising from the ongoing violation by Israel of the right of the Palestinian people to...'). There were no Palestinian violations of anything on the agenda."
"The Court said that it would nevertheless reconsider Israel's guilt, proceeded to summarily declare Israel guilty, and then held forth on the consequences. How did it find Israel guilty? In its words, without the facts."
"The Court shockingly said: 'it is not necessary for the Court to make findings of fact with regard to specific incidents allegedly in violation of international law.' It was sufficient, they said, that the UN Secretary-General said so. That would be the same Secretary-General, António Guterres, who has repeatedly invented ways to backstop Hamas. As early as October 9, 2023, he said that the atrocities of October 7th did "not come in a vacuum," Prof. Bayefsky pointed out.
"Among the results, this grotesque kangaroo court said Israel was guilty of the crime against humanity of apartheid. It took them less than 250 words to come to this monumental conclusion, intended to create an avalanche of legal and political ramifications isolating and permanently debilitating the Jewish state," she said.
"The case also calls for the ethnic cleansing of Jews from whatever land Palestinian Arabs and the UN say belongs to Palestinians. 'All settlers' must leave, 'all Palestinians' must be allowed 'to return,' 'the wall' (that put an end to the suicide-bombing carnage) must be dismantled wherever they say so. What is actually 'Apartheid Palestine' is apparently just fine."
"'Palestinian' territory - which Israel is said to occupy, including Gaza and the West Bank - is suddenly defined by the Court to consist of 'a single territorial unit, the unity, contiguity and integrity of which are to be preserved.' It is not clear where the Jews are left in this actually non-existent contiguous Palestinian territory," said Prof. Bayefsky.
She also noted, "The Opinion has a whole section called 'Violence against Palestinians.' There is no section on violence against Israelis. In fact, there is no discussion or findings about violence, terrorism, rockets, suicide-bombing, knifings, vehicle-rammings, shootings, kidnappings and rapes against Israelis at all, ever. The only mention of 'gender-based violence' paints Palestinians as the victims. One more disgusting example from the UN of 'MeToo_Unless_Ur_A_Jew.'"
"The 'Opinion' rests on lethal historical fiction. The opinion says: 'On 14 May 1948, Israel proclaimed its independence with reference to the General Assembly resolution 181 (II); an armed conflict then broke out between Israel and a number of Arab States, and the Plan of Partition was not implemented.' 'Broke out' is the UN-euphemism for the attempted annihilation of the nascent Jewish state by Arab states and Palestinian Arabs."
"The opinion also says: 'In 1967, an armed conflict (also known as the 'Six-Day War') broke out between Israel and neighboring countries Egypt, Syria and Jordan' and again 'In October 1973, another armed conflict broke out between Egypt, Syria and Israel.'"
"'Broke out' is how the UN covers-up the systematic continuous campaign by Arabs to destroy the Jewish state from May 14, 1948 on, both in the halls of the UN and in the field. This blatant historical revisionism from the UN's highest legal body makes a mockery of its subsequent conclusions built on a mountain of lies," said Prof. Bayefsky.
"The Opinion is heavily reliant on lengthy discussions of Palestinian Arab 'self-determination' and associated 'rights.' There is no mention whatsoever of Jewish self-determination. The Court says the 'key element of the right to self-determination is the right of a people freely to determine its political status and to pursue its economic, social and cultural development.' Except for Jews. For Jews, the UN decides the political status of Jews in the Jewish state and authors an "opinion" clearly intended to drive BDS - sanctions, boycotts and global efforts to devalue and destroy such development in the case of Israel."
Prof. Bayefsky continued, "Moreover, a mere 75 years after the Holocaust, the UN Court twists the laws written in response to the atrocities committed against Jews, to demonize the refuge of the Jewish people today. The Court purported to apply the law to criminalize the Nazi deportation of Jews from their homes to concentration camps - in order to criminalize the voluntary movement of Jews within the land of Israel. This isn't law. It's war by another name. It's the face of modern antisemitism. Where a German judge, Georg Nolte, sits on a UN court, to apply the law for Nazis and their ilk to the Jews."
The real consequences of this ruling, she explained, are, "The so-called 'peace process' is dead, killed off by alleged peace-loving UN judges. From now on, Palestinians have zero incentive to negotiate anything. The UN has purportedly decided the outcome of all the items that were supposed to be subject to negotiation - as specified in Oslo and other agreements - territory, borders, settlements, Jerusalem. All the Palestinians have to do is sit back and enjoy the squeeze play. And foment more wars with impunity."
Trump's doctor reveals shocking new details about ex-president's bullet wound - and just how close he came to dying
A former physician to Donald Trump revealed it's an 'absolute miracle he wasn't killed' after examining his ear post-assassination attempt.
Ronny L Jackson, 57, met Trump, 78, in Bedminster, New Jersey following his near-death experience to 'personally check on him.'
'I am extremely thankful his life was spared,' Jackson wrote in a Saturday letter, uploaded to Truth Social by Trump. 'It was an absolute miracle he wasn't killed.'
The doctor said Trump sustained a two-centimeter - roughly one inch - gunshot wound during last week's attempted assassination
Jackson revealed the Republican nominee had to undergo a CT scan of his head in Pennsylvania after the bullet clipped his ear, and that his injury continues 'intermittent bleeding,' which requires him to keep his bandage on - which has since become a symbol of solidarity among his supporters.
The memo from former White House physician Ronny Jackson, now a conservative lawmaker from Texas, is one of the first detailed accounts of the injury Trump sustained when Thomas Matthew Crooks, 20, opened fire at a rally in Pennsylvania one week ago, killing one bystander and wounding two others.
Ronny L Jackson met Trump, 78, in Bedminster, New Jersey following his near-death experience to 'personally check on him.' He said: 'I am extremely thankful his life was spared. 'It was an absolute miracle he wasn't killed'
Jackson revealed the Republican nominee had to undergo a CT scan of his head after the bullet clipped his ear, and that his injury continues 'intermittent bleeding,' which requires him to keep his bandage on - which has since become a symbol of solidarity among his supporters
'There was initially significant bleeding, followed by marked swelling of the entire upper ear. The swelling has since resolved, and the wound is beginning to granulate and heal properly,' Jackson said in a letter.
He also said the former president will have to undergo additional exams, including a 'comprehensive hearing exam.'
The 45th President of the United States was initially treated at Butler Memorial Hospital in Pennsylvania, which Jackson praised for their 'outstanding care' and 'excellent job of evaluating him and treating his wound.'
'In summary, Former President Trump is doing well, and he is recovering as expected from the gunshot wound sustained last Saturday afternoon,' Jackson said.
Jackson, who retired from the Navy as a rear admiral last year, was first appointed to the White House medical unit under former president George W. Bush, then became the president's doctor in 2013, under Barack Obama
The medical physician went to Grand Rapids, Michigan, with Trump and will 'remain by his side throughout the weekend to provide any medical assistance he needs.'
Jackson will return to Washington DC on Monday, before heading back to Amarillo, Texas, where he lives, by the end of the week.
Crooks attempted to assassinate Trump as he spoke at a rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, last Saturday.
He was shot dead by Secret Service sharpshooters after his shots grazed Trump's ear, killed rally attendee Corey Comperatore, and wounded another.
Jackson, who retired from the Navy as a rear admiral last year, was first appointed to the White House medical unit under former president George W. Bush, then became the president's doctor in 2013, under Barack Obama.
But he gained national fame after effusively praising Trump's health and 'great genes' in 2018, declaring: 'I told the president that if he had a healthier diet over the last 20 years, he might live to be 200 years old.'
During his campaign for Congress, Jackson positioned himself as a close Trump supporter, endorsing the narrative that Obama had 'weaponized' the government to spy on Trump.
He also broke ranks with public health officials on the coronavirus, saying that mask-wearing should be a 'personal choice,' and he questioned Joe Biden's cognitive capacity to run for president.
Trump put out a statement on the shooting on his Truth Social page ...
'I was shot with a bullet that pierced the upper part of my right ear,' said the former president.
'I knew immediately that something was wrong in that I heard a whizzing sound, shots, and immediately felt the bullet ripping through the skin. Much bleeding took place, so I realized then what was happening.'
The Republican presidential candidate revealed he was not warned about his attacker by the Secret Service - despite agents receiving worrying reports from rally-goers before Trump even got on stage.
Trump said that 'nobody mentioned' Thomas Matthew Crooks, the 20-year-old gunman, despite the fact that he was being monitored for 'an hour' before the shooting.
'Nobody mentioned it,' the former president said. 'Nobody said it was a problem.'
'[They] could've said, "Let's wait for 15, 20 minutes, 5 minutes." Nobody said…I think that was a mistake,' he added.
Trump, along with the rest of the United States, later questioned how Crooks could have possibly made it onto the roof to begin with.
'How did somebody get on that roof?' Trump questioned. 'And why wasn't he reported, because people saw he was on that roof.'
Trump revealed that security agents were alerted that someone was on the roof with a gun before he even walked out on stage - and did not stop him from doing so.
'When you have Trumpers screaming, the woman in the red shirt, 'There's a man on the roof,' and other people, 'There's a man on the roof and who's got a gun,'…that was quite a bit before I walked on the stage. And I would've thought someone would've done something about it,' Trump said.
Secret Service officials had refused to provide Trump with additional security during the two years prior to last weekend's assassination.
The ex-president's request for more agents and magnetometers at events he attended was denied.
Each request was rejected by senior officials.
Trump was receiving less protection than other former presidents and major party presidential candidates.
Secret Service officials refused to provide Donald Trump with additional security in the two years prior to last weekend's assassination attempt
The Secret Service's botched job has been described as 'an enormous security failure' and many are calling for the resignation of the agency's director, Kimberly Cheatle.
Crooks' attempt on Trump's life was enabled by multiple instances of negligence on behalf of the security agents.
Somehow, Crooks was able to fly a drone over the rally site the same day as the event.
Additionally, he was spotted and then watched by law enforcement at the Trump rally site - because they sensed something wasn't right - and yet they managed to lose sight of him before the carnage unfolded.
Routine checks would have eliminated all potential threats - which calls into question the standard of the Secret Service under the current administration.
The Secret Service's botched job has been described as 'an enormous security failure' and many are calling for the resignation of the agency's director, Kimberly Cheatle (pictured)
Furious US senators took it upon themselves to confront Cheatle as she herself hid behind her own security agents, after making a 'cover-your-a** call' to senators about the shooting.
Fury had erupted after Cheatle and her top aides briefed senators in a private conference call about the attempted assassination of President Donald Trump.
Senator Barrasso called the meeting a '100% cover-your-a** briefing.'
Cheatle was unable to explain how agents failed to stop Thomas Matthew Crooks from clambering onto a roof and shooting at Trump from less than 150 yards away – even though the gunman was spotted by law enforcement 20 minutes before the shots were fired.
'No one has taken responsibility. No one has been held responsible. Someone has died. The president was almost killed. The head of the Secret Service needs to go,' Barrasso said later.
Now as more fingers are pointed at Cheatle, new allegations have revealed the depth of dysfunction within the service, with Department of Homeland Security whistleblowers claiming the majority of Trump's security detail on Saturday were 'not even Secret Service' and were 'unfamiliar with standard protocols'.
Republican Senator Josh Hawley wrote to the DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas on Friday outlining those allegations and a litany of other claimed security flaws: 'Detection canines were not used to monitor entry and detect threats in the usual manner.
'Individuals without proper designations were able to gain access to backstage areas. Department personnel did not appropriately police the security buffer around the podium and were also not stationed at regular intervals around the event's security perimeter.'
The failings are a symptom of an 'agency in crisis' after decades of understaffing and corrupt promotion and hiring practices.
Cheatle, 53, was appointed director of the Secret Service by Biden in 2022, after heading up global security at PepsiCo.
Announcing her selection, President Joe Biden revealed that 'Kim' had 'served on my security detail when I was Vice President' and he and Jill Biden 'came to trust her judgment and counsel'.
While she was at PepsiCo, she was awarded a Presidential Rank Award for 'exceptional performance' by Joe Biden.
Cheatle had been personally tapped for the role as head of Secret Service by First Lady Jill Biden's top aide, Anthony Bernal, who is 'obsessed' with DEI.
'Cheatle had served on Jill Biden's second lady detail and Anthony pushed for her,' one source said. 'I heard at the time she was being considered for director that Anthony had pushed her forward as an option,' another added.
Cheatle has spoken openly about her goals of raising the number of the agency's female recruits to 30 percent of all new hires by the year 2030.
Cheatle said in an interview on ABC News days after the shooting that agents did not secure the roof from which the assassin fired because, 'That building in particular has a sloped roof, at its highest point... And so, there's a safety factor that would be considered there that we wouldn't want to put somebody up on a sloped roof.'
Critics, like former FBI Assistant Director Chris Swecker said that explanation was 'absurd.'
Cheatle (above, right) has spoken openly about her goals of raising the number of the agency's female recruits to 30 percent of all new hires by the year 2030.
Cheatle was promoted due to her close relationship with the Bidens.
The danger is that personal connection is 'not a great basis on which to select someone' for that job.
'The Secret Service have been hemorrhaging staff for a long time'.
'Many, many agents within the Secret Service thought that within the service the best people weren't being promoted, it's more about who you knew,' he said. 'It's an agency in crisis.'
Agents were accused of improperly intervening in the investigation into whether the President's son Hunter Biden lied on federal firearms forms to buy a revolver at a Delaware gun shop in 2018.
In June, Hunter was convicted on three felony charges related to the purchase.
But early on in that case, FBI documents revealed, that the gun store owner claimed that Secret Service agents showed up at his business and asked to remove the documents Hunter has signed.
The shop-owner refused and the agents allegedly left.
The government transparency group Judicial Watch has obtained hundreds of pages of internal communications between Secret Service officials about the alleged incident.
The documents revealed that agency officials discussed media reports of the incident.
One agent found it 'odd' that the agency would be involved in the investigation since the Biden Family was not receiving Secret Service protection at the time.
Another official responded: 'Maybe we were asked for a favor?'
'These new documents suggest that one can't take at face value the Secret Service's denial that it wasn't involved in the Hunter Biden gun cover-up,' Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton told DailyMail.com at the time.
Cheatle herself was then dragged into the debacle surrounding Hunter's trials in September 2023, when the House Oversight Committee ordered her to make her employees available for interview after whistleblowers alleged Secret Service agents tipped off the Bidens about an IRS investigation into Hunter.
Additionally, IRS supervisory agent Gary Shapley and FBI supervisory special agent Joe Gordon alleged that they were told by FBI brass to wait for Secret Service permission before they could go to Hunter's home to interview him.
According to Shapley and Gordon that Secret Service call never came.
Following Trump's near-death, Leavitt says there is no way Cheatle will be able to stay in her post.
'The difference between life and death in Saturday's attempted assassination of former President Trump was centimeters and a slight wind,' he said on X.
And as fury mounts, he says it is not a question of if Cheatle resigns, but when.
