Why did Ratcliffe defence fail where Kingsnorth Six succeeded? | Mike Schwarz | Environment | guardian.co.uk

The Greenpeace defendants were tried for criminal damage to the power station's chimney and argued that they had "lawful excuse" for their actions: they sought to protect property around the world threatened by climate change. Again, their vivid accounts of melting ice caps, expanding oceans and deforestation – and resulting erratic weather, flooding and rising sea levels - were supported by expert evidence.

Among those who testified was James Hansen, one of the world's leading climate scientists who, in evidence to the US Congress in the 1980s, first drew attention to man-made climate change.
...
More seriously, one might speculate what has happened in the two years since the Maidstone verdict in 2008? In the science world, "climategate" has been exploited by "contrarians" to reduce the proportion of the population who are concerned about climate change, even as mean world temperatures rise. Internationally, the Copenhagen and Cancún summits have failed to provide legally binding and effective agreements to tackle climate change. In the UK, the focus is on the reduction of the deficit through pinching financial short-termism. In an austere new world, the public may be less receptive to arguments of morality and altruism which recognise our responsibility to the world community and future generations.