Kevin in the first of his postings above states:

"I can't understand how they could find a jury where all twelve of them voted to convict on this."

I am equally surprised that the jury at his first trial could not reach a verdict. From the "Guardian" report on the first trial

"Defending himself, Mr Kelleher, 37, an events organiser from Isleworth, west London, admitted "there was no dispute" he had "lopped off" the head of the 7ft statue at London's Guildhall gallery on July 3 - a case of criminal damage."

Also from the "Guardian" report, I find the directions given to the jury quite bizarre:

"Directing the jury, Mr Justice Aikens said they could only decide that Mr Kelleher was legally justified in behaving in this way if they felt his well-being and that of his two-year-old son were immediately endangered by the economic and political system personified by Baroness Thatcher."

As the offence - i.e. causing criminal damage - potentially could result in a prison sentence, Mr Kelleher's concerns regarding the economic security and well being of his two-year-old son would appear to be slightly arse-about-face.

Viewing the economic and political system personified by Baroness Thatcher objectively, results in recognition that the country in general was a damn sight better off at the end of her tenure than it was in 1979, the political system she did not change one jot. The charge of endangering the political system of the UK would be easier to level at our current government, personified by President-in-waiting Tony Blair.

The toppling of statues in Eastern Europe was the result of popular change of political regime, the statues by and large were of Soviet leaders who "liberated" Czechs, Poles, Hungarians, East Germans saw as a reminder of Soviet occupation and tyranny. As such the two cases are not comparable.

From his closing speech at the original trial Mr. Kelleher:

"....implored the jury to acquit him, saying "you will have martyrs' crowns placed upon your heads and your names written in the history books as the people who took back power from the establishment"."

A plea of "guilty but insane" would probably have served him better.