When Thomas Mair’s trial began, many people queried why he was not being prosecuted as a terrorist. A frequent comment, on social media, was that he would have been, had he been a Muslim.
The answer is that Mair was indeed prosecuted as a terrorist, and this was made clear during preliminary hearings. This is the reason that he was tried in London, rather than Yorkshire.
But he was charged with murder, a common-law offence, rather than with an offence under counter-terrorism legislation.
Crown prosecutors did not use the word “terrorism” during the trial because they believed the jurors should be asked simply whether they believed he committed the crime or not, rather than also be expected to consider his motives. The killers of Lee Rigby were prosecuted in the same way.
During the trial, the crown did tell the jury that its case was that the murder was politically or ideologically motivated.
Following the guilty verdict, this allowed the judge to sentence Mair as a murderer who is also a terrorist.
Immediately after the case, the Crown Prosecution Service said that Mair had been convicted “of the terrorist murder of Jo Cox”.
Sue Hemming, head of special crime and counter-terrorism at the Crown Prosecution Service, added: “Mair has offered no explanation for his actions, but the prosecution was able to demonstrate that, motivated by hate, his premeditated crimes were nothing less than acts of terrorism designed to advance his twisted ideology.”
.jpg?w=600)
