A Just Stop Oil activist who invaded the track during last year’s Silverstone Grand Prix has told jurors he studied the Formula 1 rulebook and videos of previous races to make the protest as safe as possible.
Louis McKechnie, who is on trial alongside five other protesters accused of posing a risk of serious harm to F1 drivers and marshals, said the group planned to “bait out” a red flag and then enter a section of track with clear sightlines.
McKechnie, 22, denies a charge of causing a public nuisance by sitting on Silverstone’s Wellington Straight as two F1 cars approached him at a reduced speed following a crash on the first bend.
Giving evidence at Northampton Crown Court on Wednesday, McKechnie said he felt completely safe before being dragged away by a marshal, and the protest had not been dangerous.
McKechnie, who grew up in Weymouth in Dorset but now lives in Manchester, told jurors he became involved in the environmental movement when he went on Extinction Rebellion marches while studying mechanical engineering at Bournemouth University.
He told the court on Wednesday: “I saw the politicians ignoring the scientists, which felt like a recipe for disaster.
“I felt Just Stop Oil addresses a key issue which needs to be solved immediately.
“Historically this (direct action) is what works. It worked for the suffragettes, it worked for Gandhi… we are using their tactics because nothing else works.”
Answering questions from defence barrister Robbie Stern, McKechnie said Just Stop Oil is calling for an end to new oil and gas licences and a “just transition to renewable energy”.
Planning for the Silverstone action started around two-and-a-half months before last July’s Grand Prix, the defendant said, telling jurors: “It started off as Zoom calls and group texts and sometimes in-person meetings.
“Then we went there (Silverstone) in-person to see it and spent a day there.”
Describing “research” conducted before the protest, including viewing hundreds of hours of video on the internet and reading the Formula 1 rulebook, McKechnie added: “I watched every single race that’s been held at Silverstone over the last 20 years.
“I scoured the internet for every piece of information I could get about the track, the red flag system and also the drivers.
“The part of the track that we went on had a much lower proportion of crashes than other parts of the track.”
The Wellington Straight also had cameras, said McKechnie, who told the court: “We picked a part of the track which would give the cars plenty of time to pass where we were, before we went on.
“On the Wellington Straight the racing line was on the far side of the track.
“Basically we used that understanding to plan it (the protest) to be as safe as possible.
“As soon as there is an obstruction on the track, within about a second or two a red flag will come up.”
McKechnie said of his decision to leave the grass verge and sit down on the Wellington Straight: “The red flag was out. You could see it under the bridge.
“I knew I was safe and secure where I was on the track. I understood that where I was would be perfectly fine.”
Asked about the allegation that he had created a risk of serious harm, McKechnie said: “I think it’s completely false.
“Those drivers are the best drivers in the world. They would not even have flinched at something like this.”
During cross-examination, McKechnie was asked if he conceded the possibility that his actions had been dangerous.
The defendant replied: “No. I concede that it might have looked dangerous to someone who doesn’t know about this stuff in great detail.”
The trial continues.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article