A jury at the Old Bailey has failed to reach verdicts against seven pro-Palestine activists accused of criminal damage and violent disorder over a Palestine Action-linked action at an Elbit Systems weapons factory in Filton. Another defendant, who absconded while on temporary release, was convicted in absentia.
Eight members of the group known as the “Filton 25” have been on trial at the Old Bailey since June 15, each facing charges of criminal damage and violent disorder.
After more than 38 hours of deliberations, jurors refused to convict Madeleine Norman, Hannah Davidson, Teuta Hoxha, Ola Alexandra Herbich, Ian Sanders, William Nyerere Plastow and Yulia Brigadirova on the remaining charges against them, resulting in no verdicts on those counts.
The jury has now been discharged. The Crown Prosecution Service will now need to decide whether to seek a retrial. A hearing has been set for September 14 to decide the future of the case.
The accused had previously been formally acquitted of aggravated burglary, the most serious charge they faced, after six of their co-defendants were acquitted of that charge by a jury in February 2026.
The defendants were accused of assisting or encouraging an action at Elbit Systems’ Filton site in August 2024, during which activists allegedly destroyed equipment, including quadcopter drones.
The court heard none of the defendants were at Elbit during raid but were alleged to have helped to plan it, including by compiling an equipment list, reconnaissance, purchasing tools and weapons used by others, and co-ordinating the break-in and its filming.
Subscribe to our newsletter and stay updated on the latest news and updates from around the Muslim world!
Elbit Systems is Israel’s largest weapons company and has faced repeated protests and direct action from Palestine Action over its links to the Israeli military and the war in Gaza.
The Filton 25 are a group of 25 pro-Palestine activists, mainly associated with Palestine Action, who were arrested and prosecuted in connection with an action targeting Elbit Systems‘ weapons facility in Filton, near Bristol.
Four other Filton 25 defendants — Samuel Corner, Leona Kamio, Charlotte Head and Fatema Zainab Rajwani — were sentenced under terrorism legislation following convictions for criminal damage just days before the latest trial began.
Palestine Action was proscribed as a terrorist organisation by the UK government on 5 July 2025. The decision was met with large scale criticism from lawyers, human rights groups and politicians and has faced continued protests to this day from activists pressuring the Home Office to reverse the proscription.
Defendants motivations
During the trial, the jury asked the court whether the defendants would also be sentenced as terrorists if convicted.
The judge told them that sentencing was a matter for him to consider and was not something the jury should take into account when reaching its verdict.
The question came after the four co-defendants had received sentences following their criminal damage convictions.
The latest defendants had already spent lengthy periods on remand before standing trial, with some held for up to 18 months.
Several defendants gave evidence about their backgrounds and why they became involved with Palestine Action – a direct action protest group which in now a proscribed organisation in the UK.
Madeleine “Maddy” Norman, 31, a classics graduate from Oxford University, had spent 554 days in prison before her trial.
She told the court that she had volunteered with refugees and joined the Palestine Solidarity Campaign in 2021 before becoming involved with Palestine Action following protests at Elbit’s former weapons factory in Oldham.
Norman had previously taken action against Elbit’s drone factory in Shenstone and occupied Leonardo’s weapons factory in Edinburgh.
Speaking about the six activists who entered the Filton site, she told the jury they “were acting in line with their principles and integrity. With who they want to be in the world and the action they want to take”.
She added: “In 20 minutes, six activists had broken into Elbit’s most secure facility and dismantled 40 drones, battle simulators and more. I was obviously incredibly proud.”
Norman said there had been “no need to encourage anyone”, adding: “People were devastated by the genocide and they had come to take action.”
Hannah Davidson, 53, previously worked with horses and for charities supporting disabled and underprivileged children before building an art business during the Covid lockdown.
She told jurors that after October 7, 2023, she became increasingly distressed by images and videos emerging from Gaza.
“I would see mothers scrape up tiny pieces of their children,” she said, adding that she had also seen graphic footage that deeply affected her.
Davidson said she found it difficult to continue promoting her art online because, in her words, “it felt disingenuous to be advertising my art on Instagram and then the next thing you scroll to is bits of children”. She subsequently joined Palestine Action.
Davidson also became emotional while describing a counter-terrorism police raid in August 2024 and her subsequent 18 months on remand.
“They didn’t call a lawyer for me… We just disappeared,” she said.
Teuta Hoxha, 30, studied English Literature and was previously shortlisted for a BBC award for a journalistic piece about the Grenfell Tower disaster. She later worked as a carer for disabled adults and children.
Hoxha was arrested by counter-terrorism police in November 2024 and spent around 15 months in prison before trial. During that time, she went on two hunger strikes, with the second lasting 56 days.
Before joining Palestine Action, she said she had written to the Home Office and Foreign Office, contacted local mosques and organised fundraising stalls for Palestinians in Gaza.
“I felt I was raising money for people who were going to be killed anyway,” she told the jury.
Hoxha said the “straw that broke the camel’s back” was seeing footage of a Palestinian man holding plastic bags containing the remains of his son.
She said this led her to conclude that “if a state wants to exterminate a group of people and it’s in the interests of another state to collude, they will.”
After searching online for “action for Palestine”, she came across Palestine Action and subsequently joined the group. She later took part in a blockade of Elbit’s Bristol headquarters, which was subsequently closed.
Hoxha said her role at a safe house on the night of the Filton action was to assist with setting up GoPro cameras.
Describing those who entered the factory, she told the jury: “They are brave, spectacular young people with the moral clarity to damage weapons that have left children without parents.”
Defence committee responds
Responding to the outcome, the Filton 25 Defence Committee said the prosecution had failed to secure convictions against those defendants despite what it described as an attempt by the state to “justify the proscription of Palestine Action.”
“Today’s verdict comes after each of the defendants already spent up to 18 months in prison without convictions. They were all held on remand as ‘terrorist prisoners’ for well beyond the pre-trial custody time limit of six months. Today’s verdict highlights how the prolonged remand of Palestine Action activists is a way of punishing people before they are able to face trial.
“When six of the Filton 25 were retried, the court prevented the defendants from explaining their motivations and effectively gagged them, denying them the right to defend themselves. Another retrial would not only be a huge waste of resources, but it will be used as a cynical attempt to manipulate the court process in order to convict the defendants.
“The defendants who were vindicated today, were accused of encouraging or assisting the action against Elbit’s Filton weapons factory, which led to the destruction of over 40 Israeli weapons, including quadcopter drones. Each one of those drones could have massacred hundreds of Palestinians. Yet for destroying them and undoubtedly saving lives, four Palestine Action activists were sentenced as terrorists, despite only being convicted of criminal damage.
“During the trial, the jury asked the court if the defendants would be sentenced as terrorists if they were convicted of criminal damage. This clearly demonstrates the unwillingness of jurors to be pawns in a politically manipulated court process designed to facilitate the imprisonment of protestors as terrorists, without the opportunity to defend themselves against the real accusation levelled against them.”
