EXTRACT: THE FEMINIST REVOLT PART ONE - MEETINGS, BLOODY MEETINGS

 

The court now moved on to those cases the Attorney General hoped to win. These related to the women refusing to provide samples, or evade enslavement.

At six minutes past twelve the jury in the case of Johnson v Johnson found for the plaintiff, Henry Johnson and the court ordered his daughter, Elizabeth, to provide a urine sample for analysis as part of her enslavement process. The judge had instructed the jury to consider whether Henry Johnson had a statutory right to enslave his daughter, under the terms of the Act. If they decided that he did, and no evidence had been brought to refute that claim, then he had a right to expect her to comply with the request for a sample. The judge said she could only legally remain free if she was able to demonstrate that she did not meet the terms of enslavement in the Act; examples could be that she was pregnant or under the age of eighteen, or had, at some point, been married, or could show that she was not in fact his daughter.

When the jury returned its verdict, the Judge told Elizabeth Johnson that if she now refused the sample then she was in contempt of court. That would result in her immediate enslavement. Elizabeth was taken away and the sample was duly provided. She was not pregnant and was led away from the court naked and in chains, as the registered slave of her father.

The court continued to the case of Crabtree v Greater Manchester Police. Shirley Crabtree had absconded from her father's home rather than attend the local solicitor to be enslaved. She had gone to a friend across the road and had then been arrested and returned to her father. At this point she made an official complaint against the GMP for unlawful imprisonment. The Independent Police Complaints Commission had stepped in only to find that the GMP itself had stopped the enslavement. This was simply an acknowledgement that the Attorney General and indeed the various police forces wanted a test case on their power to arrest and detain women who had left home in order to avoid enslavement. Shirley was told that the Attorney General would initiate a case on her behalf, whether she liked it or not. If she didn't like it, then she would have to provide a sample and she would in all probability be enslaved. Her only hope was the court case.

The judge threw the case out before it even reached the jury. He stated that Fred Crabtree's right to enslave his daughter meant that she had to attend the solicitor's office with him. He was entitled to ask for police help when she absconded. Therefore the police were right to arrest her.

The court then moved on to its last case of the day. In Dunkley v Atherton, Helen Dunkley was challenging the legality of her enslavement by her husband. The grounds for her action were that the Solicitor, Richard Atherton, had used a taser to subdue her and then held her in bondage till she delivered the sample. She alleged wrongful imprisonment and actual bodily harm. Her enslavement was held in suspense, pending the result of her case. In his summing up the judge instructed the jury that if they believed that Mr. Atherton was acting to fulfil a legitimate application for Mrs. Dunkley's enslavement, then they had to find that Helen Dunkley was obliged to provide a sample (Johnson v Johnson). They would also have to find that Mr. Atherton was entitled to request that sample, as the duly appointed enslaving officer and that he could use reasonable force to obtain it. The judge told them that 'reasonable force', was action sufficient to obtain the sample but that would not cause permanent injury or death, thus depriving Mr. Dunkley of the full benefits of his slave. Mrs Dunkley had produced no evidence of permanent harm and a doctor had certified her as being now perfectly fit.

They jury followed the judge's directions and half an hour later Helen Dunkley was led out by her husband, naked, gagged and in chains, past the rows of journalists and TV crews. Her photos and video footage would dominate the headlines on News Bulletins that evening and the next day's newspapers.