On August 5, 2022, a group of Just Stop Oil activists attempted to protest at Manchester Airport, aiming to create a significant media sensation. The defendants, Daniel Knorr (22), Leonorah Ward (22), Indigo Rumbelow (30), Margaret Reid (54), and Noah Crane (19), all deny conspiring to intentionally cause a public nuisance.

Early in the morning, four of these activists were intercepted on their way to the airport from an Airbnb in Gatley, Stockport. They possessed tools including angle grinders, bolt cutters, superglue, sand, and protest banners as revealed in court at Minshull Street Crown Court.

As the trial continued into its second week, Daniel Knorr testified in his defense. He discussed his background, stating he studied biochemistry at Oxford University and was involved in student groups focused on climate change before joining Just Stop Oil, which he described as a ‘resistance group’. He emphasized the group believes in civil disorder for promoting change, citing historical examples like the Suffragettes and Martin Luther King.

Mr. Knorr reiterated that Just Stop Oil employs non-violent protest methods and noted their intention to target airports as a means of drawing attention to fossil fuels. He explained that Manchester Airport was strategically chosen due to its proximity to their residences and its symbolic representation of the fossil fuel industry.

In early July, all four arrested activists participated in a group chat via Signal to discuss their protest plans. This included evaluating the legal risks and in-person meetings in London to finalize their strategy. Mr. Knorr clarified their intent, stating, “Target is the wrong word. We were going to protest at Manchester Airport... We believed we would create a large sensation in the media.”

In court, it was revealed that during their approach to the airport, the activists were seen walking towards a Nissan Micra linked to a known associate. When they were arrested, they were attempting to hide the car keys after discarding them under another vehicle.

Mr. Knorr described that had they arrived at the airport, Ms. Ward's role would have involved checking Flight Radar for a window when no flights were scheduled to land. He stated that she was prepared to notify authorities of their intention to enter the airfield as a safety measure.

He elaborated on their plan to breach the perimeter fence using the tools they brought, intending to take photos that could attract media coverage. Regarding this aspiration, he remarked, “Just because it might not work, it doesn't make it not the right thing to do.”

All defendants continue to deny conspiracy to intentionally cause a public nuisance. The case is ongoing.

Proceeding