Why screen Injustice ?

A lot of misinformation as part of a campaign to stop this film being screened has been spread around, especially in respect to screenings. This is what people who have been in the film, seen the film and organised screenings screenings have to say.

“We are writing regarding the forthcoming screening of Injustice at Oxford Brookes University. We understand there’s a challenge to the screening going ahead.

Having been in the film/ held screenings/ participated in panels, we believe that the issues raised in Injustice are of grave public importance.

We haven’t witnessed a detriment to the welfare of anyone from watching the film, nor at any screening or in the film have we witnessed the director talking about his case or attacking victims of crime.

As the director will not be in attendance, we do hope you will base your decision on the contents of the film and not what is said about it, and invite you to review it before making your decision.

Yours sincerely,”

Michaela Booth, student who spend time in prison
Toni Wood,Salford University
Alex Dunedin, Ragged University
Sally Halsall, Jengba campaigner
Giulia Zampini, Greenwich University
Lord Simon Hughes, Liberal Democrat Peer
Charlotte Henry, Jengba campaigner, in Injustice
George Herbert
Emma Hetherington, student
Michael Irwin, writer who served time in prison
Gethin Jones, Unlocking Potential – served time in prison, in Injustice
Karolina, prisoner’s family, in Injustice
Tom King, therapist who served time in prison
Jo Lear, student
Marcus, prisoner’s family, Injustice
Ruth McFarlane, Open University, Students in a Secure Environment
Claire Melville
Michael O’Brien, panellist who served time in prison
Deirdre O’Neill, Inside Film, in Injustice
Dr Lewis Owens
Faith Spear, Former IMB Chair, in Injustice
Tommy, served time in prison, in Injustice
Hannah Uglow, Solicitor, Kent Law Clinic
Peter Woolf, Restorative justice campaigner

“One of the themes of the film is about society’s inability to move on from the labelling of someone as a criminal.

The film, in part, addresses the idea of the rehabilitative function of the criminal justice system and the entrenched approach to ‘criminals’ in UK society. Its function is to invite debate and creative solutions to how we as a society perceive and manage those caught in the system and how society looks at its own responses and responsibility in this area.

The film has no relation to the Director’s case – by seeking to rely on that to oppose a screening is to, in effect, do exactly what society as a whole does to stop people with convictions from moving on.

The film is an example of where someone who, having been convicted and having served the punishment – has reacted positively. To shy away from sharing a piece which analyses the environment which affects us all – solely due to the sad events which led to conviction is an example of how society’s entrenched approach fails so many. This film is a spring board for healthy and important critical discussion. No one wishes to revisit the unrelated background – only to look to the debate and its future.”

Hannah Uglow, Solicitor, Kent Law Clinic