Colston 4 verdict sparks debate among Adver readers

The Nythe resident suggested that "unsavoury" reminders of the "dark side of history "should be left standing, like how some concentration camps set up by the Nazis were kept so that future generations could learn about them.

This opinion sparked a heated debate among our readers, with one pointing out that the Edward Colston statue was built long after slavery had been abolished, and another mentioning that no historical context was included on it.

Some supported the four Bristolians found not guilty of criminal damage by a jury while others were outraged by the verdict and a few had mixed views on the situation.

Kirsty Grant: "If new signage that put the statue, person and history into context had been allowed, it would have been an important and educational artefact about this country’s role in the slave trade.

"Given that every attempt to do that legally was blocked, I can understand the frustration and anger. Having said that, the vandals should be responsible for the cost of removing the statue from where they chucked it."

Royston Cartwright: "Wise words from Dru Marland - 'Down in Bristol Harbour, Lies a fallen god of tin, Where the ripples from his slavers, have at last caught up with him'."

Lyn Saunders: "The past is the past, it can't be changed. It's part of our history."

Ron Lewis: "Anybody could see this was blanket criminal damage and the law has just let them get away with it. Sends out the wrong message and only will release another can of worms."

Shezer Sherrin: "Nobody who is offended by the verdict knew who Edward Colston was before the toppling, so maybe more statues of slave traders need to be torn down?

"It was moved into a museum so I really have no idea why you're all saying 'history needs to be learnt from' when we're doing exactly that, by adding context to the statue."

Alan Wilson: "Wanton destruction, full stop.

"Imagine if some people wanted to tear down the Isambard Kingdom Brunel Statue in the town centre. Would the police stand back and let it happen and the courts let them get away with a not guilty verdict?

"In my opinion, the Bristol verdict sends out entirely the wrong message about any statue standing across the UK that people don't like and want removed."

John Fowler: "It's true you can't change the past, but you don't have to glorify the slave traders for the present and future generations."

Sam Cleere: "Imagine being sad that people weren’t punished for chucking a statue of a slave trader in a river."

Simon Batchelor: "Got to separate the crime from the cause. The right thing done the wrong way. You can't let mob rule decide what's acceptable. They should have been convicted."

Marius Boda: "Based on this, you can clear all English/UK history, based on slavery acts. "The empire was built on other nations' blood. Let them stay and remind us, good or bad."

Jacob Leighfield: "Everyone forgets this statue was put up in 1895. Was anyone still under the illusion that slavery wasn’t wrong by then? No. They put it up to intimidate people, like Confederate war statues in the Deep South."

Andy Curtis: "Better rip the whole of Bristol down as the city was built on the back of the slave trade. They broke the law very simple and should have been punished accordingly. This just allows other to do the same again."

Richard Green: "The destruction and removal of his statue now means that everyone in the country knows who Colston was and what he did.

"The act of its removal was a more effective tool for education than the statue alone ever was - and having been defaced, it would certainly be a more interesting museum exhibit than to be left on display in Bristol.

"On the whole I disagree with vandalism, however history has often been made by revolutionary acts that break the laws of their day.

"The tearing down of Saddam Hussein's statue during the Iraq war springs to mind. Few that profess their support for the slaver's statue would be quite so pleased to argue for the restoration of that one."