The National Gallery spent just \u00a3150 retouching the frame of Van Gogh\u2019s Sunflowers after two climate activists threw soup on it \u2013 a stunt which saw the pair convicted of criminal damage estimated at between \u00a38,000 and \u00a310,000.<\/p>\n
In October 2022, Just Stop Oil (JSO) activists Anna Holland and Phoebe Plummer threw tins of Heinz tomato soup at the iconic artwork from 1888, before glueing themselves to the gallery wall, in an action which grabbed headlines worldwide. The painting itself, at the time valued at \u00a386m, was protected by a thick pane of glass. Its 17th-century Italian frame was not.<\/p>\n
Shortly after the JSO action, the painting was removed from the gallery, its frame touched up, then put back on display<\/a> a few hours later. In an email solicited via a Freedom of Information request and seen by Novara Media, the museum\u2019s head of framing Peter Schade estimated the cost of the frame\u2019s retouching at \u201c\u00a3150 in staff time and materials\u201d. The gallery also spent around \u00a3250 in labour time restoring the wall, as well as \u00a335 on a tin of paint.<\/p>\n When asked by Novara Media whether it has plans to perform a full restoration on the frame, the gallery declined to comment.<\/p>\n Southwark crown court heard that the cost to retouch the frame such that it could be rehung was \u201cnot substantial\u201d (the \u00a3150 figure came up in the trial, but was not widely reported), and that a more extensive repair would cost much more. However, Judge Christopher Hehir ruled that the value of the damage was irrelevant for the jury. Judge Hehir also barred any mention of the climate crisis in Holland and Plummer\u2019s defence.<\/p>\n Holland and Plummer were found guilty and received a combined three and a half years\u2019 sentence.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Listen to Committed \u2013 a four-part podcast about Britain\u2019s jailed climate activists, including Anna Holland and Phoebe Plummer \u2013 here<\/a>.<\/p>\n The minimal amount spent on retouching the frame points to the sometimes cavernous gap between how English law assesses criminal damage and costs in the real world.<\/p>\n When estimating the value of criminal damage, Blackstone\u2019s Criminal Practice \u2013 the manual used by criminal lawyers \u2013 advises practitioners use \u201cthe probable market cost of repairs\u201d (in this case, a full restoration) \u201cor the probable market replacement cost, whichever is the less\u201d. The law does not have to consider the actual amount paid to repair or retouch a damaged item.<\/p>\n When sentencing the pair, Judge Hehir \u2013 known for his harsh treatment of climate activists<\/a> \u2013 cited another reason for handing Holland and Plummer such long jail terms (20 months and two years respectively). \u201cIt is not the value of the damage caused to the frame that is the most serious aspect of your offending,\u201d Hehir said<\/a>. \u201cYou came within the thickness of a pane of glass of irreparably damaging or even destroying this priceless treasure, and that must be reflected in the sentences I pass.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n The severity of Holland and Plummer\u2019s sentences were controversial<\/a> at the time. Following the sentencing, human rights lawyer Aabhinav Tyagi wrote a post<\/a> for JSO\u2019s blog criticising Judge Hehir\u2019s remarks, in which he\u2019d suggested that the pair had come close to damaging the painting. \u201cBy prioritising speculative risks over concrete facts,\u201d Tyagi wrote, \u201cthe judge imposed a sentence that does not reflect the severity of the actual offence. Sentencing should address the specific harm caused by the defendants\u2019 actions, not punish them for imagined outcomes.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThis deviation sets a dangerous legal precedent where individuals can be penalised for potential consequences rather than their proven conduct,\u201d he added.<\/p>\n On the day of Holland and Plummer\u2019s sentencing in September last year, three JSO activists targeted Sunflowers again<\/a> in another soup-throwing action.<\/p>\n