This is the best summary I could come up with:

Mr Justice Saini ruled at the high court last month there was no basis to take action against Warner, 69, for holding up the sign informing jurors of their right to acquit a defendant based on their conscience.

Saini in his ruling accused the government’s solicitor general of “significantly mischaracterising” the evidence, when his lawyers alleged Warner behaved in an intimidating manner, confronting potential jurors outside the court.

His ruling also reiterated that there was a well established principle in law of jury equity; a de facto power to acquit a defendant regardless of directions from the judge.

Warner’s placard read: “Jurors, you have an absolute right to acquit a defendant according to your conscience.” She acted after judge Silas Reid forbade protesters from mentioning climate breakdown as part of their defences.

On learning of the further legal action by the government to pursue her for contempt of court – which could carry a two year prison term or a fine – Warner said: “It feels really shocking, to be honest.

She held the sign on the first day of a trial for public nuisance of members of the climate campaign group Insulate Britain.

The original article contains 449 words, the summary contains 194 words. Saved 57%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

As a long time supporter of jury nullification I'm biased, but it's crazy that he's appealing this. The sign was quoting a plaque that sits outside the old bailey ffs