A good result for once.
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/love-activists-jailed-re-read-10076956

I thought the following comments made just the judge were very interesting :-

“The cost to the police was in excess of £91,500.
“That money would have been used by the city to maintain law and order and promote the wellbeing of the people of the city.
“Some of those inside the building damaged it both by spraying graffiti and by actual acts of destruction, which I am told will cost thousands of pounds to repair.
“The apparent object of the exercise was to protest about the plight of the homeless.
“None of the defendants have done any work in the community to benefit the homeless.
“None of you worked for charities or voluntary organisations in the immediate lead up to this offence, indeed the majority had no charitable involvement.
“There is a genuine lack of sincerity in their actions, which have the appearance of a self indulgent vanity project.
“Every day after the possession order they could have left at any time. They made a conscious decision not to despite being aware of the cost and effect of their actions.”

What exactly were they jailed for?

It's in the first paragraph of the report: trespass. They pleaded guilty.

"Trespass while a possession order was in place" to give it a full title as trespass alone is not an offence.

That's what I was confused about.

Cheers.

They are the descendants of the "pay no poll tax" shower. Anything except a hard days work. They will be the same ones in forty years time queuing up at the post office counter for their weekly handouts, whilst complaining to their queuing neighbour that the young today don't know they are born. Some of their fellow ancestors in protest are now in the House of Commons and the Lords. Look no further than the likes of Peter Haine.

A possession order isn't actually required; it's all in the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994.

Is this the same outfit that were despoiling the Pier Head/Mann Island area a few months back ? More court cases to come hopefully.

"Trespass" becomes "Aggravated Trespass" and a criminal offence if the trespassers refuse to leave or cause any damage.

As far as I can tell for an offence of aggravated trespass there is no requirement for a possession order and a possession order in itself does not automatically bring about an offence of aggravated trespass.

Though obviously a possession order is meaningful evidence that the trespass was un-wanted and can be proof of notice.

The normal offence used to be breach of the peace on refusing to vacate but in this case the plea was against "trespass while a possession order was in place" which I can't find any law or act referring to??? Perhaps its just poor media reporting, I'll have to wait until the court records get processed.

Some of my old urbex colleagues have been arrested on various trumped up charges by police trying to deter the hobby, including charges such as burglary, being found in an enclosed space, aggravated trespass, vagrancy and even terrorism!

And probably "Looking at me in a funny way".