Tommy Robinson



  • Powerful stuff during the break. Too powerful to stay up on Twitter for long.



  • @Rembrandt

    Ezra Levant must be the only North American journalist covering the case (?) and good on him for making the regular trips over there, he clearly believes it’s an important case.



  • @Salacious-Crumb I think so, not that I'd classify the brit reporters as 'covering' the case either with some of the fiction they're pushing. There's a QC tweeting updates in there too which is good as it's an independent source verifing what Ezra has been saying.

    Thought this tweet in particular was interesting from him. The prosecution alleging the official judicial guidelines on reporting restrictions are wrong by law. So they seem to be arguing that even if the restrictions weren't advertised as per law and even though according to the guidelines its ok to report on details already in the public domain..you can still be charged. Sounds like scraping the bottom of the Harrell.

    Adjourned for the day. Regardless of the outcome this does not look great for the government. That video of the ex-constable whistleblower is bound to be spread pretty far.



  • The hilarity continues....well it would be hilarious if the content wasn't so horrific and the stakes so high.



  • 🤮



  • @Rembrandt oh stop it Rembrandt. You don't live in Britain so you don't understand what a menace to society racist and biased Tommy Robinson is!!

    He was convicted of committing a crime deemed worthy of months in solitary imprisonment. You know nothing of the law in Britain and surely the authorities have a case.

    Multiple child rapists are victims of Tommy's hate crimes outside that courthouse too don't you know!

    I know everything about that vile islamaphobe TR and he needs to be stopped!

    Don't you remember the EDL?

    Besides, it was only working class girls and not nearly as many as what they say that were aged 11 and were arrested 3 times in the presence of multiple adult rapists.

    TR is the real problem here

    No one on the fern ever insinuated....



  • Guilty of contempt of court. Sentence to be considered.



  • @Siam I'm struggling to understand what you're getting at?



  • @Bones drunk and a bit excitable.... again...



  • Update on sentencing. 9 months.



  • Terrible optics for Britain. Right out of the Putin handbook.

    Jailed twice for causing anxiety at a trial that wasn't impeded



  • @Siam more media out there than those with your political leanings ...



  • @Siam said in Tommy Robinson:

    Terrible optics for Britain. Right out of the Putin handbook.

    Jailed twice for causing anxiety at a trial that wasn't impeded

    Honestly @Siam I don't think the average person in the UK gives a monkey's about the case. And arguably the optics would be just as bad if he'd got off. People who don't understand the bigger picture as you might still have opinions, and in their minds the conviction is justified



  • Pretty devastated on this. I understand custodial sentence will be around 10 weeks considering time already served ..I wonder if this particular 'contempt of court' charge will land him with terrorists, murderers and ra@ists who want him dead...

    It's all super bizarre, despite social media giants attempts the live-stream video is out there still for those willing to look for it. As are the articles by the Huddersfield Examiner and BBC which came out prior to Tommys live stream and from which Tommy read from. 2 of the charges were in relation to interfering with the course of justice ie the outcome of the trial...except as I understand it this was all after the trial had ended and was just the verdict to be read out. The anxiety allegation is in regards to the 3rd charge of harassing the defendents.

    These are the charges for which he was found guilty:

    On 5 July, the High Court found Yaxley-Lennon to be in contempt of court, because:

    • His online publication of details about the criminal case involved a breach of a reporting restriction order imposed under s4(2) of the Contempt of Court Act 1981.
    • The content of what he published online gave rise to a substantial risk that the course of justice in the criminal case would be seriously impeded, thereby amounting to a breach of the rule of contempt law known as “the strict liability rule”.
    • By aggressively confronting and filming some of the defendants in that case as they arrived at court, he interfered with the course of justice.

    ref: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/stephen-yaxley-lennon-committed-to-prison-for-contempt-of-court

    These were his questions to the adult men walking into the court who were accused of gangr%$ing 11 year olds :

    "Alright lads, how you feeling?"
    "How are you feeling about your verdict?"
    "You got your bags with ya?"
    "You got no guilt mate, is there any guilt?"
    "Alright mate, how are you doing?"
    "Are you alright?"
    "Hello mate, what are you in court for today if you don't mind me asking?"
    "How's the trial gone bro?"
    "Your the one in court yeah?"

    Its damn hard to separate the emotion from the law in cases like this and its extremely difficult to find a media outlet that has even a vague interest in trying to report fact on someone has hated like TR...I mean you can be banned from social media for using his name..that's just off-the-planet insane. The guy is extremely passionate and has worked a lot with families of the victims of these r£¥e gangs, maybe he did actually cross some legal lines but from a moral perspective I can understand fully why especially with the gross cover-up of these atrocities over the years. Anyway when I get a chance I'm going to try and read through more of the official judgements and case information and see what I can find.

    Would be nice if a media outlet could do the hard yards for a change though!

    edit for language just in case adsense is affected on this topic



  • @MajorRage what have political leanings got to do with this?

    This is a disproportionate sentencing for an innocuous and common "crime".



  • One of these should work.


    https://www.tr.news/freedom-for-tommy

    *Warning if you are a TR sympathiser do not watch in front an expensive display as you might find your fist go through it unexpectedly.



  • @Siam said in Tommy Robinson:

    @MajorRage what have political leanings got to do with this?

    This is a disproportionate sentencing for an innocuous and common "crime".

    Common?

    And absolutely everything.

    Was YL the only one there because every single other media outlet is fearful of islamaphobia OR because they know the laws around this and do not want to jeopardize a case?



  • @Rembrandt said in Tommy Robinson:

    One of these should work.


    https://www.tr.news/freedom-for-tommy

    *Warning if you are a TR sympathiser do not watch in front an expensive display as you might find your fist go through it unexpectedly.

    Filmed in portrait mode, 10 weeks in jail seems about right .



  • An interesting pice on the BBC website re TR today. Whilst it is clear they don't like him, they at least seem to have stuck to the facts.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48942411

    The most telling part is in regard to the most recent hearing and why it was felt the contempt charge was valid:-

    "Today, thanks to that hearing, we know Robinson nearly derailed the Leeds trial after judges at the Old Bailey revealed what happened next. There were attempts by the grooming gang defendants to have the trial stopped on the basis that a jury could no longer reach a fair verdict. One of the men even managed to get a hearing at the Court of Appeal that could have led to him being freed."



  • Judgement here https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/ag-v-yaxley-lennon-2019-ewhc-1791-qb-rev1-final.pdf

    There were numerous attempts by case defendants to have their convictions quashed.

    Reading between the lines the judge appears most pissed off about the story spun by TR to try and justify his actions on the day. TR basically tried to play clever rather than clarifying the court order and changed his version of events twice. That didn’t wash very well.

    He deliberately tried to run very close to the edge (which he may feel was justified) and fell over it. Has no one to blame but himself.


Log in to reply