| TOMMY ROBINSON 07:42 - May 26 with 73989 views | getcarter |
Not a fan but his arrest yesterday challenges freedom of speech.
This post has been edited by an administrator |  | | |  |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 16:33 - May 30 with 1990 views | FerrisBuellerJB |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 16:26 - May 30 by Lohengrin |
If it is stalking Marty uses the scatter-gun approach, EVERYBODY cops it.
Every once in a while I’ll come out with something he approves of and I’ll earn myself an up-arrow. He likes to give me a Chinese burn then kiss it better.  |
That’s ok then as long as I’m not being victimised otherwise I might have had to go to the authorities under these new laws of the land he could be in jail by the end of the week😂 |  | | |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 16:34 - May 30 with 1989 views | londonlisa2001 |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 15:14 - May 30 by Lohengrin |
Only now catching up with all this - just got up from an eighth 12-hour night shift on the bounce and I’m slurring and reeling a bit like a drunk. I’m getting too old for this... 
Right then, a couple of things, the Huddersfield Examiner journalist Stephanie Finnegan (already cited on this thread) was on Radio 4 this morning and let something interesting slip. She was one of two ‘proper’ reporters outside of the court and was saying that prior to Tom commencing his streaming schtick he had enquired of the police present if he was “alright to crack on, this isn’t breaking any laws, is it?” Having been given the nod he was off and running. Now it was clear from the interview segment that Finnegan has about as much time for Tom as you do but she seemed to think there was something ‘off’ about the sequence of events.
Regardless of what anybody thinks of Tom or what they think he stands for to be arrested, charged and gaoled within the space of what, four to five hours speaks to me of Home Office orchestration and is reminiscent of one of two things: either a Field Court Martial or the Star Chamber, this isn’t modern due process as anybody knows it.
Stay away from central London on the 9th and 10th of June, love. It’s going to be bedlam up there, come home to visit Mam for a couple of days. |
Again, this has been covered:
“Yaxley-Lennon was not “tried”. The contempt proceedings were held on the same day, as is entirely standard and he admitted that he was in contempt of court. There is no special treatment here whatsoever. Anyone, infamous far-right totem or otherwise, would have been subject to the exact same process for contempt in breaching a reporting restriction. Not everyone would have been sent straight to prison; but then not everyone has a suspended sentence hanging over them for a near-identical offence.”
Re standard treatment in contempt hearings:
“Contempt proceedings do not attract a jury trial. The procedure for a court dealing with a criminal contempt is set out in the Criminal Procedure Rules. These allow for a “summary procedure”, where the court, having made its own enquiries and offered a contemnor (for that is the official term) the chance to seek legal advice, can deal with the offender straight away. The Crown Court can commit a contemnor to prison for up to two years. There is nothing unusual in him being dealt with on the day of the contempt. Courts are required to deal with contempts as swiftly as possible. There is no suggestion of any prejudice; Yaxley-Lennon was legally represented by an experienced barrister and would have received full legal advice.”
As an aside, The Home Office has nothing to do with the judiciary.
And finally, I hope you’re not suggesting that Tommy Robinson’s rag bag of ill informed supporters of free speech aren’t a threat to the safety of ordinary members of the public? Surely their only concern is ensuring the propriety of the British Justice system, other than the bit which has put their little hero into prison? | | | |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 16:35 - May 30 with 1986 views | londonlisa2001 |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 15:43 - May 30 by Jango |
I don’t care whether he’s in prison or not the blokes a beauty. I pulled you up on your point about him being there may have resulted in the case being jeapordised. Load of bollocks. |
I’ve explained what the issue was with the interconnected proceedings.
If you don’t understand, that’s not my problem. | | | |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 16:36 - May 30 with 1986 views | FerrisBuellerJB |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 16:30 - May 30 by Lohengrin |
And demonstrations as “nazi marches.”
I’ve no way of knowing but I think he may just be a Corbynite... |
You’re not wrong there’s a few on here as well | | | |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 16:38 - May 30 with 1978 views | SgorioFruit |
This dodgy looking arrest and imprisonment of Tommy will only make him and his followers grow from strength to strength.
He hasn’t let prison or anyone stop him before. |  |
| |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 16:39 - May 30 with 1978 views | Lohengrin |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 16:34 - May 30 by londonlisa2001 |
Again, this has been covered:
“Yaxley-Lennon was not “tried”. The contempt proceedings were held on the same day, as is entirely standard and he admitted that he was in contempt of court. There is no special treatment here whatsoever. Anyone, infamous far-right totem or otherwise, would have been subject to the exact same process for contempt in breaching a reporting restriction. Not everyone would have been sent straight to prison; but then not everyone has a suspended sentence hanging over them for a near-identical offence.”
Re standard treatment in contempt hearings:
“Contempt proceedings do not attract a jury trial. The procedure for a court dealing with a criminal contempt is set out in the Criminal Procedure Rules. These allow for a “summary procedure”, where the court, having made its own enquiries and offered a contemnor (for that is the official term) the chance to seek legal advice, can deal with the offender straight away. The Crown Court can commit a contemnor to prison for up to two years. There is nothing unusual in him being dealt with on the day of the contempt. Courts are required to deal with contempts as swiftly as possible. There is no suggestion of any prejudice; Yaxley-Lennon was legally represented by an experienced barrister and would have received full legal advice.”
As an aside, The Home Office has nothing to do with the judiciary.
And finally, I hope you’re not suggesting that Tommy Robinson’s rag bag of ill informed supporters of free speech aren’t a threat to the safety of ordinary members of the public? Surely their only concern is ensuring the propriety of the British Justice system, other than the bit which has put their little hero into prison? |
What I’m telling you, love, is that thousands are descending on Central London the same weekend as the Al Quds demonstrations. |  |
| An idea isn't responsible for those who believe in it. |
| |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 16:46 - May 30 with 1965 views | Lohengrin |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 16:36 - May 30 by FerrisBuellerJB |
You’re not wrong there’s a few on here as well |
Are there? I can’t say as I’ve ever noticed...  | |
| An idea isn't responsible for those who believe in it. |
| |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 16:51 - May 30 with 1945 views | FerrisBuellerJB |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 16:46 - May 30 by Lohengrin |
Are there? I can’t say as I’ve ever noticed... |
Really their not that hard to spot their the ones that post insults when they can’t give an adequate answer during a debate. They repeat themselves over and over call anyone that disagrees with them thick or racist sometimes both. Oh they also love the EU | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 16:52 - May 30 with 1943 views | Lohengrin |
If I don’t reply to any other posts please don’t think I’m being rude, I’m just off to work and I’ll catch up as and when.
Try and be nice to each other!
Ta ra.  | |
| An idea isn't responsible for those who believe in it. |
| |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 16:52 - May 30 with 1942 views | londonlisa2001 |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 16:39 - May 30 by Lohengrin |
What I’m telling you, love, is that thousands are descending on Central London the same weekend as the Al Quds demonstrations. |
Terrific. Good for them.
As a police officer told me when I was waiting in the Strand a year or so ago for the same morons in their Football Lads Alliance guise to pass through Trafalgar Square before I could walk across with my young nephew to get our bus - ‘ it’s exactly the same pathetic little twerps as it is every other time ‘. | | | |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 16:58 - May 30 with 1925 views | londonlisa2001 |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 16:51 - May 30 by FerrisBuellerJB |
Really their not that hard to spot their the ones that post insults when they can’t give an adequate answer during a debate. They repeat themselves over and over call anyone that disagrees with them thick or racist sometimes both. Oh they also love the EU |
Why would a Corbynite love the EU?
Why would a judge be a Corbynite? Not usual bedfellows. | | | |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 17:06 - May 30 with 1911 views | theloneranger |
I'll hold my hands up and say I got it wrong on page 1.
I wrongly believed that this was the 3rd and final trial, but that's not until September 2018.
"Judge Collier ruled that the cases will be heard in three separate trials starting in January. 2018"
The first trial, expected to last 10 weeks, has a provisional start date of January 8, 2018.
The second trial, expected to last six weeks, is planned to start on April 16, 2018.
The third trial, which is expected to last four weeks, has the provisional start date of September 3, 2018. |  |
| Everyday above ground ... Is a good day! 😎 |
| |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 17:11 - May 30 with 1900 views | londonlisa2001 |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 17:06 - May 30 by theloneranger |
I'll hold my hands up and say I got it wrong on page 1.
I wrongly believed that this was the 3rd and final trial, but that's not until September 2018.
"Judge Collier ruled that the cases will be heard in three separate trials starting in January. 2018"
The first trial, expected to last 10 weeks, has a provisional start date of January 8, 2018.
The second trial, expected to last six weeks, is planned to start on April 16, 2018.
The third trial, which is expected to last four weeks, has the provisional start date of September 3, 2018. |
30 defendants, 2/3 rds of which are now done according to reports.
Hence the particularly strict restrictions in place over filming as some people are involved in more than 1 of the trials it seems. | | | |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 17:15 - May 30 with 1890 views | Highjack |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 16:38 - May 30 by SgorioFruit |
This dodgy looking arrest and imprisonment of Tommy will only make him and his followers grow from strength to strength.
He hasn’t let prison or anyone stop him before. |
Well prison will stop him for about 13 months this time. |  |
| |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 17:19 - May 30 with 1885 views | controversial_jack |
Of course it's relevant. He was pulled on a charge that shouldn't have been.This is the important bit,there would have been no contempt of court without him being arrested for breech of the peace | | | |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 17:28 - May 30 with 1875 views | londonlisa2001 |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 17:19 - May 30 by controversial_jack |
Of course it's relevant. He was pulled on a charge that shouldn't have been.This is the important bit,there would have been no contempt of court without him being arrested for breech of the peace |
Honestly - read the secret barrister (link already posted on here). It’s explained there. | | | |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 17:37 - May 30 with 1861 views | controversial_jack |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 17:28 - May 30 by londonlisa2001 |
Honestly - read the secret barrister (link already posted on here). It’s explained there. |
I have and it's totally inaccurate | | | |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 17:39 - May 30 with 1853 views | londonlisa2001 |
In what way?
I mean I assume you’re not saying you know the law better than someone who is a barrister and a judge? Unless you are also a barrister? | | | |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 17:42 - May 30 with 1847 views | FerrisBuellerJB |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 16:58 - May 30 by londonlisa2001 |
Why would a Corbynite love the EU?
Why would a judge be a Corbynite? Not usual bedfellows. |
We were referring to the secret barrister. Who released those details after a judge had put out a gagging order and before it was lifted look at the dates. By releasing these legal details is the secret barrister now in contempt of court? | | | |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 17:43 - May 30 with 1846 views | Ebo |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 16:25 - May 30 by FerrisBuellerJB |
The secret barrister also refers to Robinson’s supporters as knuckle draggers very professional |
I think most judges would as well. |  |
| |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 17:44 - May 30 with 1841 views | Ebo |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 16:52 - May 30 by Lohengrin |
If I don’t reply to any other posts please don’t think I’m being rude, I’m just off to work and I’ll catch up as and when.
Try and be nice to each other!
Ta ra. |
Grabbing B*stard is that 9 night shifts on the bounce? | |
| |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 17:54 - May 30 with 1828 views | FerrisBuellerJB |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 17:43 - May 30 by Ebo |
I think most judges would as well. |
They’re meant to be impartial despite their personal feelings. | | | |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 17:55 - May 30 with 1827 views | londonlisa2001 |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 17:42 - May 30 by FerrisBuellerJB |
We were referring to the secret barrister. Who released those details after a judge had put out a gagging order and before it was lifted look at the dates. By releasing these legal details is the secret barrister now in contempt of court? |
The secret barrister is a judge. | | | |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 17:57 - May 30 with 1824 views | controversial_jack |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 17:39 - May 30 by londonlisa2001 |
In what way?
I mean I assume you’re not saying you know the law better than someone who is a barrister and a judge? Unless you are also a barrister? |
Contempt of courts proceedings are not done in closed court as he states, they are done in open court unless in exceptional circumstances. They are always made public too | | | |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 18:03 - May 30 with 1810 views | londonlisa2001 |
| TOMMY ROBINSON on 17:57 - May 30 by controversial_jack |
Contempt of courts proceedings are not done in closed court as he states, they are done in open court unless in exceptional circumstances. They are always made public too |
It was done in open court. There were reporters there.
There was a reporting restriction which was subsequently lifted.
I quote (from the secret barrister):
“his contempt hearing was heard in public, with members of the press present. However, the judge imposed temporary reporting restrictions (under section 4(2) of the Contempt of Court Act 1981 again), postponing reporting of the details of Lennon’s contempt until the trial, and the subsequent related trial, had concluded.”
So I ask again. How is the secret barrister wrong? Why do you think it’s a ‘he’ by the way? | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
