By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
So taking Robinson out of the equation, do all major trials ban reporting until the trial is completed??
[Post edited 26 May 2018 12:34]
I imagine in cases of grooming and rape there are a lot of interests surrounding confidentiality and witness protection which results in curbs of journalistic freedoms.
The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
I imagine in cases of grooming and rape there are a lot of interests surrounding confidentiality and witness protection which results in curbs of journalistic freedoms.
So taking Robinson out of the equation, do all major trials ban reporting until the trial is completed??
[Post edited 26 May 2018 12:34]
No. Reporting is one thing. I am not going to comment on this case but, what you are not allowed to do is to put things in the public media , eg opinions on the on going case as that may influence jurors if they see it
Jurors are told that they cannot discuss the case with their family, friends, eg, only amongst themselves when the case has finished. Obviously if someone were to comment on a case, giving their opinions, putting it on social media, family, friends of the jury may see it and increase the risk of a fair trial not happening.
That is different to reporting on the facts of the case as it is happening in court,
No. Reporting is one thing. I am not going to comment on this case but, what you are not allowed to do is to put things in the public media , eg opinions on the on going case as that may influence jurors if they see it
Jurors are told that they cannot discuss the case with their family, friends, eg, only amongst themselves when the case has finished. Obviously if someone were to comment on a case, giving their opinions, putting it on social media, family, friends of the jury may see it and increase the risk of a fair trial not happening.
That is different to reporting on the facts of the case as it is happening in court,
In today's social media driven world, try finding me an on-going case that isn't being dissected to the nth degree online.
It is definitely something that is impossible to control.
But it's the same as many things in life, authorities choose who they will target.
I want a mate like Flashberryjacks, who wears a Barnsley jersey with "Swans are my second team" on the back.
In today's social media driven world, try finding me an on-going case that isn't being dissected to the nth degree online.
It is definitely something that is impossible to control.
But it's the same as many things in life, authorities choose who they will target.
I agree, but there’s a difference between Joe from Penarth discussIng it with his 3 mates and another person who has 100,000 odd plus people supporting and following what they say.
He was arrested for preventing a breech of the peace. It didn't even come close to breeching the peace.I can't stand him, but those police were out of order
AS I understand it there are a number of interlinked proceedings. Reportage of one could ultimately conflict with the others, hence the media blackout, hence Robinson getting lifted for trying to breach that. It's f*ckall to do with freedom of speech.
Pain or damage don't end the world. Or despair, or f*cking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man... and give some back.
AS I understand it there are a number of interlinked proceedings. Reportage of one could ultimately conflict with the others, hence the media blackout, hence Robinson getting lifted for trying to breach that. It's f*ckall to do with freedom of speech.
AS I understand it there are a number of interlinked proceedings. Reportage of one could ultimately conflict with the others, hence the media blackout, hence Robinson getting lifted for trying to breach that. It's f*ckall to do with freedom of speech.
Exactly right.
As I said above, as soon as the other trial concludes, it will be reported.
AS I understand it there are a number of interlinked proceedings. Reportage of one could ultimately conflict with the others, hence the media blackout, hence Robinson getting lifted for trying to breach that. It's f*ckall to do with freedom of speech.
Sense. Robinson’s disciples are nauseating in their devotion to the c*nt.
I agree, but there’s a difference between Joe from Penarth discussIng it with his 3 mates and another person who has 100,000 odd plus people supporting and following what they say.
We've has hundreds if not thousands of posts on here, on any given high profile case, Ched Evans for example. So why isn't that particular blackout observed by those in position, for example, the owner of this website (And thousands of others of the same ilk).
I'm in no way trying to defend that goon by the way. He's a vile bloke, who appeals to the Daily Mail readers and facebook types who go by the middle names of "Madbloke", "Onamission", "Yummymummy", etc, etc.
I want a mate like Flashberryjacks, who wears a Barnsley jersey with "Swans are my second team" on the back.
Yes, and I’ve said exactly the same on those threads too that they should not be discussed (as far as opinions on guilt etc) when the trial is ongoing. In theory, as soon as a person is charged,
I’ve prosecuted and defended cases which have been in the paper and some of the public discussion bared no resemblance to what was happening in court or any of the details of the case. How on earth could anyone realistically have an opinion on a verdict unless they were in court and watched it ?
The opinions he expressed could have been expressed in other situations and he would have been entitled to express them - but he chose to act as he has in breach of the law, knowing he was breaking the law and knowing it would get him publicity.
Freedom of speech only extends to being with the law.
If you believe freedom of speech is the freedom to say anything, anywhere and to anybody you are advocating a completely lawless society. It would mean pedophiles could groom children under the 'freedom of speech'; people could come up to you (me, your loved ones or anyone) in the street and hurl vicious abuse at them under 'freedom of speech'; women could be propositioned and verbally abused at work (in the street, on the doorstep) under 'freedom of speech'.
Our police and legal system has gone soft and should put thugs like Robinson and his religious counterpart in the dock.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.