|
Tommy Robinson -Oxford Union Address
The British establishment have imprisoned this man.
The Attorney General directed the presiding judge to incarcerate Robinson. If it can happen to TR it can happen to anybody. |
Originally Posted by RobJenks
(Post 12056901)
The British establishment have imprisoned this man.
The Attorney General directed the presiding judge to incarcerate Robinson. If it can happen to TR it can happen to anybody. |
He's been imprisoned for breaking the law. Simple as. Just becuase you dont agree with it doesnt mean you can just ignore it
If he wants to change the law then he can stand and an MP and try to get it changed. Although he tried and failed at that |
Originally Posted by RobJenks
(Post 12056901)
The British establishment have imprisoned this man.
The Attorney General directed the presiding judge to incarcerate Robinson. If it can happen to TR it can happen to anybody. |
The only tragedy here is that enough muppets have donated to this guy's cause to buy him a £900K 5-bed mansion with a jacuzzi. I'm sure he'll be stifling his laughter at the shameful injustice of it all every minute of his stretch inside.
|
From what I understand of the case he has been imprisoned for specifically asking the convicted pedophiles "what they thought of their verdict"
I don't understand how that impacts a case? if the case has already had a result? |
no he was jailed specifically for breaking reporting restrictions imposed to try and ensure a 'fair' trial whereby the accused and the case are not allowed to be Identified....................he live streamed defendants arriving at court, etc.
bit like picking a bag of sweets up and walking out of the shop and then crying that your not a 'shoplifter' |
Originally Posted by pimmo2000
(Post 12057036)
From what I understand of the case he has been imprisoned for specifically asking the convicted pedophiles "what they thought of their verdict"
I don't understand how that impacts a case? if the case has already had a result? Tommy Robinson broke such a reporting restriction at a trial in Cambridge and was found guilty of contempt of court for which he received a suspended sentence, so wasn't sent to prison in that case! Then he repeated his actions at a similar trial in Leeds and his suspended sentence was activated. His actions were completely irresponsible. By reporting (live streaming on facebook) on the trial, this could have lead to a mistrial and the defendants walking free. The sad point is, some of his arguments are actually valid, but because he behaves like a d1ck, he is only ever considered as a right wing loony and is arguments are then irrelevant. |
Originally Posted by BMWhere?
(Post 12057049)
In cases where there are a large number of defendants, they can't all be tried at the same time, so they try them in smaller groups at separate trials with different juries. To ensure the juries are not influenced, they impose reporting restrictions that prevent the reporting of any of the trials until all trials have been completed, at which point the restrictions are lifted and the media can report the result of all the trials together.
Tommy Robinson broke such a reporting restriction at a trial in Cambridge and was found guilty of contempt of court for which he received a suspended sentence, so wasn't sent to prison in that case! Then he repeated his actions at a similar trial in Leeds and his suspended sentence was activated. His actions were completely irresponsible. By reporting (live streaming on facebook) on the trial, this could have lead to a mistrial and the defendants walking free. The sad point is, some of his arguments are actually valid, but because he behaves like a d1ck, he is only ever considered as a right wing loony and is arguments are then irrelevant. Ah ok thank you, that makes perfect sense now. |
He is however a complete dick however you look at it
|
Originally Posted by BMWhere?
(Post 12057049)
In cases where there are a large number of defendants, they can't all be tried at the same time, so they try them in smaller groups at separate trials with different juries. To ensure the juries are not influenced, they impose reporting restrictions that prevent the reporting of any of the trials until all trials have been completed, at which point the restrictions are lifted and the media can report the result of all the trials together.
Tommy Robinson broke such a reporting restriction at a trial in Cambridge and was found guilty of contempt of court for which he received a suspended sentence, so wasn't sent to prison in that case! Then he repeated his actions at a similar trial in Leeds and his suspended sentence was activated. His actions were completely irresponsible. By reporting (live streaming on facebook) on the trial, this could have lead to a mistrial and the defendants walking free. The sad point is, some of his arguments are actually valid, but because he behaves like a d1ck, he is only ever considered as a right wing loony and is arguments are then irrelevant. That isn't the reason given in this case was it? not that I'm defending his actions i should add. for those that really want to understand more about it reporting restrictions, https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/...may-2016-2.pdf |
Originally Posted by coupe_20vt
(Post 12056914)
You sound like a bit of a dick :D
|
Originally Posted by Russell38
(Post 12057069)
Why is he a dick because he has a different opinion than you. No wonder so many people are leaving scoobynet it’s people like you
When he actually thinks before he speaks and doesn't behave like a muppet to play for the crowd, such as the video above, he actually comes across with valid and reasonable points. |
Originally Posted by Tidgy
(Post 12057067)
That isn't the reason given in this case was it? not that I'm defending his actions i should add.
In the Cambridge case, he was actually filming inside a live courtroom, found guilty of contempt for breaking reporting restrictions and filming in a courtroom and received a suspended sentence. In the Leeds case, he was live streaming to facebook filming and naming the defendants, so he was arrested and the judge activated his suspended sentence. He then successfully argued there was a procedural error in the activation of his suspended sentence and was released pending a new hearing. That hearing was in the high court last week where he was found guilty of contempt and sent back to prison with his previous jail time being taken into account, so he'll be out on license in around 6 weeks!
Originally Posted by Russell38
(Post 12057069)
Why is he a dick because he has a different opinion than you. No wonder so many people are leaving scoobynet it’s people like you
He could of reported it all after the trials were finished, but that wouldn't get him the media coverage he wanted, so he acted like a dick to make himself the headline getting locked up for "telling the truth" and pretending that the establishment were trying to cover up the truth about the pedo rings - In both cases, once all the trials were concluded and the reporting restrictions lifted, the stories were fully covered in the national media, there was no hiding of the truth, only self promotion of brand "Tommy"! <= DICK! |
Originally Posted by BMWhere?
(Post 12057074)
It's exactly the reason why he's now been locked up, although obviously he's trying to twist the truth and spin it all to make it look like the establishment are against him. Its pretty simple, he broke the law twice and now he's locked up for it.
In the Cambridge case, he was actually filming inside a live courtroom, found guilty of contempt for breaking reporting restrictions and filming in a courtroom and received a suspended sentence. In the Leeds case, he was live streaming to facebook filming and naming the defendants, so he was arrested and the judge activated his suspended sentence. He then successfully argued there was a procedural error in the activation of his suspended sentence and was released pending a new hearing. That hearing was in the high court last week where he was found guilty of contempt and sent back to prison with his previous jail time being taken into account, so he'll be out on license in around 6 weeks! He's a dick because his actions risked causing a mis-trial which could have seen dangerous pedophiles walk free! He could of reported it all after the trials were finished, but that wouldn't get him the media coverage he wanted, so he acted like a dick to make himself the headline getting locked up for "telling the truth" and pretending that the establishment were trying to cover up the truth about the pedo rings - In both cases, once all the trials were concluded and the reporting restrictions lifted, the stories were fully covered in the national media, there was no hiding of the truth, only self promotion of brand "Tommy"! <= DICK! |
Originally Posted by Russell38
(Post 12057078)
He called the op a dick not Tommy Robinson
...although the OP is trying to make a point that poor old Tommy is a victim of an establishment set up rather than having to pay for his crimes because he's not above the law, so, you know... :banana: |
Originally Posted by Russell38
(Post 12057069)
Why is he a dick because he has a different opinion than you. No wonder so many people are leaving scoobynet it’s people like you
Yaxley-Lennon is a nasty little racist. IMO, anyone who supports his disgusting rants is a complete dick. Hope that clears things up for you. |
Originally Posted by coupe_20vt
(Post 12057126)
Oh poor you. Did my comment upset you?
Yaxley-Lennon is a nasty little racist. IMO, anyone who supports his disgusting rants is a complete dick. Hope that clears things up for you. |
Originally Posted by coupe_20vt
(Post 12057126)
Oh poor you. Did my comment upset you?
Yaxley-Lennon is a nasty little racist. IMO, anyone who supports his disgusting rants is a complete dick. Hope that clears things up for you. I think your comment suggests you are extremely single minded, much like a racist ironically. You have decided that regardless of the topic, if you agree with him, you're a dick. That just makes you sound like a simpleton. In fact it makes you sound like one of his supporters, you are blinded by the character and ignorant to the topic. I'm not a support of him, or anyone else, but I like to review everything subjectively. I'd ask in your reply, if you manage to look past what you perceive to be insults and tell me what makes him racist? what specifically has he done, or said that is against any race? AGAIN .. I'm not defending him, but if you have such a strong opinion you must have evidence to back it up? |
Originally Posted by BMWhere?
(Post 12057080)
Sorry, you are correct, I misread the quote!
...although the OP is trying to make a point that poor old Tommy is a victim of an establishment set up rather than having to pay for his crimes because he's not above the law, so, you know... :banana: |
Originally Posted by pimmo2000
(Post 12057184)
You have to admit, it's all a but suspect, the differences in reporting, the claims to what was and wasn't done .. and why the referral to the higher court? Smoke and fire .. you know how this works.
|
Originally Posted by BMWhere?
(Post 12057193)
The only difference are what he clamming and what the entire media is reporting. From the sun and daily mail to the guardian and bbc, the story is pretty consistent.
Why is it that all the usual news media outlets feel the need to constantly remind us of his real name, usually second paragraph in they’ll write “Robinson, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon”. FFS we get it, he changed his name, meanwhile they call “Henry Charles Albert David” Harry. Never say Meghan Markel’s first name is Rachel, Liam Gallagher is actually William, Gideon Osborne- our former chancellor and let’s not forget Sir Reginald Dwight and our potential next prime minister: Alexander Boris de Pfeffel! |
Originally Posted by BMWhere?
(Post 12057193)
The only difference are what he clamming and what the entire media is reporting. From the sun and daily mail to the guardian and bbc, the story is pretty consistent. The only one creating any smoke is him! There is nothing unusual about a high profile appeals case being held in the high court, wouldn't surprise me if it was at his own request! He's not above the law and claiming conspiracy is just a typical right wing tactic to distract his supporters from the basic fact that what he did was against the law!
|
He had to come up with something catchier , the meatheads he courts couldnt really cope with his real name
|
|
Originally Posted by ALi-B
(Post 12057197)
Why is it that all the usual news media outlets feel the need to constantly remind us of his real name, usually second paragraph in they’ll write “Robinson, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon”.
FFS we get it, he changed his name, meanwhile they call “Henry Charles Albert David” Harry. Never say Meghan Markel’s first name is Rachel, Liam Gallagher is actually William, Gideon Osborne- our former chancellor and let’s not forget Sir Reginald Dwight and our potential next prime minister: Alexander Boris de Pfeffel! You can also look at it another way, why does he need to use an alias? |
Originally Posted by BMWhere?
(Post 12057274)
Because that's his legal name and they are obliged to use it. Tommy Robinson is only an alias that he chooses to use and has no legal standing. If you want to search to legal documents regarding his court case, then you need to use his real name. Of they don't print his real name, then it may be difficult to find such legal documents.
You can also look at it another way, why does he need to use an alias? It's a stage name, he's created a character |
Lol
( Shakes head ) |
Originally Posted by Tidgy
(Post 12057226)
I cant believe i wasted time watching that, what absolute pish.
Originally Posted by dpb
(Post 12057290)
Lol
( Shakes head ) |
Well it sounds like youre suggesting he has a different character , under his real name
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:52 PM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands