Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
hetrodoxly

Tommy Robinson.

565 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

hetrodoxly

There's been domonstrations in many parts of the world and more due in a couple of weeks, thousands gathered outside downing street demanding the  release of the political prisonerTommy Robbinson.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kismit
6 minutes ago, hetrodoxly said:

There's been domonstrations in many parts of the world and more due in a couple of weeks, thousands gathered outside downing street demanding the  release of the political prisonerTommy Robbinson.

For goodness sake he is not Ghandi.

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Setton
Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, hetrodoxly said:

There's been domonstrations in many parts of the world and more due in a couple of weeks, thousands gathered outside downing street demanding the  release of the political prisonerTommy Robbinson.

He's not a political prisoner, he's a silly little man with no respect for the law. 

Edited by Setton
  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Grey Area
31 minutes ago, hetrodoxly said:

There's been domonstrations in many parts of the world

And what has that got to do with Tommy?

32 minutes ago, hetrodoxly said:

and more due in a couple of weeks

Damn, and no Tommy to take part in them!

33 minutes ago, hetrodoxly said:

political prisonerTommy Robinson.

Please!  The guy got caught filming people involved in an on-going trial, he's not been jailed for his political views, he's been jailed because he's done it before and now he's doing it again.  Political Prisoner my back side!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
preacherman76

The man exposed pedo rape gangs. You'd think everyone would care about that. You'd think everyone would be seeing him for the true hero he is. There are children NOT BEING RAPED RIGHT NOW, because of Tommy.

Honestly people who defend this arrest are, as far as I'm concerned, just a waste of oxygen. Go ahead and cut off the branch you are sitting on. It isn't that far down, smh.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Setton
6 minutes ago, preacherman76 said:

The man exposed pedo rape gangs. You'd think everyone would care about that. You'd think everyone would be seeing him for the true hero he is. There are children NOT BEING RAPED RIGHT NOW, because of Tommy.

Honestly people who defend this arrest are, as far as I'm concerned, just a waste of oxygen. Go ahead and cut off the branch you are sitting on. It isn't that far down, smh.

What he has done is risk those accused of these crimes getting off on a mistrial by his prejudicing the jury. 

If he really cared about seeing justice done over his own fame, he'd have stopped reporting when told. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
preacherman76

I'm not going to be able to talk about this civilly. So I'm going to bow out now. Good day to you all.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kismit
Just now, preacherman76 said:

The man exposed pedo rape gangs. You'd think everyone would care about that. You'd think everyone would be seeing him for the true hero he is. There are children NOT BEING RAPED RIGHT NOW, because of Tommy.

Honestly people who defend this arrest are, as far as I'm concerned, just a waste of oxygen. Go ahead and cut off the branch you are sitting on. It isn't that far down, smh.

Preacher you do understand the concept of due process don't you?

I  am not condemning this man, but I will condemn some of his very foolish actions. 

Again if he actually cared about the outcome, for the sake of the victims, he would have let justice take its course.

Surely you understand enough of law in western society that you understand media coverage can bias a court hearing. And even if it does not, the defense can use that media influence  to help defend their case.

He knew he was going to be sentenced, he knew it was because he jeopardized the case and he still did it.

That is fool hardy and reckless behavior.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
preacherman76
21 minutes ago, Setton said:

What he has done is risk those accused of these crimes getting off on a mistrial by his prejudicing the jury. 

If he really cared about seeing justice done over his own fame, he'd have stopped reporting when told. 

How? He didn't even mention a single persons name.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
preacherman76
22 minutes ago, Kismit said:

Preacher you do understand the concept of due process don't you?

I  am not condemning this man, but I will condemn some of his very foolish actions. 

Again if he actually cared about the outcome, for the sake of the victims, he would have let justice take its course.

Surely you understand enough of law in western society that you understand media coverage can bias a court hearing. And even if it does not, the defense can use that media influence  to help defend their case.

He knew he was going to be sentenced, he knew it was because he jeopardized the case and he still did it.

That is fool hardy and reckless behavior.

He didn't jeopardize anything. He was just keeping the fact that this is happening alive in the public's mind. Didn't even bring up a name involved. He had no idea he was getting arrested.

Why the silence on Tommy's arrest? He was already sentenced before he got walked through the door. No mistrial gonna happen there.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kismit
2 minutes ago, preacherman76 said:

He didn't jeopardize anything. He was just keeping the fact that this is happening alive in the public's mind. Didn't even bring up a name involved. He had no idea he was getting arrested.

Why the silence on Tommy's arrest? He was already sentenced before he got walked through the door. No mistrial gonna happen there.

 From the link here

Quote

Robinson pleaded guilty to contempt of court.

That appears to be the actions of someone who knew what was going on. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener

I think that some of the concern relates to the procedure that the judge used, in relation to TR's activities that morning. 

TR was arrested for "Breach of the Peace", a curious action seeing as his actions did not seem to be causing ANY sort of disturbance. He was standing in a public area, talking to a camera. 

He was brought before the magistrate in record time: he never even went to the police station, but was taken directly into the courtroom... which seems odd.... and charged with an entirely DIFFERENT 'crime' to the one he was arrested for. to whit - contempt of court. However, he was standing in a public area (NOT within the precincts of the courthouse) and seemingly NOT saying anything about the trial that was not already in the public domain. 

At this point.. and within just a couple of hours, the Magistrate had charged him with contempt of court, found him guilty, and passed sentence. Again, this seems VERY odd; I was under the impression that the process for being found guilty of a crime required for time to prepare a defence etcetera. We also have to ask: did his comments during his live youtube stream have the potential to influence the case ? 

Now, the charge of "contempt of court" is one created by a Judge or Magistrate, and they have to issue some sort of "arrest warrant". But this didn't happen. And what happened to the charge of "Breach of the Peace" ? Was it ever even evaluated by the Police  ? It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that the Magistrate asked the police to "get" TR on a trumped-up charge, just so that he could be forcibly brought before the Magistrate. If so, that is a serious breach of procedure, as it was a false arrest. If you are arrested by the Police, you are taken to the police station, and NOT taken into the courtroom. These are two entirely different jurisdictions. 

 So we have a number of parallel issues:

  1. Was the charge of "Contempt of Court" a reasonable one ? Was TR really guilty of it ? 
  2. Was the use of a seemingly 'fabricated' police arrest fair and legal ? 
  3. Was the trial fair ? Where TR's rights to representation and due process maintained ? 
  4. And above all... WHY was all discussion of the trial and sentence of TR kept under reporting restrictions ? (right up to the point where a local newspaper challenged them and forced the Magistrate to step back and annul them). 

 Rightly or wrongly, this leaves an impression that "the establishment" (or at least this particular magistrate) decided to bend the rules to "Get" TR for reasons of politics rather than Law. 

 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kismit
12 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

I think that some of the concern relates to the procedure that the judge used, in relation to TR's activities that morning. 

TR was arrested for "Breach of the Peace", a curious action seeing as his actions did not seem to be causing ANY sort of disturbance. He was standing in a public area, talking to a camera. 

He was brought before the magistrate in record time: he never even went to the police station, but was taken directly into the courtroom... which seems odd.... and charged with an entirely DIFFERENT 'crime' to the one he was arrested for. to whit - contempt of court. However, he was standing in a public area (NOT within the precincts of the courthouse) and seemingly NOT saying anything about the trial that was not already in the public domain. 

At this point.. and within just a couple of hours, the Magistrate had charged him with contempt of court, found him guilty, and passed sentence. Again, this seems VERY odd; I was under the impression that the process for being found guilty of a crime required for time to prepare a defence etcetera. We also have to ask: did his comments during his live youtube stream have the potential to influence the case ? 

Now, the charge of "contempt of court" is one created by a Judge or Magistrate, and they have to issue some sort of "arrest warrant". But this didn't happen. And what happened to the charge of "Breach of the Peace" ? Was it ever even evaluated by the Police  ? It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that the Magistrate asked the police to "get" TR on a trumped-up charge, just so that he could be forcibly brought before the Magistrate. If so, that is a serious breach of procedure, as it was a false arrest. If you are arrested by the Police, you are taken to the police station, and NOT taken into the courtroom. These are two entirely different jurisdictions. 

 So we have a number of parallel issues:

  1. Was the charge of "Contempt of Court" a reasonable one ? Was TR really guilty of it ? 
  2. Was the use of a seemingly 'fabricated' police arrest fair and legal ? 
  3. Was the trial fair ? Where TR's rights to representation and due process maintained ? 
  4. And above all... WHY was all discussion of the trial and sentence of TR kept under reporting restrictions ? (right up to the point where a local newspaper challenged them and forced the Magistrate to step back and annul them). 

 Rightly or wrongly, this leaves an impression that "the establishment" (or at least this particular magistrate) decided to bend the rules to "Get" TR for reasons of politics rather than Law. 

 

And this could be the case for a totally innocent human being who did not already have a police acknowledged background for political agitation.

There is virtually no way on God's green earth Tommy Robinson did not know he was causing trouble. And no way he had not done it before.

If this where a known Islamic convert, with ISIS sympathies causing trouble outside of a courthouse and the police took him away to have him charged with contempt or disturbing the peace how would people react?

Two different but extreme ideological views of the world.

He knew what he was doing and he at this point, did it for his own self promotion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Grey Area
15 minutes ago, preacherman76 said:

Why the silence on Tommy's arrest? 

Probably because:

A. No one really cares about this particular individual enough for the story to be deemed public interest.

B. Not enough people are aware of this guy for it to be of public interest.

C. The arrest of someone for breach of the peace is no great surprise and does not constitute being in the public interest.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
preacherman76
21 minutes ago, Grey Area said:

Probably because:

A. No one really cares about this particular individual enough for the story to be deemed public interest.

B. Not enough people are aware of this guy for it to be of public interest.

C. The arrest of someone for breach of the peace is no great surprise and does not constitute being in the public interest.

That's interesting. Why would a judge care about any of that? If it was true, why did several media outlets report on it, then pull their articles on it when the tyrannical arm of the judicial system demanded silence. Hmmm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danydandan

So basically because of what he did there is the potential for a number of accused rapists to get there case dismissed. That's pretty stupid thing to do in my opinion.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
preacherman76
21 minutes ago, danydandan said:

So basically because of what he did there is the potential for a number of accused rapists to get there case dismissed. That's pretty stupid thing to do in my opinion.

BS. He did no such thing. This is a lie, meant to justify false imprisonment

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kismit

Was somebody broadcasting his prejudiced guilt or innocents in his trial?

Oh sorry, you are right, they were. My mistake. 

Thank goodness for due process.

Now I am out. It is very late and I have work in the morning. 

But before I leave I will repeat the statement 

Quote

Robinson pleaded guilty to contempt of court.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danydandan
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, preacherman76 said:

BS. He did no such thing. This is a lie, meant to justify false imprisonment

I'm not saying what he wants to achieve is wrong, how he is going about it is wrong. In my opinion.

These animals should be exposed, but if what he is doing has any chance of these animals bring let off, then he needs a good kick in ****.

Edited by danydandan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
preacherman76
18 minutes ago, Kismit said:

Was somebody broadcasting his prejudiced guilt or innocents in his trial?

Oh sorry, you are right, they were. My mistake. 

Thank goodness for due process.

Now I am out. It is very late and I have work in the morning. 

But before I leave I will repeat the statement 

 

Thank you for showing what lying scum the media is. You don't plead anything to contempt of court. If a judge decides you are guilty of it you just get thrown in jail.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
preacherman76
19 minutes ago, danydandan said:

I'm not saying what he wants to achieve is wrong, how he is going about it is wrong. In my opinion.

These animals should be exposed, but if what he is doing has any chance of these animals bring let off, then he needs a good kick in ****.

Well he is the only one who has gotten anywhere with it. Many many people have been outright denied justice when they tried to report these things.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danydandan
1 minute ago, preacherman76 said:

Well he is the only one who has gotten anywhere with it. Many many people have been outright denied justice when they tried to report these things.

A better way to do it, would be anonymously and after the trial has ended.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
preacherman76
17 minutes ago, danydandan said:

A better way to do it, would be anonymously and after the trial has ended.

Have you seen the details of what was going on here man? How it was these guys were able to force these kids to come with them? This was state sponsored. There was only one way for justice to be served. It needed to be screamed from the mountain tops. Many people think it still wont be when this is all said and done.  

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kismit
8 minutes ago, preacherman76 said:

Thank you for showing what lying scum the media is. You don't plead anything to contempt of court. If a judge decides you are guilty of it you just get thrown in jail.

Really? 

I  will look into that tomorrow morning, although I am pretty sure that the judicial system in England is very similar to the colonies in which after evidence is presented the assailant is given the opportunity to plead guilt or innocents or even no plea, after which sentencing occurs. 

But again it is late.. please remind me to check the validity of your statement in the morning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kismit
11 minutes ago, danydandan said:

A better way to do it, would be anonymously and after the trial has ended.

Or even openly, after the trial.

A much better result.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.