Ot,tommy robinson wins appeal

Clearly, the Law has 'grey areas' and every Lawyer has an opinion. Furthermore the Bench reflects the establishment and the make up of the establishment is pretty clear these days.

Unlike others who I suspect are in a similar position I make no comment on the legal issues as I am not qualified in this area.
Nevertheless Mr Robinson has a tale to tell and here is his interview with Tucker Carlson following his release:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdZZD89ucoI

Great interview ,he was stitched up

it seems US right-wing activists like Steve Bannon want to throw a bit of money into a project involving “Tommy Robinson” as a possible front man for a new attempt at pulling together a hard-right organisation.

Lets look at what he did.
He knowingly made a video and encouraged people to share it where he reported on a trial that at that time had an order barring its reporting until the conclusion of a linked trial. That enough is the literal definition of contempt of court. The fact he was already on a suspended sentence for contempt of court meant he was always going to get himself into some kind of trouble for doing it again.

If anyone actually wants to read what is going on rather than just believing your lovely conspiracy theories, have a look at https://thesecretbarrister.com/2018/08/01/the-tommy-robinson-judgment-what-does-it-all-mean/

Facts

He was under a suspended 3 month sentence for contempt of court when he was arrested

He pleaded guilty to a further offence of contempt of court gaining him a 13 month sentence.

He appealed on the procedural basis that he did not have sufficient time to prepare a case.

The appeal was upheld.

A re-trail will be held in September, heard by a different judge, allowing him sufficient time to prepare a case.

Regardless of what anyone else has said, the above are the facts here.

the appeal judges werent even sure any offence was even committed

If that was the case he would have been acquitted.

Feck me scraping the bottom of the barrel here. Reporting restrictions ? Tommy was reading WHAT WAS ALREADY IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN,. He was reading from the BBC website so please tell me again what freaking reporting restrictions ? That was just made up Bull shit. How could he also effect the trial. The jury had been sent to a very quiet room to consider the evidence.
You lefties are so desperate 5o get him locked up and why ? Because he has different opinions to you. Look you have different opinions to me and despite you being a patronising Liberal I wouldn’t want to see you locked up.
Now one thing do you think the way he was treated once inside fair ?

what the f**k was he there for then! i thought the point of tommy was he is providing us with news that the mainstream media were trying to suppress, or ignoring, but now apparently he's just reading out news that is readily available on the bbc! what exactly is he trying to achieve if he's just reciting a bbc news article?

also as i understand it, this set of trials is very broad, with interconnected trials and defendants, it's not as if this trial that TR was reporting from (the one which was in deliberation) was going to put everyone involved behind bars. which is why influencing the trial (or more accurately, giving the other defendants' lawyers a reason to push for a mistrial by saying that the trial had been influenced) is still an issue. Whether anyone agrees with it or not, the way in which TR was reporting the trial cant really be described as unbiased. (the bbc article is still out there and if you read it you'll see its very matter of fact, written by the courts style statement). TR was likely suggesting guilt, as i'm sure many other newspapers would have done, which is one of the many reasons for the media blackout on these trials. (its not a f*cking leftist conspiracy its common sense by people who want to see these people behind bars as much as the rest of us!).

so he's basically just reading out information that everyone already had access to, and in doing so putting cases which have taken prosecutors countless hours to compile, at risk. based on that, i hope you can understand why people would like to see him in out of the way for a while! (not that i want to see him inside i just want to see him shut the f**k up to be honest).

I know you want him to do something to land him in prison. But he knew his previous contempt said he could not step foot on court property so he didn’t.
Had it not of been in the Public domain then again he would of been in trouble. SO YES HE READ IT FROM THE BBC WEBSITE THE INFORMATION THAT HAD ALREADY BEEN RELEASED BY THE COURTS. So he is just repeating what had been already said.
So where the f**k is the contempt ? Why did he do it ? Because it was just put on the BBC web page no TV Station was covering it and why ? Because the defendants were Pakistani men that’s why.
Did the mainstream news cover Telford recently ? Again no. Where was the major news feeds on Rochdale ? Again nothing.
So it’s down to Robinson to let the public know what is happening.
Why is everyone so desperate that these hideous crimes be hidden away like Rochdale ? Talk about being part of the problem.
1/ Do you believe these Asian rape gangs and these mass rapes are made up ?
2/ Do you think like the establishment that these mass rapes should be kept quiet ? And believe these girls should just shut there mouths for the sake of diversity ?
3/ Would you change your mind in if a family member became a victim ?
As it is said when there is one rape there is outrage. When there are tens of thousands of rapes it becomes just an statistic.

Feck me scraping the bottom of the barrel here. Reporting restrictions ? Tommy was reading WHAT WAS ALREADY IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN,. He was reading from the BBC website so please tell me again what freaking reporting restrictions ? That was just made up Bull shit. How could he also effect the trial. The jury had been sent to a very quiet room to consider the evidence.
You lefties are so desperate 5o get him locked up and why ? Because he has different opinions to you. Look you have different opinions to me and despite you being a patronising Liberal I wouldn’t want to see you locked up.
Now one thing do you think the way he was treated once inside fair ?

these posts are looking more and more like the incoherent rants of a deluded inmate scribbling frantically with a coloured crayon on their cell wall.

And your post make you look like a rapist and Peadphile lover

Lets look at what he did.
He knowingly made a video and encouraged people to share it where he reported on a trial that at that time had an order barring its reporting until the conclusion of a linked trial. That enough is the literal definition of contempt of court. The fact he was already on a suspended sentence for contempt of court meant he was always going to get himself into some kind of trouble for doing it again.

If anyone actually wants to read what is going on rather than just believing your lovely conspiracy theories, have a look at https://thesecretbarrister.com/2018/08/01/the-tommy-robinson-judgment-what-does-it-all-mean/

Facts

He was under a suspended 3 month sentence for contempt of court when he was arrested

He pleaded guilty to a further offence of contempt of court gaining him a 13 month sentence.

He appealed on the procedural basis that he did not have sufficient time to prepare a case.

The appeal was upheld.

A re-trail will be held in September, heard by a different judge, allowing him sufficient time to prepare a case.

Regardless of what anyone else has said, the above are the facts here.

the appeal judges werent even sure any offence was even committed

If that was the case he would have been acquitted.

Feck me scraping the bottom of the barrel here. Reporting restrictions ? Tommy was reading WHAT WAS ALREADY IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN,. He was reading from the BBC website so please tell me again what freaking reporting restrictions ? That was just made up Bull shit. How could he also effect the trial. The jury had been sent to a very quiet room to consider the evidence.
You lefties are so desperate 5o get him locked up and why ? Because he has different opinions to you. Look you have different opinions to me and despite you being a patronising Liberal I wouldn’t want to see you locked up.
Now one thing do you think the way he was treated once inside fair ?

what the f**k was he there for then! i thought the point of tommy was he is providing us with news that the mainstream media were trying to suppress, or ignoring, but now apparently he's just reading out news that is readily available on the bbc! what exactly is he trying to achieve if he's just reciting a bbc news article?

also as i understand it, this set of trials is very broad, with interconnected trials and defendants, it's not as if this trial that TR was reporting from (the one which was in deliberation) was going to put everyone involved behind bars. which is why influencing the trial (or more accurately, giving the other defendants' lawyers a reason to push for a mistrial by saying that the trial had been influenced) is still an issue. Whether anyone agrees with it or not, the way in which TR was reporting the trial cant really be described as unbiased. (the bbc article is still out there and if you read it you'll see its very matter of fact, written by the courts style statement). TR was likely suggesting guilt, as i'm sure many other newspapers would have done, which is one of the many reasons for the media blackout on these trials. (its not a f*cking leftist conspiracy its common sense by people who want to see these people behind bars as much as the rest of us!).

so he's basically just reading out information that everyone already had access to, and in doing so putting cases which have taken prosecutors countless hours to compile, at risk. based on that, i hope you can understand why people would like to see him in out of the way for a while! (not that i want to see him inside i just want to see him shut the f**k up to be honest).

I know you want him to do something to land him in prison. But he knew his previous contempt said he could not step foot on court property so he didn’t.
Had it not of been in the Public domain then again he would of been in trouble. SO YES HE READ IT FROM THE BBC WEBSITE THE INFORMATION THAT HAD ALREADY BEEN RELEASED BY THE COURTS. So he is just repeating what had been already said.
So where the f**k is the contempt ? Why did he do it ? Because it was just put on the BBC web page no TV Station was covering it and why ? Because the defendants were Pakistani men that’s why.
Did the mainstream news cover Telford recently ? Again no. Where was the major news feeds on Rochdale ? Again nothing.
So it’s down to Robinson to let the public know what is happening.
Why is everyone so desperate that these hideous crimes be hidden away like Rochdale ? Talk about being part of the problem.
1/ Do you believe these Asian rape gangs and these mass rapes are made up ?
2/ Do you think like the establishment that these mass rapes should be kept quiet ? And believe these girls should just shut there mouths for the sake of diversity ?
3/ Would you change your mind in if a family member became a victim ?
As it is said when there is one rape there is outrage. When there are tens of thousands of rapes it becomes just an statistic.

Did you actually read what i wrote or do you have those pathetic questions lined up for anyone that disagrees with you. These interlinked trials happened to put these people in prison, TR potentially gave the defence lawyers something to use to defend the rapists, and for criticising that you ask me 3 questions that look like they've been written by this geezer - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gE2OzGfIDLQ asking if i deny the crimes took place or asking if i feel silencing victims is the best thing to do.

Tommy Robinson = Freedom fighter

Jeremy Corbyn = Racist

Jewish Holocaust survivor = Antisemite

Boris & Gove meet with Bannon = So what

NHS privatisation = Good for us

Climate change = Debatable

Lobbyists on every political show = Experts

WELCOME TO THE UK MEDIA

Lets look at what he did.
He knowingly made a video and encouraged people to share it where he reported on a trial that at that time had an order barring its reporting until the conclusion of a linked trial. That enough is the literal definition of contempt of court. The fact he was already on a suspended sentence for contempt of court meant he was always going to get himself into some kind of trouble for doing it again.

If anyone actually wants to read what is going on rather than just believing your lovely conspiracy theories, have a look at https://thesecretbarrister.com/2018/08/01/the-tommy-robinson-judgment-what-does-it-all-mean/

Facts

He was under a suspended 3 month sentence for contempt of court when he was arrested

He pleaded guilty to a further offence of contempt of court gaining him a 13 month sentence.

He appealed on the procedural basis that he did not have sufficient time to prepare a case.

The appeal was upheld.

A re-trail will be held in September, heard by a different judge, allowing him sufficient time to prepare a case.

Regardless of what anyone else has said, the above are the facts here.

the appeal judges werent even sure any offence was even committed

If that was the case he would have been acquitted.

Feck me scraping the bottom of the barrel here. Reporting restrictions ? Tommy was reading WHAT WAS ALREADY IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN,. He was reading from the BBC website so please tell me again what freaking reporting restrictions ? That was just made up Bull shit. How could he also effect the trial. The jury had been sent to a very quiet room to consider the evidence.
You lefties are so desperate 5o get him locked up and why ? Because he has different opinions to you. Look you have different opinions to me and despite you being a patronising Liberal I wouldn’t want to see you locked up.
Now one thing do you think the way he was treated once inside fair ?

what the f**k was he there for then! i thought the point of tommy was he is providing us with news that the mainstream media were trying to suppress, or ignoring, but now apparently he's just reading out news that is readily available on the bbc! what exactly is he trying to achieve if he's just reciting a bbc news article?

also as i understand it, this set of trials is very broad, with interconnected trials and defendants, it's not as if this trial that TR was reporting from (the one which was in deliberation) was going to put everyone involved behind bars. which is why influencing the trial (or more accurately, giving the other defendants' lawyers a reason to push for a mistrial by saying that the trial had been influenced) is still an issue. Whether anyone agrees with it or not, the way in which TR was reporting the trial cant really be described as unbiased. (the bbc article is still out there and if you read it you'll see its very matter of fact, written by the courts style statement). TR was likely suggesting guilt, as i'm sure many other newspapers would have done, which is one of the many reasons for the media blackout on these trials. (its not a f*cking leftist conspiracy its common sense by people who want to see these people behind bars as much as the rest of us!).

so he's basically just reading out information that everyone already had access to, and in doing so putting cases which have taken prosecutors countless hours to compile, at risk. based on that, i hope you can understand why people would like to see him in out of the way for a while! (not that i want to see him inside i just want to see him shut the f**k up to be honest).

I know you want him to do something to land him in prison. But he knew his previous contempt said he could not step foot on court property so he didn’t.
Had it not of been in the Public domain then again he would of been in trouble. SO YES HE READ IT FROM THE BBC WEBSITE THE INFORMATION THAT HAD ALREADY BEEN RELEASED BY THE COURTS. So he is just repeating what had been already said.
So where the f**k is the contempt ? Why did he do it ? Because it was just put on the BBC web page no TV Station was covering it and why ? Because the defendants were Pakistani men that’s why.
Did the mainstream news cover Telford recently ? Again no. Where was the major news feeds on Rochdale ? Again nothing.
So it’s down to Robinson to let the public know what is happening.
Why is everyone so desperate that these hideous crimes be hidden away like Rochdale ? Talk about being part of the problem.
1/ Do you believe these Asian rape gangs and these mass rapes are made up ?
2/ Do you think like the establishment that these mass rapes should be kept quiet ? And believe these girls should just shut there mouths for the sake of diversity ?
3/ Would you change your mind in if a family member became a victim ?
As it is said when there is one rape there is outrage. When there are tens of thousands of rapes it becomes just an statistic.

Did you actually read what i wrote or do you have those pathetic questions lined up for anyone that disagrees with you. These interlinked trials happened to put these people in prison, TR potentially gave the defence lawyers something to use to defend the rapists, and for criticising that you ask me 3 questions that look like they've been written by this geezer - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gE2OzGfIDLQ asking if i deny the crimes took place or asking if i feel silencing victims is the best thing to do.

TR potentially gave defence lawyers something to use...?????????

find it a bit of a stretch myself that TR talking into a mobile thats going onto his youtube station is going to have effect on these trials.
but id imagine the way it was handled and the attention its brought due to it being mishandled will give lawyers far more ammunition than TRs actions did..plus the fact it was the same judge presiding over the grooming trial thats now been shown to be an idiot.?
as for having questions lined up...well not everyone is like you { the Aherne thread when you jumped in going on about howpeople had taken offence..BEFORE anyone had posted anything remotely like they had been offended..