Tommy Robinson

ISIS were in Cosmeston in 2014. Having a barbeque near the children's play area. Vale Of Glamorgan near enough for you Dave67? Your just posting on here to create arguments just like another well known troll. If your views truly are your own, then you are naive with zero common sense and are precisely part of the problem.

http://www.penarthtimes.co.uk/news/1131 ... Cosmeston/

imgID7791644.jpg.gallery.jpg

imgID7791647.jpg.gallery.jpg

imgID7791642.jpg

Deluded these Islamic appeaser,soon be moaning if one if there family get shot by a terrorist

Wez, even at their moderate end of the scale their cockroach breeding is taking away life opportunities for native Brits children and grandchildren. My grandfather fought and died in the war and I am horrified and sickened by the state of this country after so many fought to preserve it. They were the best generation and criminals like Tony Blair should be strung up for his pro-EU Kalergi immigration policy which has meant that native Brits are now a minority in many 'flipped' cities.

This is bang on mate...……….people very rarely mention or have probably heard of Kalergi but it's happening being driven by the likes of the EU, UN and people like George Soros and the ruling elite! Most political parties since the early 70's should hang their heads in shame for selling us out.

Looks to me that the Muslim council for Britain is doing a preemptive strike to silence any conservatives MPs bringing up any sort of discussion of grooming gangs or even Tommy Robinson that could shed light on themselves in any shape or form .

Muslim group tells Tories to 'remove Islamophobia from party' http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44311092

Looks to me that the Muslim council for Britain is doing a preemptive strike to silence any conservatives MPs bringing up any sort of discussion of grooming gangs or even Tommy Robinson that could shed light on themselves in any shape or form .

Muslim group tells Tories to 'remove Islamophobia from party' http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44311092

The MCB has well documented links to terrorist groups like the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas. The Media, BBC in particular, portray them as the moderate, they are not.

ISIS were in Cosmeston in 2014. Having a barbeque near the children's play area. Vale Of Glamorgan near enough for you Dave67? Your just posting on here to create arguments just like another well known troll. If your views truly are your own, then you are naive with zero common sense and are precisely part of the problem.

http://www.penarthtimes.co.uk/news/1131 ... Cosmeston/

imgID7791644.jpg.gallery.jpg

imgID7791647.jpg.gallery.jpg

imgID7791642.jpg

Quick question, does anyone know what the signs actually say?

I never thought this post would blow up this much

I never thought this post would blow up this much

Its certainly got them going, bigger than a football debate on City

I never thought this post would blow up this much

Its certainly got them going, bigger than a football debate on City

Im here all week my old friend

just noticed there's a planned protest march to free tommy planned for saturday 9'th June in London
think this could be the biggest protest march ever seen in the uk

If you honestly think that then your an idiot will be nowhere near the size of marches like the anti war in Iraq marches and many many others

I never thought this post would blow up this much

Its certainly got them going, bigger than a football debate on City

Im here all week my old friend

I never thought this post would blow up this much

Its certainly got them going, bigger than a football debate on City

Im here all week my old friend

The judge was a witness to the arrest and legally shouldn't of been the one to judge on him, this one will be Massive

I never thought this post would blow up this much

Its certainly got them going, bigger than a football debate on City

Im here all week my old friend

All your bloody fault !!

ISIS were in Cosmeston in 2014. Having a barbeque near the children's play area. Vale Of Glamorgan near enough for you Dave67? Your just posting on here to create arguments just like another well known troll. If your views truly are your own, then you are naive with zero common sense and are precisely part of the problem.

http://www.penarthtimes.co.uk/news/1131 ... Cosmeston/

imgID7791644.jpg.gallery.jpg

imgID7791647.jpg.gallery.jpg

imgID7791642.jpg

Quick question, does anyone know what the signs actually say?

The Jack's are going down.

ISIS were in Cosmeston in 2014. Having a barbeque near the children's play area. Vale Of Glamorgan near enough for you Dave67? Your just posting on here to create arguments just like another well known troll. If your views truly are your own, then you are naive with zero common sense and are precisely part of the problem.

http://www.penarthtimes.co.uk/news/1131 ... Cosmeston/

imgID7791644.jpg.gallery.jpg

imgID7791647.jpg.gallery.jpg

imgID7791642.jpg

Quick question, does anyone know what the signs actually say?

The Jack's are going down.

ISIS were in Cosmeston in 2014. Having a barbeque near the children's play area. Vale Of Glamorgan near enough for you Dave67? Your just posting on here to create arguments just like another well known troll. If your views truly are your own, then you are naive with zero common sense and are precisely part of the problem.

http://www.penarthtimes.co.uk/news/1131 ... Cosmeston/

imgID7791644.jpg.gallery.jpg

imgID7791647.jpg.gallery.jpg

imgID7791642.jpg

Quick question, does anyone know what the signs actually say?

There is no god but Allah, Mohammad is the messenger of Allah.

Its also on the Saudi flag and many other banners the white circle thing is the seal of Mohammad.

I never thought this post would blow up this much

Its certainly got them going, bigger than a football debate on City

Im here all week my old friend

My mother always told me id be famous one day

All your bloody fault !!

Bit late to the party here but felt the need to comment (and yes it's a long post so apologies for that for those who don't like such things)...

For anyone who thinks that TR arrest and subsequent sentencing was in line with the regular application of UK law I ask you please to just consider a few questions:

Why was TR told by the police officer on duty at the beginning of the live stream that he was allowed to continue as long as he stayed off the court property including the steps (which he did) and that he wasn't breaking any laws as long as he stayed in the public area?

How could TR reading information that was already in the public domain (which is all he read out) going to influence the result of a trial in which the verdict had already been reached? Bear in mind, the respondents were arriving for sentencing so the trial had already been brought to a conclusion

The judge that sentenced TR (who incidentally was the same judge that was overseeing the grooming case) was caught on camera looking down on TR being arrested and smirking/laughing - doesn't this show a clear bias of opinion towards TR and shouldn't a more impartial judge have been appointed?

Why was TR's personal solicitor told that he would be given bail (so no need to race across the country), only for a state solicitor with limited knowledge of TR's history and current suspended sentence to be appointed?

Why did TR's trial last less than 10 minutes? For that matter, when have you ever heard of someone going from arrest through to actually starting to serve a sentence within 5 hours?

He was arrested for breach of the peace (which isn't actually a criminal offence and falls under civil law rather than criminal law) if he was guilty of breaking the restrictions of his suspended sentence why wasn't he simply arrested for that in the first place?

If he was guilty of breaking the restrictions of his suspended sentence which was three months, why was he given 13 months imprisonment? The additional 10 months certainly seems heavy-handed?

Why was there a gag order on the TR's arrest in the first place? This ruling was only overturned as it was deemed unlawful when Leeds Live challenged it remember. Also, the reporting on TR's conviction needn't have reference to anything that could have prejudiced the grooming gang trial so why was this necessary other than to try to reduce an anticipated backlash from the public?

Why are none of these questions being addressed by the mainstream media?

When taking into account that one of the key reasons identified on official home office paperwork with regards to Brittany Pettibone's refusal of entry into the UK was that she intended to interview TR is it a massive leap to assume TR is viewed by the government as a someone whose voice and reach they are clearly trying to limit as much as possible?

Is it then also that big a leap to assume that TR's arrest, unprecedentedly swift trial and draconian sentencing may be perhaps politically motivated?

Regardless of your views of TR these are all important questions and whilst I'm sure there may be answers to some of them, the fact that there is so many parts of this whole saga that fall beyond the regular application of UK law should be a red flag to anyone capable of reasoned, independent thought.

Finally, I implore anyone who thinks this is a fair arrest for breach of the peace to watch the full live stream first before making a judgement. Having done so it is very clearly a trumped up charge and I for one will be at the protest next weekend not for TR but for the fact that we are blindly sleepwalking into a very dark and scary place in terms of how the law is being applied to those who don't toe the party line in this country.

bluddy hell ealing that was a long essay to digest !

in basic terms what you were trying to say the mainstream media are a bit corrupt

don't think i,ve ever replied to a politics post before this post but i think the TR case is a bit different to any other in terms of where our country is going .

in my lifetime the miners strike was a biggy , the poll tax was a biggy and the march against irag was a biggy where people actually turned out in huge numbers and I think this TR case will be the same and could be quite a defining moment in politics judging by social media .

do you really think let's say if half a million people turn up next week in london will free tommy tho with the government we got now ? will free speech will ever be the same again ?

bluddy hell ealing that was a long essay to digest !

in basic terms what you were trying to say the mainstream media are a bit corrupt

don't think i,ve ever replied to a politics post before this post but i think the TR case is a bit different to any other in terms of where our country is going .

in my lifetime the miners strike was a biggy , the poll tax was a biggy and the march against irag was a biggy where people actually turned out in huge numbers and I think this TR case will be the same and could be quite a defining moment in politics judging by social media .

do you really think let's say if half a million people turn up next week in london will free tommy tho with the government we got now ? will free speech will ever be the same again ?

Yeah sorry matey - I'm not really smart enough to condense it down so end up writing overly long posts!

Your absolutely right when you say this is different to the regular political stuff that's forever going on in the background - but I also think the TR case is just one in a number of recent cases (i.e Dancula, Lauren Southern/Brittany Pettibone, Paul Weston, Kevin Crehan etc etc) where the law has been applied in an increasingly authoritarian and draconian way - under the disguise of political correctness. Ultimately, it could be a case that this is the straw that breaks the camel's back.

Do I think the March will have an immediate effect - probably not - but hopefully if there are enough numbers the regular folks in the street will start to see what is happening with a bit more clarity - and that will eventually force the matter in the ballot boxes.

I just hope it's not too little too late.

in basic terms what you were trying to say the mainstream media are a bit corrupt

Also just to add 'a bit corrupt' is a tad underdoing it - reminds me of one of my favourite Simpson quotes:

Lionel Hutz (Marge's Lawyer): Now don't you worry, Mrs. Simpson, I... uh-oh. We've drawn Judge Snyder.
Marge: Is that bad?
Lionel Hutz: Well, he's had it in for me ever since I kinda ran over his dog.
Marge: You did?
Lionel Hutz: Well, replace the word "kinda" with the word "repeatedly," and the word "dog" with "son."

Bit late to the party here but felt the need to comment (and yes it's a long post so apologies for that for those who don't like such things)...

For anyone who thinks that TR arrest and subsequent sentencing was in line with the regular application of UK law I ask you please to just consider a few questions:

Why was TR told by the police officer on duty at the beginning of the live stream that he was allowed to continue as long as he stayed off the court property including the steps (which he did) and that he wasn't breaking any laws as long as he stayed in the public area?

How could TR reading information that was already in the public domain (which is all he read out) going to influence the result of a trial in which the verdict had already been reached? Bear in mind, the respondents were arriving for sentencing so the trial had already been brought to a conclusion

The judge that sentenced TR (who incidentally was the same judge that was overseeing the grooming case) was caught on camera looking down on TR being arrested and smirking/laughing - doesn't this show a clear bias of opinion towards TR and shouldn't a more impartial judge have been appointed?

Why was TR's personal solicitor told that he would be given bail (so no need to race across the country), only for a state solicitor with limited knowledge of TR's history and current suspended sentence to be appointed?

Why did TR's trial last less than 10 minutes? For that matter, when have you ever heard of someone going from arrest through to actually starting to serve a sentence within 5 hours?

He was arrested for breach of the peace (which isn't actually a criminal offence and falls under civil law rather than criminal law) if he was guilty of breaking the restrictions of his suspended sentence why wasn't he simply arrested for that in the first place?

If he was guilty of breaking the restrictions of his suspended sentence which was three months, why was he given 13 months imprisonment? The additional 10 months certainly seems heavy-handed?

Why was there a gag order on the TR's arrest in the first place? This ruling was only overturned as it was deemed unlawful when Leeds Live challenged it remember. Also, the reporting on TR's conviction needn't have reference to anything that could have prejudiced the grooming gang trial so why was this necessary other than to try to reduce an anticipated backlash from the public?

Why are none of these questions being addressed by the mainstream media?

When taking into account that one of the key reasons identified on official home office paperwork with regards to Brittany Pettibone's refusal of entry into the UK was that she intended to interview TR is it a massive leap to assume TR is viewed by the government as a someone whose voice and reach they are clearly trying to limit as much as possible?

Is it then also that big a leap to assume that TR's arrest, unprecedentedly swift trial and draconian sentencing may be perhaps politically motivated?

Regardless of your views of TR these are all important questions and whilst I'm sure there may be answers to some of them, the fact that there is so many parts of this whole saga that fall beyond the regular application of UK law should be a red flag to anyone capable of reasoned, independent thought.

Finally, I implore anyone who thinks this is a fair arrest for breach of the peace to watch the full live stream first before making a judgement. Having done so it is very clearly a trumped up charge and I for one will be at the protest next weekend not for TR but for the fact that we are blindly sleepwalking into a very dark and scary place in terms of how the law is being applied to those who don't toe the party line in this country.

Don't you think that if the establishment was really that keen to oget him behind bars and corrupt they would have just sent him down on one of the massive list of offences, ranging from hooliganism to mortgage fraud to obstructing justice etc, that he has already committed though?

If a muslim guy committed mortgage fraud and didnt get a sentence, there would be a full page spread on the daily mail (followed by a thread on here most likely) about how they get away with everything.

It has already been stated by senior prosecutors and litigators that robinsons acts will be seen as a bargaining chip for the defence ..it doesnt matter whether TR's words ACTUALLY did influence the trial, these are lawyers who will twist anything to suit their story so if anything locking TR up is just ensuring justice is done to these sick paedos, cant see a problem in that atall.

Don't you think that if the establishment was really that keen to oget him behind bars and corrupt they would have just sent him down on one of the massive list of offences, ranging from hooliganism to mortgage fraud to obstructing justice etc, that he has already committed though?

They already did. He was lucky to survive.

The mortgage fraud he was sentenced for was an incredibly harsh sentence (for example Peter Mandelson got away with the same crime without jail time - I guess it was just a different type of mortgage fraud - actually nope was pretty much exactly the same reason i.e. filing the form incorrectly).

Oh and for that crime, TR was sent to a category A prison (i.e. highest security where violent offenders convicted of crimes like rape, murder, terrorsim, armed robbery etc are sent) when a sentence for mortgage fraud would usually mean being sent to a category C or D prison.

Whilst we're at it the hooliganism offence so often brought up was related to calling Newport fans Sheep Shaggers - yes that was the actual 'racially motivated' speech he was convicted for.

If a muslim guy committed mortgage fraud and didnt get a sentence, there would be a full page spread on the daily mail (followed by a thread on here most likely) about how they get away with everything.

Not really relevant - I specifically didn't mention Muslims once in my post as it is a distraction from the main point here - that this is a misuse of UK legal system which is based on very, very dubious reasoning and practices.

...it doesnt matter whether TR's words ACTUALLY did influence the trial, these are lawyers who will twist anything to suit their story so if anything locking TR up is just ensuring justice is done to these sick paedos, cant see a problem in that atall.

So in order for justice to be served to someone who has committed a heinous crime within the UK, it is justified to incarcerate a man for 13 months, even if his actions - in your own words might not ACTUALLY influence the trial? So a potentially innocent man could be sentenced to prison, for the sake of the greater good?

Damn - we may as well just all start packing a bag for the Gulags just in case it's our turn to take one for the team next.

Don't you think that if the establishment was really that keen to oget him behind bars and corrupt they would have just sent him down on one of the massive list of offences, ranging from hooliganism to mortgage fraud to obstructing justice etc, that he has already committed though?

They already did. He was lucky to survive.

The mortgage fraud he was sentenced for was an incredibly harsh sentence (for example Peter Mandelson got away with the same crime without jail time - I guess it was just a different type of mortgage fraud - actually nope was pretty much exactly the same reason i.e. filing the form incorrectly).

Oh and for that crime, TR was sent to a category A prison (i.e. highest security where violent offenders convicted of crimes like rape, murder, terrorsim, armed robbery etc are sent) when a sentence for mortgage fraud would usually mean being sent to a category C or D prison.

Whilst we're at it the hooliganism offence so often brought up was related to calling Newport fans Sheep Shaggers - yes that was the actual 'racially motivated' speech he was convicted for.

If a muslim guy committed mortgage fraud and didnt get a sentence, there would be a full page spread on the daily mail (followed by a thread on here most likely) about how they get away with everything.

Not really relevant - I specifically didn't mention Muslims once in my post as it is a distraction from the main point here - that this is a misuse of UK legal system which is based on very, very dubious reasoning and practices.

...it doesnt matter whether TR's words ACTUALLY did influence the trial, these are lawyers who will twist anything to suit their story so if anything locking TR up is just ensuring justice is done to these sick paedos, cant see a problem in that atall.

So in order for justice to be served to someone who has committed a heinous crime within the UK, it is justified to incarcerate a man for 13 months, even if his actions - in your own words might not ACTUALLY influence the trial? So a potentially innocent man could be sentenced to prison, for the sake of the greater good?

Damn - we may as well just all start packing a bag for the Gulags just in case it's our turn to take one for the team next.

Excellent post, the establishment are fools if they think this will silence TR if anything when he's released he will gain more exposure than ever....and thank god for that.

So in order for justice to be served to someone who has committed a heinous crime within the UK, it is justified to incarcerate a man for 13 months, even if his actions - in your own words might not ACTUALLY influence the trial? So a potentially innocent man could be sentenced to prison, for the sake of the greater good?

Damn - we may as well just all start packing a bag for the Gulags just in case it's our turn to take one for the team next.

It was a trial which had a media blackout, end of.

As the great tommy robinson himself once said... if you cant follow the laws of a country go move somewhere else (or something along those lines im sure..)

Bit late to the party here but felt the need to comment (and yes it's a long post so apologies for that for those who don't like such things)...

For anyone who thinks that TR arrest and subsequent sentencing was in line with the regular application of UK law I ask you please to just consider a few questions:

Why was TR told by the police officer on duty at the beginning of the live stream that he was allowed to continue as long as he stayed off the court property including the steps (which he did) and that he wasn't breaking any laws as long as he stayed in the public area?

How could TR reading information that was already in the public domain (which is all he read out) going to influence the result of a trial in which the verdict had already been reached? Bear in mind, the respondents were arriving for sentencing so the trial had already been brought to a conclusion

The judge that sentenced TR (who incidentally was the same judge that was overseeing the grooming case) was caught on camera looking down on TR being arrested and smirking/laughing - doesn't this show a clear bias of opinion towards TR and shouldn't a more impartial judge have been appointed?

Why was TR's personal solicitor told that he would be given bail (so no need to race across the country), only for a state solicitor with limited knowledge of TR's history and current suspended sentence to be appointed?

Why did TR's trial last less than 10 minutes? For that matter, when have you ever heard of someone going from arrest through to actually starting to serve a sentence within 5 hours?

He was arrested for breach of the peace (which isn't actually a criminal offence and falls under civil law rather than criminal law) if he was guilty of breaking the restrictions of his suspended sentence why wasn't he simply arrested for that in the first place?

If he was guilty of breaking the restrictions of his suspended sentence which was three months, why was he given 13 months imprisonment? The additional 10 months certainly seems heavy-handed?

Why was there a gag order on the TR's arrest in the first place? This ruling was only overturned as it was deemed unlawful when Leeds Live challenged it remember. Also, the reporting on TR's conviction needn't have reference to anything that could have prejudiced the grooming gang trial so why was this necessary other than to try to reduce an anticipated backlash from the public?

Why are none of these questions being addressed by the mainstream media?

When taking into account that one of the key reasons identified on official home office paperwork with regards to Brittany Pettibone's refusal of entry into the UK was that she intended to interview TR is it a massive leap to assume TR is viewed by the government as a someone whose voice and reach they are clearly trying to limit as much as possible?

Is it then also that big a leap to assume that TR's arrest, unprecedentedly swift trial and draconian sentencing may be perhaps politically motivated?

Regardless of your views of TR these are all important questions and whilst I'm sure there may be answers to some of them, the fact that there is so many parts of this whole saga that fall beyond the regular application of UK law should be a red flag to anyone capable of reasoned, independent thought.

Finally, I implore anyone who thinks this is a fair arrest for breach of the peace to watch the full live stream first before making a judgement. Having done so it is very clearly a trumped up charge and I for one will be at the protest next weekend not for TR but for the fact that we are blindly sleepwalking into a very dark and scary place in terms of how the law is being applied to those who don't toe the party line in this country.

Don't you think that if the establishment was really that keen to oget him behind bars and corrupt they would have just sent him down on one of the massive list of offences, ranging from hooliganism to mortgage fraud to obstructing justice etc, that he has already committed though?

If a muslim guy committed mortgage fraud and didnt get a sentence, there would be a full page spread on the daily mail (followed by a thread on here most likely) about how they get away with everything.

It has already been stated by senior prosecutors and litigators that robinsons acts will be seen as a bargaining chip for the defence ..it doesnt matter whether TR's words ACTUALLY did influence the trial, these are lawyers who will twist anything to suit their story so if anything locking TR up is just ensuring justice is done to these sick paedos, cant see a problem in that atall.

Maybe get your facts right before posting eh....

Don't you think that if the establishment was really that keen to oget him behind bars and corrupt they would have just sent him down on one of the massive list of offences, ranging from hooliganism to mortgage fraud to obstructing justice etc, that he has already committed though?

They already did. He was lucky to survive.

The mortgage fraud he was sentenced for was an incredibly harsh sentence (for example Peter Mandelson got away with the same crime without jail time - I guess it was just a different type of mortgage fraud - actually nope was pretty much exactly the same reason i.e. filing the form incorrectly).

Oh and for that crime, TR was sent to a category A prison (i.e. highest security where violent offenders convicted of crimes like rape, murder, terrorsim, armed robbery etc are sent) when a sentence for mortgage fraud would usually mean being sent to a category C or D prison.

Whilst we're at it the hooliganism offence so often brought up was related to calling Newport fans Sheep Shaggers - yes that was the actual 'racially motivated' speech he was convicted for.

If a muslim guy committed mortgage fraud and didnt get a sentence, there would be a full page spread on the daily mail (followed by a thread on here most likely) about how they get away with everything.

Not really relevant - I specifically didn't mention Muslims once in my post as it is a distraction from the main point here - that this is a misuse of UK legal system which is based on very, very dubious reasoning and practices.

...it doesnt matter whether TR's words ACTUALLY did influence the trial, these are lawyers who will twist anything to suit their story so if anything locking TR up is just ensuring justice is done to these sick paedos, cant see a problem in that atall.

So in order for justice to be served to someone who has committed a heinous crime within the UK, it is justified to incarcerate a man for 13 months, even if his actions - in your own words might not ACTUALLY influence the trial? So a potentially innocent man could be sentenced to prison, for the sake of the greater good?

Damn - we may as well just all start packing a bag for the Gulags just in case it's our turn to take one for the team next.

Im not referring to small slap on the wrist custodial sentances, im referring to a sentence where he's away from being able to make a public impact for a long period of time.

also in regards to the cat a prison, he is a far right extremist, and is likely to need protection and special measures surely? he didn't get put in for an extended period of time he just got put in an appropriate location.

Bit late to the party here but felt the need to comment (and yes it's a long post so apologies for that for those who don't like such things)...

For anyone who thinks that TR arrest and subsequent sentencing was in line with the regular application of UK law I ask you please to just consider a few questions:

Why was TR told by the police officer on duty at the beginning of the live stream that he was allowed to continue as long as he stayed off the court property including the steps (which he did) and that he wasn't breaking any laws as long as he stayed in the public area?

How could TR reading information that was already in the public domain (which is all he read out) going to influence the result of a trial in which the verdict had already been reached? Bear in mind, the respondents were arriving for sentencing so the trial had already been brought to a conclusion

The judge that sentenced TR (who incidentally was the same judge that was overseeing the grooming case) was caught on camera looking down on TR being arrested and smirking/laughing - doesn't this show a clear bias of opinion towards TR and shouldn't a more impartial judge have been appointed?

Why was TR's personal solicitor told that he would be given bail (so no need to race across the country), only for a state solicitor with limited knowledge of TR's history and current suspended sentence to be appointed?

Why did TR's trial last less than 10 minutes? For that matter, when have you ever heard of someone going from arrest through to actually starting to serve a sentence within 5 hours?

He was arrested for breach of the peace (which isn't actually a criminal offence and falls under civil law rather than criminal law) if he was guilty of breaking the restrictions of his suspended sentence why wasn't he simply arrested for that in the first place?

If he was guilty of breaking the restrictions of his suspended sentence which was three months, why was he given 13 months imprisonment? The additional 10 months certainly seems heavy-handed?

Why was there a gag order on the TR's arrest in the first place? This ruling was only overturned as it was deemed unlawful when Leeds Live challenged it remember. Also, the reporting on TR's conviction needn't have reference to anything that could have prejudiced the grooming gang trial so why was this necessary other than to try to reduce an anticipated backlash from the public?

Why are none of these questions being addressed by the mainstream media?

When taking into account that one of the key reasons identified on official home office paperwork with regards to Brittany Pettibone's refusal of entry into the UK was that she intended to interview TR is it a massive leap to assume TR is viewed by the government as a someone whose voice and reach they are clearly trying to limit as much as possible?

Is it then also that big a leap to assume that TR's arrest, unprecedentedly swift trial and draconian sentencing may be perhaps politically motivated?

Regardless of your views of TR these are all important questions and whilst I'm sure there may be answers to some of them, the fact that there is so many parts of this whole saga that fall beyond the regular application of UK law should be a red flag to anyone capable of reasoned, independent thought.

Finally, I implore anyone who thinks this is a fair arrest for breach of the peace to watch the full live stream first before making a judgement. Having done so it is very clearly a trumped up charge and I for one will be at the protest next weekend not for TR but for the fact that we are blindly sleepwalking into a very dark and scary place in terms of how the law is being applied to those who don't toe the party line in this country.

Don't you think that if the establishment was really that keen to oget him behind bars and corrupt they would have just sent him down on one of the massive list of offences, ranging from hooliganism to mortgage fraud to obstructing justice etc, that he has already committed though?

If a muslim guy committed mortgage fraud and didnt get a sentence, there would be a full page spread on the daily mail (followed by a thread on here most likely) about how they get away with everything.

It has already been stated by senior prosecutors and litigators that robinsons acts will be seen as a bargaining chip for the defence ..it doesnt matter whether TR's words ACTUALLY did influence the trial, these are lawyers who will twist anything to suit their story so if anything locking TR up is just ensuring justice is done to these sick paedos, cant see a problem in that atall.

Maybe get your facts right before posting eh....

I was posting opinion, and just for reference what did i post which was untrue?

Im not referring to small slap on the wrist custodial sentances, im referring to a sentence where he's away from being able to make a public impact for a long period of time.

Here in lies the point - you're playing the man not the ball here.

Look we're not going to find common ground on this one as we're too far away from each other ideologically.

From what you've posted you seem to be of the opinion that it's OK to sentence someone based on who they are not the crime they've committed. Whilst, I may be wrong on that assumption and I don't want to put words in your mouth, I think that is fundamentally wrong and just can't see how we could find any way of moving the conversation forwards from that premise.

Best to leave it at that for now otherwise this could go on for a long, long time - maybe we can finish the discussion in the Gulags some time and in the meantime, we can find something of equal importance to (dis)agree on like whether City should sign Rondon or Andre Grey

Excellent post, the establishment are fools if they think this will silence TR if anything when he's released he will gain more exposure than ever....and thank god for that.

Cheers Dude, whilst I feel for Tommy massively on this and think it is a definite stitch up hopefully this might be the one that finally wakes people up

Im not referring to small slap on the wrist custodial sentances, im referring to a sentence where he's away from being able to make a public impact for a long period of time.

Here in lies the point - you're playing the man not the ball here.

From what you've posted you seem to be of the opinion that it's OK to sentence someone based on who they are not the crime they've committed.

I was going by the logic of there being a conspiracy to lock him up for an extended period of time in that instance, im not saying he should be locked up for an irregular period. I do not condone in anyway locking someone up for an extended period of time based on who they are, just playing devils advocate there.

Best to leave it at that for now otherwise this could go on for a long, long time - maybe we can finish the discussion in the Gulags some time and in the meantime, we can find something of equal importance to (dis)agree on like whether City should sign Rondon or Andre Grey

Neither IMO, price tag won't get past tan so need to go for a loan deal/champ striker in that department. sure warnock will have something in mind either way.

Bit late to the party here but felt the need to comment (and yes it's a long post so apologies for that for those who don't like such things)...

For anyone who thinks that TR arrest and subsequent sentencing was in line with the regular application of UK law I ask you please to just consider a few questions:

Why was TR told by the police officer on duty at the beginning of the live stream that he was allowed to continue as long as he stayed off the court property including the steps (which he did) and that he wasn't breaking any laws as long as he stayed in the public area?

How could TR reading information that was already in the public domain (which is all he read out) going to influence the result of a trial in which the verdict had already been reached? Bear in mind, the respondents were arriving for sentencing so the trial had already been brought to a conclusion

The judge that sentenced TR (who incidentally was the same judge that was overseeing the grooming case) was caught on camera looking down on TR being arrested and smirking/laughing - doesn't this show a clear bias of opinion towards TR and shouldn't a more impartial judge have been appointed?

Why was TR's personal solicitor told that he would be given bail (so no need to race across the country), only for a state solicitor with limited knowledge of TR's history and current suspended sentence to be appointed?

Why did TR's trial last less than 10 minutes? For that matter, when have you ever heard of someone going from arrest through to actually starting to serve a sentence within 5 hours?

He was arrested for breach of the peace (which isn't actually a criminal offence and falls under civil law rather than criminal law) if he was guilty of breaking the restrictions of his suspended sentence why wasn't he simply arrested for that in the first place?

If he was guilty of breaking the restrictions of his suspended sentence which was three months, why was he given 13 months imprisonment? The additional 10 months certainly seems heavy-handed?

Why was there a gag order on the TR's arrest in the first place? This ruling was only overturned as it was deemed unlawful when Leeds Live challenged it remember. Also, the reporting on TR's conviction needn't have reference to anything that could have prejudiced the grooming gang trial so why was this necessary other than to try to reduce an anticipated backlash from the public?

Why are none of these questions being addressed by the mainstream media?

When taking into account that one of the key reasons identified on official home office paperwork with regards to Brittany Pettibone's refusal of entry into the UK was that she intended to interview TR is it a massive leap to assume TR is viewed by the government as a someone whose voice and reach they are clearly trying to limit as much as possible?

Is it then also that big a leap to assume that TR's arrest, unprecedentedly swift trial and draconian sentencing may be perhaps politically motivated?

Regardless of your views of TR these are all important questions and whilst I'm sure there may be answers to some of them, the fact that there is so many parts of this whole saga that fall beyond the regular application of UK law should be a red flag to anyone capable of reasoned, independent thought.

Finally, I implore anyone who thinks this is a fair arrest for breach of the peace to watch the full live stream first before making a judgement. Having done so it is very clearly a trumped up charge and I for one will be at the protest next weekend not for TR but for the fact that we are blindly sleepwalking into a very dark and scary place in terms of how the law is being applied to those who don't toe the party line in this country.

Don't you think that if the establishment was really that keen to oget him behind bars and corrupt they would have just sent him down on one of the massive list of offences, ranging from hooliganism to mortgage fraud to obstructing justice etc, that he has already committed though?

If a muslim guy committed mortgage fraud and didnt get a sentence, there would be a full page spread on the daily mail (followed by a thread on here most likely) about how they get away with everything.

It has already been stated by senior prosecutors and litigators that robinsons acts will be seen as a bargaining chip for the defence ..it doesnt matter whether TR's words ACTUALLY did influence the trial, these are lawyers who will twist anything to suit their story so if anything locking TR up is just ensuring justice is done to these sick paedos, cant see a problem in that atall.

Maybe get your facts right before posting eh....

Just noticed you have only just piped up on this thread after asking for "evidence on the rochadale claim" which was then provided to you.. you go quiet for a while then pipe up again in something totally unrelated