Chit Chat
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 277 comments are related to the topic:
Tommy Robinson Freed on bail - second conviction flawed
Tommy Robinson Freed on bail - second conviction flawed
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 277
|
By:
He was told, and admitted to that, just not in a detailed enough manner.
|
|
By:
Really?:
The court reassembled at 1.10 for one minute when the judge made an order postponing all reporting of the contempt proceedings until the conclusion of the trial and adjourned the matter at counsel's request until 14.00. That hearing began with reference to the appellant’s antecedents and was followed by mitigation. At no stage were particulars of the alleged contempt put to the appellant for him to accept or deny them. Through counsel, the appellant expressed deep regret for the “breach of integrity of the court system” which his actions had caused. In mitigation it was emphasised that the appellant had known there was a reporting restriction but had believed that he was not falling foul of the order by what he had done. Indeed, when he first arrived at court that morning he had asked to read the order. In the course of his broadcast the appellant refers to the order and appears to be trying to abide by its terms. Counsel referred to the appellant's wife and three young children. Some further detailed mitigation was advanced, as it had been in Canterbury, as to the dangers the appellant might face if committed to immediate custody. |
|
By:
Yes, really. The word "particulars" in your bold sentence strongly signals that it lacked in detail.
|
|
By:
NOUN
1A detail. ‘he is wrong in every particular’ More example sentencesSynonyms 1.1particulars Detailed information about someone or something. ‘a clerk took the woman's particulars’ https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/particular |
|
By:
Come on Edy. Surely you can see he was not told what he was supposed to have done wrong. To this day we do not know exactly what it is.
Reading on... Procedural fairness has always been a requirement in contempt proceedings, including the need to particularise the alleged contempt at the outset. An alleged contemnor must know what it is he has done which is said to amount to a contempt of court so that he can decide whether to accept responsibility or contest the allegation. i.e. you cannot be judged to have admitted something if you do not know what you are accused of. |
|
By:
Yes, he can not be judged on it. That's why he was granted a retrial. Are you even thinking along?
But the document still clearly states for everyone with a clear mind that he did accept that he acted in contempt of court in general, but not any particulars. So if indeed he says he never admitted to contempt of court, then he is lying into your face and you sheep simply buy it. |
|
By:
and if indeed you finally chose to read the document, you will have seen that he was explained the basic idea of why he was there. Again though, not in a detailed enough manner by the judge, which is why he gladly gets a new trial.
|
|
By:
edy
03 Aug 18 11:15 Joined: 13 Dec 06 | Topic/replies: 188,741 | Blogger: edy's blog Yes, he can not be judged on it. That's why he was granted a retrial. Are you even thinking along? But the document still clearly states for everyone with a clear mind that he did accept that he acted in contempt of court in general, but not any particulars. So if indeed he says he never admitted to contempt of court, then he is lying into your face and you sheep simply buy it. ^ Is this the bit you are referring to when you say that? Through counsel, the appellant expressed deep regret for the “breach of integrity of the court system” which his actions had caused. In mitigation it was emphasised that the appellant had known there was a reporting restriction but had believed that he was not falling foul of the order by what he had done. |
|
By:
I quoted one of the parts that said it.
|
|
By:
I looked back a couple of pages and cannot see the part you quoted.
Can you just quote the exactly part you mean for clarity. |
|
By:
We talked about for about an hour because you desperately kept arguing tangibles
Mate...what did I tell you about trying to grind people down by asking the same things over and over, and about you asking the darndest of things? |
|
By:
*tangibles and technicalities
|
|
By:
Either way, let me hand you an olive branch of peace. We both know you're too far stuck in your little bubble, so we should stop wasting both of our time on this.
|
|
By:
This is my understanding you what happened:
1. The Judge told him he was in contempt of court. 2. His representative apologized but said he thought he was not in contempt. 3. It was never clarified what he did that was in contempt. 4. The judge proceeded on the basis that the appellant had admitted his contempt (on this basis: Through counsel, the appellant expressed deep regret for the “breach of integrity of the court system” which his actions had caused. In mitigation it was emphasised that the appellant had known there was a reporting restriction but had believed that he was not falling foul of the order by what he had done.) You may interpret things differently but I am guessing we are in agreement again here. |
|
By:
Just watched TR on Tucker's show, TR never pleaded guilty or not guilty, why did the press/police release a different version ?
|
|
By:
Ibrahima - I cannot believe you just asked that lol .
|
|
By:
Tucker has a good show there,lots of things the main stream wont go near like the Vegas shootings,people now see so many flaws in the official yarn
|
|
By:
Does he do .... Shock ! Horror ! Police /press suppress factual information stories ?
|
|
By:
https://youtu.be/Q96elyZaxq8
Tommy taking to Paxman in Feb 2011 highlighting Muslim rape gangs. Paxman doing the establishment thing and obfuscating. Watch from 7 minutes. |
|
By:
Safaa Boular: UK's Youngest female terror plotter handed life sentence
Safaa Boular, the youngest woman convicted of plotting a terror attack on British soil, has been jailed for life with a minimum of 13 years. The 18-year-old was sitting her GCSEs when she was seduced by IS fighter Naweed Hussain, originally from Coventry and more than 15 years her senior. She hid her Islamic State-inspired plans in coded conversations about preparations for an innocent Mad Hatter's tea party. Judge Mark Dennis QC sentenced Boular to life imprisonment with a minimum of 13 years at the Old Bailey on Friday - making her the last member of Britain's first all-women terror cell to be jailed. https://news.sky.com/story/safaa-boular-jailed-youngest-woman-convicted-of-plotting-uk-terror-attack-handed-life-sentence-11459560 |
|
By:
Deputy Assistant Commissioner Dean Haydon said: "After Safaa was arrested and charged, her mother and sister tried to pick up where she left off....
"Working with the security services, we tracked their plans and stopped them before they were able to put them into practice. "All three women were filled with hate and toxic ideology, and were determined to carry out a terrorist attack. Had they been successful, it could well have resulted in people being killed or seriously injured." https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-45062647 |
|
By:
Tommy keeps warning the UK. Why are the prophets always ignored??
|
|
By:
Which prophet are we referring to here ?
 |
|
By:
Was he really ? Why do so many people try to live their lives based on the example he set ? They can't ALL be misguided , surely ?
|
|
By:
Yes, they can. After all, their belief system goes back to ishmael, the bast@rd son of Abraham, so they are, quite literally, the bast@rd pf `religions`.
|
|
By:
If that was really the case surely our Government would be quick to clamp down on them before the situation got out of control and became a serious risk to national security .....
|
|
By:
What a fred about news
 I guess you would rather have a leftist haven, like old times where everyone agreed with you. God this place has gone downhill. |
|
By:
I haven't written anything to agree or disagree with.
Again If everyone isn't all over a thread like this showing unity and affiliation (lets call it agreeing), they're a leftist or libtard in your little world, Sonko. What you really seem to want to see is everyone agreeing with you. hmmm. If it helps I agree with your last sentence. |
|
By:
I love the way you label people, this world is bigger than you know.
Media doesnt expel anyone. Not seen anyone agree with me, name them, id like to add them as friends  |
|
By:
Questions for British Home Secretary re: Tommy Robinson
https://youtu.be/l-Umjrnrp2s |
|
By:
I hadn't heard of Paul Weston before but that is eleven minutes of essential viewing for both pro & anti-Tommy types alike.
Will Home Secretary Javid (who swore his oath of political office on the koran  ) answer any of the dozen questions?What about the final question to all the anti-Tommys? A-T, what about you? Facts? You both seem quite vociferous about this. Do you still feel the same having watched that? You will watch it, won't you? Thank you for posting Broadsword and I look forward to Paul's follow-up. |
|
By:
Will Home Secretary Javid (who swore his oath of political office on the koran ShockedCrazy) answer any of the dozen questions?
swearing on anything other than a non-religious constitution (or bill of rights) of any given country is indeed preposterous and should not happen. I fully agree with you. |
|
By:
This isn't the friggin' dark ages.
|
|
By:
If the mainstream media are to regain any power they are going to have to start naming who is giving them fake information.
Things like 'sources close to the investigation said' and a 'spokesperson for xyz said' is a massive red flag. If there are a no names given how can the information be verified. Despite what has happened the media continue to write biased articles. Rather than be outraged at his flawed conviction and treatment in prison they attack his message. Why is this? |
|
By:
Good luck with getting information if the journalists always insists on publishing the name of his source.
And spokesperson for xyz seems somewhat verifiable for everybody if you aren't a lazy git. |
|
By:
Unless of course it literally states "xyz"
|
|
By:
The Sun's reaction..
THE SUN SAYS TOMMY Robinson is a nasty thug and a grandstanding idiot. He is not a freedom fighter. Nor is he the hero he is made out to be in the sewer which social media has become. Nor is he a “reporter” fearlessly exposing an establishment cover-up of rapes by gangs of Asian men. That scandal has been exposed by actual journalists. In fact Robinson, real name Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, almost wrecked the trial of some accused of serious crime, thus potentially denying both them and their alleged victims justice. Yesterday he was freed on appeal over his contempt of court. Supporters say he was locked up too hastily and for too long. But he was already serving a suspended sentence for the same offence. His many convictions stretch from violence to fraud. We have no sympathy. The case he jeopardised in Leeds had reporting restrictions, temporarily preventing details being publicised. They’re neither unusual nor a politically-correct cover-up. They’re to avoid prejudicing and collapsing other trials linked to it. Robinson blatantly flouted them, was in contempt — and admitted it. Yes, our legal system IS too secretive. On this occasion it was crucial in the interests of justice. It’s time his supporters grasped it. The Times: Rather than anti-migrant rhetoric, the message that ‘MSM’ are concealing the truth is fuelling his right-wing populism After Tommy Robinson was released from prison this week, his cheerleader Raheem Kassam was interviewed on Radio 4’s Today programme. Martha Kearney raised Robinson’s violent criminal record, his insidious “warning”, as English Defence League leader, to all Muslims after terrorist attacks. With facts and tough questions, Kearney sought to unpick the persona of “citizen journalist” Honest Tommy. Yet many have argued that the BBC should not host Kassam at all. To interview him or Robinson or Steve Bannon, with whom both are working to build a trans-European far-right movement, is to legitimise hatred, normalise fascism and draw Islamophobia into the mainstream. It would be great never to see again the veneered smile of Robinson: the girlfriend-beating football thug and mortgage fraudster, too thick or arrogant… |
|
By:
"almost wrecked the trial of some accused of serious crime" - that is a very serious allegation.
"the same offence" - ah, will they elaborate as to the actual offence? |
|
By:
"Robinson blatantly flouted them, was in contempt — and admitted it." - FAKE NEWS!!!
|
|
By:
The Sun & the Times, lol - the two front runners from Murdoch's stable
  |