nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Tommy Robinson jailed

[Deleted User]

Apparently according to Lauren Southern, Tommy has been sentenced to 13 months but there is a UK wide embargo on reporting.

Anyone else got any info?

Edit. Not too sure about the authenticity of the embargo. I'm assuming that it's for this https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/tommy-robinson-arrested-leeds-court-child-grooming-trial-edl-founder-latest-a8368821.html?amp

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

seachto7

Grayson wrote: »

Not punching someone outside a courthouse is cowardice?

Now because the guy is behind a mask I can't say who he is so I have no idea if he did something horrific. There's a good chance that he's a complete bastard and he was found guilty of horrible crimes. However I do have to argue with the logic that someone is a coward because they won't attack someone who's taunting them outside a courthouse. And if we flip it on it's head it makes no sense. That would mean that someone who punches someone outside a courthouse is brave.

And no, I'm not defending a rapist. If that guy was one he's scum and deserves to be in jail. I'm just pointing out that your logic makes no sense.

He was all mouth and shapes until he was asked to “do something”. Ran off like a rat.

Grayson

deco nate wrote: »

Full stream that got Tommy 13 months.
Make your own minds up

https://youtu.be/TTdJaHWvLbk

Jaysus, that's an hour long. Don't suppose you have a transcript?
(semi serious. I could read that in 10 minutes. However I don't want to spend an hour on a Sunday evening listening to that)

Grayson

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

Fair enough. That is the problem, it is hard to find solid information. My ears go up when I hear of someone being sent to jail (for whatever reason) and there is a gag order. There has been other fruity things the UK has been doing recently which means I'm not just looking at this in isolation.

If by midway through next week there's no proper news I'll think that it was probably a gag order. On a Sunday though, when he was arrested on a Friday afternoon, I'm not 100% sure.

deco nate

Full stream that got Tommy 13 months.
Make your own minds up

https://youtu.be/TTdJaHWvLbk

JohnMc1

Captain Obvious wrote: »

You didn't specify what you wanted proof of.

You just wanted to run your ignorant mouth again.

Call Me Jimmy

Grayson wrote: »

That's a catch 22 question to ask. The reason the ban is in place according to that document, assuming it's real (where did it come from), is to protect an ongoing case. It would have to be because of a piece of information that, if disclosed, could prejudiced the ongoing abuse case.
However you're asking people to say exactly why. People can't since it's currently protected information. You're asking people to answer a question that's currently impossible to answer.

Edit: I've tried for a couple of minutes to find a similar doc online and I can't. However the few court documents I found have a letterhead with a crest and/or a stamp. Not saying it's not real, it's just that there have been so many lies flying about on twitter, and even a few here, that I'm taking some of this stuff with a pinch of salt.

Fair enough. That is the problem, it is hard to find solid information. My ears go up when I hear of someone being sent to jail (for whatever reason) and there is a gag order. There has been other fruity things the UK has been doing recently which means I'm not just looking at this in isolation.

Grayson

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

Which is insane in anyone's book surely? Can someone justify that?

That's a catch 22 question to ask. The reason the ban is in place according to that document, assuming it's real (where did it come from), is to protect an ongoing case. It would have to be because of a piece of information that, if disclosed, could prejudiced the ongoing abuse case.
However you're asking people to say exactly why. People can't since it's currently protected information. You're asking people to answer a question that's currently impossible to answer.

Edit: I've tried for a couple of minutes to find a similar doc online and I can't. However the few court documents I found have a letterhead with a crest and/or a stamp. Not saying it's not real, it's just that there have been so many lies flying about on twitter, and even a few here, that I'm taking some of this stuff with a pinch of salt.

deco nate

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

Which is insane in anyone's book surely? Can someone justify that?

Apparently he's locked up for 13 months now the papers can't report on it

Call Me Jimmy

deco nate wrote: »

The ban on reporting on his case is in force until the case against the pedophiles has concluded...

Which is insane in anyone's book surely? Can someone justify that?

deco nate

The ban on reporting on his case is in force until the case against the pedophiles has concluded...

Grayson

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

Ah brainfart. Yea I'm a bit torn. it is stupid in that it could give defendants a slim possibility of appealing (although after being convicted I don't know how this could be argued). But I do think there is some weirdness going on the UK.

In most countries they have strict rules about what can and can't happen in a court case. Jurors for example aren't allowed watch news about the case it a lot of places. It's designed to make sure they are impartial. In some high profile cases they'll even put the jury into a hotel. Having someone outside the court approaching them could be considered contempt if it taints their view.

Here's the thing though. I haven't heard of a case like this recently where people have gotten off. The justice system may have been slow to react but no-one can say that the court system isn't working. These people are going to trial and being found guilty.

So it's weird that right wingers would protest about a system that's actually working and jailing rapists.

thebull85

Grayson wrote: »

Not punching someone outside a courthouse is cowardice?

Now because the guy is behind a mask I can't say who he is so I have no idea if he did something horrific. There's a good chance that he's a complete bastard and he was found guilty of horrible crimes. However I do have to argue with the logic that someone is a coward because they won't attack someone who's taunting them outside a courthouse. And if we flip it on it's head it makes no sense. That would mean that someone who punches someone outside a courthouse is brave.

And no, I'm not defending a rapist. If that guy was one he's scum and deserves to be in jail. I'm just pointing out that your logic makes no sense.

well he went to put it on tommy and when tommy stood up to him he backed off. Thats a coward, Trying to intimidate and failing.

Grayson

seachto7 wrote: »

Fair play to him showing up outside court. Saw that 2017 video before and liked the “go on , do something then”. No they won’t because they are cowards.
More people should be protesting at these court hearings.

Not punching someone outside a courthouse is cowardice?

Now because the guy is behind a mask I can't say who he is so I have no idea if he did something horrific. There's a good chance that he's a complete bastard and he was found guilty of horrible crimes. However I do have to argue with the logic that someone is a coward because they won't attack someone who's taunting them outside a courthouse. And if we flip it on it's head it makes no sense. That would mean that someone who punches someone outside a courthouse is brave.

And no, I'm not defending a rapist. If that guy was one he's scum and deserves to be in jail. I'm just pointing out that your logic makes no sense.

Call Me Jimmy

Ah brainfart. Yea I'm a bit torn. it is stupid in that it could give defendants a slim possibility of appealing (although after being convicted I don't know how this could be argued). But I do think there is some weirdness going on the UK.

thebull85

seachto7 wrote: »

Fair play to him showing up outside court. Saw that 2017 video before and liked the “go on , do something then”. No they won’t because they are cowards.
More people should be protesting at these court hearings.

Same as the scumbag yesterday, running away from Tommy then when he got about 20 feet away start giving it the big i am.

They are known for being cowards.

pitifulgod

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

Are there jurors in this trial? And there is a gag order.

I'm referring to the trial he disrupted. Here's the judge's statement.... He was negatively affecting the judicial process and the rules are there for a reason.

“This is not about free speech, not about the freedom of the press, nor about legitimate journalism, and not about political correctness,” the judge told Robinson at the time

“It is about justice and ensuring that a trial can be carried out justly and fairly, it’s about being innocent until proven guilty.

“It is about preserving the integrity of the jury to continue without people being intimidated or being affected by irresponsible and inaccurate ‘reporting’, if that’s what it was.”

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/tommy-robinson-arrested-leeds-court-child-grooming-trial-edl-founder-latest-a8368821.html

seachto7

Fair play to him showing up outside court. Saw that 2017 video before and liked the “go on , do something then”. No they won’t because they are cowards.
More people should be protesting at these court hearings.

thebull85

Captain Obvious you are probably correct about there being no media blackout.

But on Friday after it happened there were articles up online on about 4 different sites that got pulled for whatever reason.

Call Me Jimmy

pitifulgod wrote: »

External influences on a jury can cause mistrials anywhere with a high quality justice system. Ireland, the US, UK etc. It's pretty fundamental to the judicial system.

Are there jurors in this trial? And there is a gag order.

pitifulgod

JohnMc1 wrote: »

If that is all it takes to cause a mistrial then the British Justice System is in a sad state of affairs.

JohnMc1 wrote: »

Where did I say that? I said that if that's all it takes to cause a mistrail than the British Justice System is in a sad state of affairs.

External influences on a jury can cause mistrials anywhere with a high quality justice system. Ireland, the US, UK etc. It's pretty fundamental to the judicial system.

Grayson

thebull85 wrote: »

There has also been a load of news outlets than ran the story of the arrest and then got rid of quite quickly. Last i heard even breitbart were not reporting on it ffs

The stories are all still there. You can just google them. None of the links that were put up here have gone dead. And one of the stories I linked to was from last night.

I'd say there's been a slowdown because there's not much to say until he's arraigned.

Captain Obvious

JohnMc1 wrote: »

Are you stupid? NO don't answer. I already know that you are. You've proven it plenty of times. That statement does not suggest a support for a mistrial.

You didn't specify what you wanted proof of. Your continued defence of actions that would jeopardise a trial is the evidence that you don't care if the trial is successful or not.

thebull85 wrote: »

They expect people not to want to know the identity of rapists living among them? Really?

They expect people to obey the legal restrictions which have been established to ensure a fair trial.

Also media blackout?

thebull85

Grayson wrote: »

Or else he just wants the attention. He broke the law twice and now he's a martyr to the right wing cause. Look at the way people are defending him here. Even though he knew what would happen he still portrays himself as a victim.

Plus there's all the conspiracy stuff. The police were out to get him etc... He was there for a fcuking hour before they arrested him. It's not like they were lying in wait. All the idiots on twitter saying there was a reporting ban and no-one allowed say he was arrested. Despite the fact that if you google it there's loads of stories. Right wingers love to feel victimised.

There has also been a load of news outlets than ran the story of the arrest and then got rid of quite quickly. Last i heard even breitbart were not reporting on it ffs

Grayson

Ramin Djawadi wrote: »

Media black out in UK on his arrest is the BIG story posters are skipping over
How many others have been locked up in secret?

I'm going to put this in block caps so maybe you'll read it.

"THERE'S NO MEDIA BLACKOUT"

Google it. There's loads of stories. there's links to them on this thread. It's easily available information. And there's loads that are in the UK media. The OP even put one in his post.

Edit: the post and poster appears to be gone now. So I guess he's been banned a rereg.

Grayson

20Cent wrote: »

Thats thw video that got him a suspended sentencea year ago. He was told not to do ot again as a condition of the suspension. He did it again so is now in jail. He's not the smartest of people.

Or else he just wants the attention. He broke the law twice and now he's a martyr to the right wing cause. Look at the way people are defending him here. Even though he knew what would happen he still portrays himself as a victim.

Plus there's all the conspiracy stuff. The police were out to get him etc... He was there for a fcuking hour before they arrested him. It's not like they were lying in wait. All the idiots on twitter saying there was a reporting ban and no-one allowed say he was arrested. Despite the fact that if you google it there's loads of stories. Right wingers love to feel victimised.

thebull85

Captain Obvious wrote: »

Because they expect people to obey court orders in relation to identifying them. And they weren't in custody either were they?

They expect people not to want to know the identity of rapists living among them? Really?

JohnMc1

Captain Obvious wrote: »

Right here

Are you stupid? NO don't answer. I already know that you are. You've proven it plenty of times. That statement does not suggest a support for a mistrial.

Captain Obvious

thebull85 wrote: »

If it means so much to the courts to keep these guys identity a secret then why arent they brought in by a police escort through a back door?

Because they expect people to obey court orders in relation to identifying them. And they weren't in custody either were they?

thebull85

If it means so much to the courts to keep these guys identity a secret then why arent they brought in by a police escort through a back door?

Captain Obvious

Yeah but if that's the way he acts outside courts it's not surprising he had a suspended sentence already and why they arrested him this time before he acted the same again.