FTA69 wrote: » Ha apparently he was a former Brit Army solider as well who joined in the late 1980s when they were off torturing and murdering Irish people. Patriot my f*cking hole.
Stephen15 wrote: » Any evidence to that claim?
ohnonotgmail wrote: » any evidence that he was a british soldier? He admits it
Stephen15 wrote: » And what's your point about him being an ex British soldier if he was an ex British soldier and was supporting leftist causes would that be brought up probably not.
Stephen15 wrote: » And what's people's point about him being an ex British soldier if he was an ex British soldier and was supporting leftist causes would that be brought up probably not.
Birneybau wrote: » Tan Torino
WinnyThePoo wrote: » 'Take the necessary risks to extract the truth' Haha Links to Gemma o Doherty too. Absolute fruitcake.
Birneybau wrote: » Don't forget Q!https://twitter.com/rothschildmd/status/1111511681568366592
Birneybau wrote: » Tan Torino has a new site, the height of self aggrandizement:https://www.grandtorino.ie/ Note the desperate calls for donations
super_furry wrote: » Does he have a page explaining the Oath of Allegiance he swore to the Queen of England?
Birneybau wrote: » Tan Torino has a new site, the height of self aggrandizement:https://www.grandtorino.ie/
recedite wrote: » Its important not to be at the mercy of censorship by randomers working in the facebuke and youtube corporations.
Joeytheparrot wrote: » Of course it is. For extreme far right racists like Torino. Facebook and Youtube dont remove content easily so they must be doing something wrong to be removed in the first place.
recedite wrote: » In this context its worth noting that TR was unlawfully locked up in solitary confinement last year at the behest of such people. On appealing all the way up to the very top (the UK Supreme Court) he was exonerated; his conviction was quashed and he was released.
recedite wrote: » Facebuke is a bit like boards.ie in that random individuals, and a private company can control the discourse, censoring out any views they don't like. So in the same way that you, as a mod (though not a mod in this forum) just branded GT as a far right racist, facebuke have done the same to Tommy Robinson in the UK. GT is quite correct to take measures now to try to protect his own free speech and independence, before the same thing happens to him. If either of these characters were in fact engaging in any kind of hate speech, as opposed to just free speech, then there are laws in both the UK and Ireland for dealing with that. And plenty of people who would be very quick to report the matter to the police. In this context its worth noting that TR was unlawfully locked up in solitary confinement last year at the behest of such people. On appealing all the way up to the very top (the UK Supreme Court) he was exonerated; his conviction was quashed and he was released. That very expensive appeal was made possible by donations he had received through his youtube and facebuke channel "donate" buttons. It was only after justice was served that the corporations attempted to cut off his funding. They were annoyed that money channeled through their media was used to free a man that had been unlawfully locked up. What does that tell you about their respect for proper "due process" in a real court of law?
Boggles wrote: » Or put another way (reality). Stephens lawyers argued with the Court of Appeal not the Supreme Court on several points of law and technicalities that weren't followed. He was by no means exonerated and he is currently out on bail and will have to answer the charges in a new trial.
64.In this case,no particulars of the scope of the alleged contempt were ever formulated, let alone in writing, or put to the appellant....
66.In our judgment the failure to follow the requirements of Part 48 of the Rules was much more than a technical failure. In contempt proceedings, touching as they do on the liberty of the subject, there is a need for the contempt in question to be identified with precision and the conductof the alleged contemnor identified with sufficient particularity to enable him, with the assistance of legal advice, to respond to what is a criminal charge, in all but name. In this case there was no clarity at all about what the appellant was admitting and for what parts of his broadcast he was considered by the judge to be guilty of contempt of court
70.As with Canterbury, the formal record of the contempt proceedings wrongly suggests that the appellant had been convicted of a criminal offence, rather than found to have been in contempt of court.
71.The order drawn by the court says on its face that it is an “Order for Imprisonment -Made under the Criminal Justice Act 2003”. The term of thirteen months is described as a “sentence” and the suspended order of committal made at Canterbury Crown Court is identified as a “suspended sentence”. None of this is correct, for reasons we have already given.72.Although this is a matter of form capable of correction it does have serious consequences. Such errors should not be allowed to occur again.Judges making findings of contempt and sentencing in consequence should check an order or record going out in the court’s name for accuracy.
74.Accordingly, the classification of the appellant as a convicted prisoner has had the effect of depriving him of privileges relating to: visits by his doctor or dentist, the freedom to choose what clothes to wear and the absence of restrictions on prison visits and the sending and receipt of letters
77.In summary, the finding of contempt made in Leeds must be quashed because:(i) It was inappropriate to proceed immediately on the motion of the court to deal with the alleged contempt after immediate steps had been taken to remove the offending video from the internet. An adjournment was necessary to enable the matter to proceed on a fully informed basis; in any event(ii) The failure to comply with Part 48 of the Rules resulted inthere being no clear statement, orally or in writing, of the conduct said to comprise a contempt for contravening the section 4(2) order in place;(iii) It was unclear what conduct was said to comprise a breach of that order and the appellant was sentenced on the basis of conduct which fell outside the scope of that order;(iv) The haste with which the contempt proceedings were conducted led to an inability of counsel to mitigate fully on the appellant's behalf. 78.The finding of contempt must be quashed...
recedite wrote: » Technically you are right on that point, it was the CoA and not the SC, but regardless of the name of the court, the appeal was at the highest level available and the judgement was by the Lord Chief Justice who is the highest judge in the UK. However, the unlawful imprisonment of TR was not due to mere "points of law" and "technicalities". It was a gross miscarriage of justice; locking up a citizen (in solitary confinement) on trumped up charges. Its a damning indictment of incompetence and skullduggery by the original judge who had TR snatched off the street and summarily locked up within a few hours. Wrongly classifying TR as a convicted prisoner as opposed to somebody in jail for a minor "contempt of court" (which itself was never proven) is what allowed them to put him straight into solitary confinement, as opposed to a more benign prison regime.
batgoat wrote: » He's free to go to the European Court of Human Rights... Suspect he won't win though.
recedite wrote: » It wouldn't bother me at all whether he was in the US marines or the British commandos for a while. Its irrelevant, except that it shows the man has bravery and he is certainly very adaptable. If we had a few politicians with his balls, we'd be in a much better place as a nation.
Timberrrrrrrr wrote: » Please explain how either of these rights are at risk.
recedite wrote: » TR already won.
recedite wrote: » Having his own website means GTs videos are not liable to be pulled by randomers working for facebuke. I don't think it has happened yet, but the guy is obviously smart enough to be thinking ahead.
batgoat wrote: » The guy is a racist piece of **** who lives with his mammy at age fifty. His way of paying for his own place, patreon combined with racist rants. He believes in nonsensical conspiracies such as QAnon... You buy into a lot of nonsense tbh.
