High Court Finds Tommy Robinson guilty of contempt of court over Facebook broadcast

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: Grambler

Common sense, in trials like of these rapists nobody knows who they are except the authorities , nobody knows who the victims are, the accused or any witnesses, the idea is to keep the trial free from public interference and also to protect all involved in the trial until it's conclusion .
ETA. People like Robinson, and Rolf Harris for that matter are already all over the news media it's impossible to stop people from talking about them.

But apparently Robinson was only reporting facts that were already publicly available, facts that had already been reported by the BBC.

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: Grambler

the idea is to keep the trial free from public interference and also to protect all involved in the trial until it's conclusion .

Then why do they expose these people on trial to the public at all? They should have unmarked cars bring them into a private facility that is free of public eyes, with no exposure to the outside world. If they really wanted to keep trials free from public interference, they are failing miserably.

For the trial he covered, it almost appeared the accused were escorted directly out of the courthouse and onto a sidewalk on a public street. That can't be correct can it?

a reply to: Flatcoat

I don't know about that, what facts were known? As I understand it he got in trouble for trying to film the court proceedings and the defendants.

a reply to: Grambler

Aye right, Tommy was simply minding his own business bumping his gums about Muslim pedophiles outside a court.

Just happened to be there i suppose.

He was doing a lot more than simply filming.

Probably breaching a few bail conditions in the process.

a reply to: Grambler

I think you called Tommy a journalist, not me.

Can you show me his degree?

Because he sure canny.

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

I thought he was simply filming himself making comments with the courthouse in the background. As he was filming, the defendants were released out onto a very public sidewalk. That is when they charged him with some BS of trying to influence public opinion.

a reply to: ClovenSky

Again as I understand it, the courts allow media after the trial, I guess they allow the public to know there is a trial so people think the system works (which is rubbish as we all know the system is #ed) I dunno man it's a strange one, all I am certain of is Tommy is a victim of his own stupidity.

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: Flatcoat

I don't know about that, what facts were known? As I understand it he got in trouble for trying to film the court proceedings and the defendants.

Well, he obviously couldn't have known anymore than what was already public knowledge...I can't imagine they let him observe court proceedings inside.

a reply to: ClovenSky

No, they charged him because he was told not to do what he did previously by a judge, and proceeded to do so again anyway.

That's what's called taking the piss.

And that does not go down to well with the law especially outside courts.

originally posted by: Flatcoat

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: Flatcoat

I don't know about that, what facts were known? As I understand it he got in trouble for trying to film the court proceedings and the defendants.

Well, he obviously couldn't have known anymore than what was already public knowledge...I can't imagine they let him observe court proceedings inside.

I believe he actually tried, that being the case he kinda deserves what he gets.

And the public are falling over themselves to condemn this shockingly abhorrent action that Tommy Robinson took.

Not a single one of those very people gave even the slightest condemnation of the rapists.

I guess what Tommy did is so shocking and awful that the organised and systematic rape of HUNDREDS of underaged girls just pales in comparison.

Faux outrage.

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: Flatcoat

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: Flatcoat

I don't know about that, what facts were known? As I understand it he got in trouble for trying to film the court proceedings and the defendants.

Well, he obviously couldn't have known anymore than what was already public knowledge...I can't imagine they let him observe court proceedings inside.

I believe he actually tried, that being the case he kinda deserves what he gets.

If he tried to barge in while court was in session, then that's a different kettle of fish, although I haven't seen that claimed anywhere.

Those guilty of the systematic failure to protect the children and capture the perpetrators—the government—still walks free, without conviction or punishment. Wild stuff.

originally posted by: MickyKnox
Those guilty of the systematic failure to protect the children and capture the perpetrators—the government—still walks free, without conviction or punishment. Wild stuff.

Covering up islamic crimes and refusing to report on them is apparently perfectly acceptable.
I mean, I haven’t seen ONE SINGLE PERSON who condemns Tommy’s actions say that the police who attempted to hide these crimes and protect these rapists should be prosecuted.

Again, faux outrage. They don’t care about the HUNDREDS of girls.

So was he filming during the final segment of this trial, when the jury was considering its verdict?

Hmmm, I wonder how he could influence the jury's decision when they were in the final process of deliberation? Wasn't he arrested as the defendants were exiting the courthouse and some judge said he was 'aggressively confronting and filming' some of the defendants?

This smells to high heaven. I guess this will serve as an example to us peons to not question our oligarchs. To never push the boundary of what we are told is acceptable and what isn't. Kind of like our government arresting people for trying to educate the masses on our right of jury nullification, which is completely legal.

Stupid serfs, they should fully recognize when the oligarchs are conducting business and show their adoration.

bow down sheep bow down

a reply to: MickyKnox

And those swine should have been standing in the dock beside the monsters.

How they can possibly call themselves Police and Social workers is beyond me.

Some things transcend the likes of racism and race cards.

Beasting weans or knowingly allowing such horrendous acts of depravity to continue is quite simply beyond contempt.

Especially so when you are in a position of authority and actually able to do something about it.

originally posted by: ClovenSky
So was he filming during the final segment of this trial, when the jury was considering its verdict?

Hmmm, I wonder how he could influence the jury's decision when they were in the final process of deliberation? Wasn't he arrested as the defendants were exiting the courthouse and some judge said he was 'aggressively confronting and filming' some of the defendants?

This smells to high heaven. I guess this will serve as an example to us peons to not question our oligarchs. To never push the boundary of what we are told is acceptable and what isn't. Kind of like our government arresting people for trying to educate the masses on our right of jury nullification, which is completely legal.

Stupid serfs, they should fully recognize when the oligarchs are conducting business and show their adoration.

bow down sheep bow down

When it’s a pedophile priest these very same people are screeching “name and shame, name and shame, why should they be protected” and they are more than happy to “aggressively confront” the defendants outside of court.

When Tommy does it, at the END of the trial. When, like you say, final deliberations are underway, it’s “shame on Tommy”

I’d love to know the motivation of this way of thinking. We know the reasoning of the police and the media (protect islamic criminals at ALL costs) but the mindset of those who are rushing to condemn Tommy for this when they’re more than happy for others to do the same, a mystery.

a reply to: ClovenSky

Did tommy film while the jury was there?

Cause i read they had already decided and were no longer part of the trial

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Grambler

Aye right, Tommy was simply minding his own business bumping his gums about Muslim pedophiles outside a court.

Just happened to be there i suppose.

He was doing a lot more than simply filming.

Probably breaching a few bail conditions in the process.

For over a year now o have shown exactly what the law that tommy broke was, and showed how it is broken by thousands of people in the us, even right here in ats

And very single person that supports Tommy’s arrest ignores the actual words of the law and makes up yheir own reason why it was selectively applied

“Tommy’s famous so it’s ok to say he’s guilty during his trial”

“Tommy is t a journalist, journalist are allowed to break the law but not tommy”

“Tommy was on the court steps that’s what the problem was”

The law doesn’t make those distinctions

If you cheer for a law that you yourself (by saying tommy was guilty and commenting before his hearing was over) or your friends are breaking because it’s being selectively enforced for people you dislike

Don’t be surprised when the government comes for you as well

a reply to: Grambler

Well if they do it won't be until after Brexit and any human rights amendments that are in the post.

They seem quite taken with Robinson and his ilk right now.

Plus i might be getting on a little now, but the fact of the matter is i can do 6 months inside standing on my head without nobody serious trying to kill me. God knows why i would be of interest to them all the same. LoL

If only Tommy could claim the same, and why is it they all want him pan bread, is it because he is a nice person?

I think not.