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

a reply to: oldcarpy

You produced FAKE NEWS ! and you did not acknowledge your fake story about a 70 year old beatiung upi tommy Robinson was fake!
I produced legal case referenes. You produced fake tabloid stories which are not even online anymore because the newspaper took them down!

originally posted by: bartconnolly
Two CONTEMPT OF COURT cases. Which is whay you CAN compare them!

No you cannot compare them. Two different cases. Different circumstances. Different trials. Different everything. Trying to draw parallels between the two cases is silly.

originally posted by: bartconnolly
a reply to: oldcarpy

You produced FAKE NEWS ! and you did not acknowledge your fake story about a 70 year old beatiung upi tommy Robinson was fake!
I produced legal case referenes. You produced fake tabloid stories which are not even online anymore because the newspaper took them down!

You still here?

Yes, seems that story was indeed fake. More's the pity.

Again, apples and oranges.

a reply to: paraphi

Of course you can compare them! first of all they are decisions in a court and are comparable on that. second of all they are for the same non criminal Act "Contempt of court" .
You are suggestion someone can not compare one instance of contempt of court with another instance. that is what courts of appeal do! They for example compare the punishment for one instance of something with the punishment given for another instance. If for example I got a £1,000 fine in prison and you got ten years and we both committed the same offence then ytou CAN compare them!
Here we have two people accused of contempt of court. One filming with a camera in a court room, the other judged to have insulted two Islamic child rapists on their way in to be sentenced and hurt their feelings. Both were judged to be contempt. One person was warned not to do it again, the other got 14 months!

a reply to: oldcarpy

so you now admit the story was fake only after being called out on it? And you wish it was true? so you would like violence to be done to Tommy Robinson?

Has he not suicided yet?

Shame.

a reply to: bartconnolly

You're ignoring the fact that Tommy was on a suspended sentence for previous contempt of court and the judges summary in that case laid out exactly what would occur to Tommy if he repeated the same offence within that time period. He was on a final warning and broke all the recommendations and explanations the judge laid out in her closing statement.

Myself, Paraphi and Old Carpy have worked in the courts/legal system (myself as a trained court reporter) - Tommy broke the law by revealing identitiies while a series of trials were taking place as doing so was legally deemed to cause a great risk of a trial collapse.

He didn't just 'insult someone', he completely failed to understand any of the UK broadcasting restrictions on court cases - he broadcast they were guilty before the ruling and sentencing which is illegal under UK broadcast law - he filmed members of the jury, witnesses, victims entering court despite their being anonymity bans on this information to protect the identities of the victims.

They were multiple serious breaches of criminal trial proceedings - Tommy failed to do any research and thought the trial was concluding that day. It wasn't - court dates were publicly scheduled and open to the public, this is bread and butter court reporting - as the court documents show on the Tuesday of the ongoing trial proceeding Tommy having to have the courtroom cleared until he could be dealt with - the defence team of the grooming gang tried to use it to declare a mistrial - had the initial judge not taken such draconian action for such a gross violation of how the UK court system works and what restrictions are in place, they would likely have succeeded.

He failed to understand the law, was previously found guilty but escaped jail and given a full explanation of why court reporting restrictions exist and the seriousness of breaching them - he was told he was lucky to escape jail and that if he continued such behaviour while on suspended sentence he would be looking at a term of at least 13 months.

As others have said previously - cases are not comparable, different circumstances, different evidence, different breaches of specific contempt of court laws, different prosecution and defence teams - the UK court system does not work the way you think it does.

a reply to: paraphi

Trials? Contempt isnt a criminal offence and you dont get a "sentence" for it. According to the Lord chief Justice.

a reply to: bastion said

You're ignoring the fact that Tommy was on a suspended sentence for previous contempt of court

No! the LAW ignores prior issues until a verdict is delivered. But contempt is not a criminal offence. In any case are you telling me if that woman went into another court and used a camera she warrants 14 months?

He was on a final warning and broke all the recommendations and explanations the judge laid out in her closing statement.

I do not believe he did. Evidence shows he was aat pains to ensure not to do that and he went and got training to prevent it and asked at the court. His last issue was oine like the woman which hgappened in the court building. this one happened outside.
Also I do not actually believe the court made a correct decision. Two of the three accusations are ridiculous. The third ( that he incited his supporters to go after them) is bogus!

Myself, Paraphi and Old Carpy have worked in the courts/legal system

Look up "argument from authority"

Tommy broke the law by revealing identitiies while a series of trials were taking place as doing so was legally deemed to cause a great risk of a trial collapse.

WRONG! Please read the actual cases. The Judge Marsden AFTER he put a gagging order on Reporting anything about the case and Tommy Robinson) the very next court day said TR had done NOTHING to affect any Jry or outcomns and the Prosecution agreed with him! It is in the court record but no one reported on it . They use the excuse of a gagging order but the Press asked for the gagging order to be lifted so they could lambaste TR the day before the appeal. They never mentioned the admission that he hadnt affected or caused any risk to the trial as the actual Trial Judge said! Not alone that but one of the two in that day for sentencing APPEALED the sentence and verdict based on what TR did and the appeal Judge also said he caused no risk to the trial!

They were multiple serious breaches of criminal trial proceedings -

So can you LIST THEM? These multiple procedural breaches?

having to have the courtroom cleared until he could be dealt with - the defence team of the grooming gang tried to use it to declare a mistrial - had the initial judge not taken such draconian action for such a gross violation of how the UK court system works and what restrictions are in place, they would likely have succeeded.

Rubbish! the actual record states (and you have brought it up so you can supply it as I have several times in this discussion) that TR posed NO RISK to any mistrial. It is bunkum to suggest that after his "no risk " actions and incarceration that his presence might constitute grounds for a mistrial!

He failed to understand the law, was previously found guilty

No! YOU fail to understand the law! AS outlined by the Lord Chief Justice. Contempt is not a criome for which someone is found guilty! And tell me how many journalists have being given 14 months
- the defence team of the grooming gang tried to use it to declare a mistrial -
Which PROVED THE POINT . they attempts were thrown out because his behaviour did not in any way affect the trial!
As the Judge the prosecution and the appeal court said!

they would likely have succeeded.

Rubbish! they DID NOT succeed! And to assert that if TR was left at large they might succeed and he might commit contempt is "thoughcrime" . We do not put people in Prison on the grounds that they might do something wrong if we dont incarcerate them!

- he was told he was lucky to escape jail and that if he continued such behaviour while on suspended sentence he would be looking at a term of at least 13 months.

WHERE was he told that? How many journalists since WWII have served 14 months or even served a DAY in prison for contempt?

cases are not comparable,

A contempt case IS COMPARABLE with another contempt case! How many people have got 14 months for contempt since WWII?

the UK court system does not work the way you think it does.

What we can all see is the UK courts system does not work at all for some people like the Birmingham 6 Guildford 4 and others!

a reply to: bastion

he filmed members of the jury, witnesses, victims entering court despite their being anonymity bans on this information to protect the identities of the victims.

He did not film any victims or Jury members. The Jury were DISMISSED and no evidence was being heard from witnessess. You are just making stuff up! the hearing was a SENTENCING hearing after the two Islamic child gang rapists had already being found guilty!

originally posted by: bartconnolly
Of course you can compare them! first of all they are decisions in a court and are comparable on that. second of all they are for the same non criminal Act "Contempt of court" .

You are absolutely right. But also very wrong. No two fraud cases are the same, yet the sentencing guidelines are. What is important is the precedents that are set when a case is judged, and this is a a root principle of Common Law. Someone taking photos in a court, or whipping their boobs out, would be contempt and a judge can look back to see what previous precedents have been set and impose a tariff within the existing guidelines.

In the case of Robinson the infringement was somewhat more complicated, so took a different turn as a similar case had not already set the precedent.

So looking at a fraud trial the judge would be able to draw similarities from multiple sources to ascertain the type of tariff to be levelled, based on previous precedents. This means that people who are found guilty of similar offences get the same sentence.

Now, I know you are passionate about this, but you are beating a drum which has no skin, of flogging a horse that was buried some time ago. You need to start your journey into law by understanding the basics, and these include the latitude the judge has in sentencing a person found guilty of a crime.

Here you go

originally posted by: bartconnolly
a reply to: oldcarpy

so you now admit the story was fake only after being called out on it? And you wish it was true? so you would like violence to be done to Tommy Robinson?

Only after you kindly pointed it out.
Yes, I do wish it was true.
Yes.
But I do not share your obsession with this so, goodbye.

originally posted by: paraphi
originally posted by: bartconnolly

No two fraud cases are the same, yet the sentencing guidelines are.

And your sentencing guidelines for contempt of court is????

What is important is the precedents that are set when a case is judged, and this is a a root principle of Common Law. Someone taking photos in a court, or whipping their boobs out, would be contempt and a judge can look back to see what previous precedents have been set and impose a tariff within the existing guidelines.

In the case of Robinson the infringement was somewhat more complicated, so took a different turn as a similar case had not already set the precedent.

Because the SAME and MORE EXTREME acts were done by a Sikh journalist outside the SAME court for the SAME trial while it was ongoing and BEFORE the verdict was delivered and the accused were hounded by that journalist and a crowd and the SAME judge did nothing! So where does that leave you " equality of treatment" ?
Variious comparable cases for contempt HAVE occurred over the last 50 years . Much more extreme casesa and in not a single one of these was any journalist sent to a prison!

So looking at a fraud trial the judge would be able to draw similarities from multiple sources to ascertain the type of tariff to be levelled, based on previous precedents. This means that people who are found guilty of similar offences get the same sentence.

Except they dont! and also contempt is not a "sentence" for a "crime" as the Loprd chief justice has stated!

Now, I know you are passionate about this, but you are beating a drum which has no skin, of flogging a horse that was buried some time ago. You need to start your journey into law by understanding the basics, and these include the latitude the judge has in sentencing a person found guilty of a crime.

Unlike you i cite actual cases not opinion in this discussion.
www.bailii.org...
Paragraph 83:
There was no clarity about what parts of the video were relied upon as amounting to contempt, what parts the appellant accepted through his counsel amounted to contempt and for what conduct he was sentenced.
Paragraph 70-71
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.
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.

www.judiciary.uk...

Para 45 Mr Caldecott argues that the actus reus of this offence is committed by the reporting in
and of itself.

But this is only true if the actus reus constitute material evidence as to contempt. So the question her is whether for examnple “the alleged perpetrators are in court today and people needto know what is going on, people need to know these court cases are happening" is EVIDENCE of contempt under the section 4(2) Order

HOW is announcing that people are on trial for child grooming in any way afecting the process of that trial?
" You see that man who was getting aggressive as he walked
into court, the man who faces charges of child abduction, rape,
prostitution… "

How is saying that affecting the process of the trial or the jury?
"[p11] I’m on a suspended sentence, suspended prison sentence
which was supposed to be to prevent me or deter me from
reporting on these sort of cases."

How is saying that breaching any order about not reporting on the details or process of the trial?

" in this case there’s 29 perpetrators, 2 women, 2 Muslim
women on this trial. Not this part but they’re on part of this 29
trial, 2 Muslim women. All of them are alleged to have been
involved so all of them are innocent until proven guilty and 30%
of them, if you’re just joining us, are called Mohammed. They
are from majority Pakistani community of Huddersfield and
these rapes happened between 2004 and 2011. So today’s the
verdict, I believe the jury went out yesterday to decide. "

How is reading out this information which TR got from publicly available sources affecting the process or jury?
[p24] There’s a grooming court case going on, there’s 29 people
on charge, 10 of them are up for verdict today. [male bystander]
What are they charged for? [Respondent] Raping girls as young
as 11, 18 girls….
… are part of this trial … So yeah I’m here to report to let people
know these Court cases are going on …
[p39] “[male bystander] What’s going on here?... Paedophiles?
[Respondent] Yeah 29 of them on trial, 2 women for grooming
11-year olds, well allegedly grooming 11-year olds.”

Now saying 29 pedophiles on trial for pedophilia MIGHT be suggesting that they are guilty. thats the worst TR did but how is it in any way affecting the process or outcome of the trial?

In the Dr Harold Shipman Trial ( im sure you are aware of that trial) Mark Kaye of Preston-based Rock FM complained about the high cost of the trial and added that Shipman was "innocent until proved guilty as sin", to a chorus of "guilty, guilty" from colleague Judith Vause.

Not one day in prison!

In 1997, the Evening Standard was fined £40,000 (plus £50,000 legal costs) for revealing that three of the six men on trial for an escape from Whitemoor Prison were convicted IRA terrorists

Not a day served in a prison.

So where are YOUR "comparable cases" ! you will not find ANY because they do not exist!

a reply to: bartconnolly

Give it a rest, eh?

originally posted by: bartconnolly
Unlike you i cite actual cases not opinion in this discussion.
www.bailii.org...

Um. I think that I was the first person to post links to the court papers et al, so am familiar with the details of the case.

We are going around in circles here, but my advice (well back to someone - could have been you) is not to selectively quote from the sentencing narrative, as the whole thing should be taken together. You are quoting selectively from Robinson's appeal, which he won, but only by deferral of legal opinion.

HOW is announcing that people are on trial for child grooming in any way afecting the process of that trial?

That's for the judge to decide.

Live with it Robinson, or Yaxley-Lennon to use his real name, is in prison as he neraly disrupted a criminal trial.

a reply to: paraphi

said

I think that I was the first person to post links to the court papers et al, so am familiar with the details of the case.

I dont think you were first to post ALL the cases. But in the above reply Im not referring to your earlier posts or to my earlier ones Im posting the actual references that were in them.
But if you wish to refere to any reference you posted in any earlier post please supply a reference to it which is why I said "i cite actual cases not opinion in this discussion."
If you offer an opinion show evidence to support it and not just restate the opinion.
You can of course reference your earlier post if it contains the reference.

not to selectively quote from the sentencing narrative, as the whole thing should be taken together. You are quoting selectively from Robinson's appeal, which he won, but only by deferral of legal opinion.

Wrong!
Im quoting from points made by the Lord chief Justice which were NOT taken up in the appeal . Such as the "sentence" not being a sentence and "contempt" not being a crime. The nature and punishment for the offence to which the LCJ devoted several paragraphs. This related to the current discussion of comparable severity of pubishment
Some parts were taken up in the last hearing ( from the same portion of the LCJ comments on punishment) and not directly referred to e.g. the fact that he must be released when 50% is served.
But YOU HAVE PROVIDED NO EVIDENCE of any comparable case where a Journalist got 14 months for contempt!
Please supply evidence to support this argument you made.
You said that punishment is reflective of similar cases. so SHOW ME the similar cases.
I do not believe any cases of a journalist getting such a sentence as you claimed exists!

You are quoting selectively from Robinson's appeal, which he won, but only by deferral of legal opinion.

Wrong! Im quoting from an appeal FOR SPECIFIC ALLEGATIONS which he won. He then had DIFFERENT allegations put to him which he had not defended in his original appeal. If he appeals the current contempt then a legal opinion on these NEW allegations will arise. and he would have grounds to appeal because these are DIFFERENT charges!
I earlier said
"HOW is announcing that people are on trial for child grooming in any way affecting the process of that trial?"
To which you replied

That's for the judge to decide.

Two Judges already decided! the original Marsden and an appeal Judge and both decided that he in NO WAY affected the outcome of the trial or the conviction of the muslims for gang rape.

in prison as he neraly disrupted a criminal trial.

Wrong! again! You keep harping on about the DIFFERENT and DISMISSED charges! He was charged with three NEW and DIFFERENT charges none of which were "disrupting a trial"
The main one they had was upsetting the two convicted child rapists and calling on his supporters to hound the families of these convicted Islamic child rapists.
He did not do that. It is clear in the video he referred to a foreigner who was over "Generation Identity" and how the news papers were hounding him and his family. He then said something like "why don't you hound the people doing the rapes or their family" and he was clearly referring to THE MEDIA and how they treat him and his family and friends and people like him who might criticise Islam. He was asking why the media dont hound people who commit gang rapes like they hound him for drawinbg attention to them when the media and establishment refuse to draw attention to them? He was not calling for his supporters to hound the families of any of the convicted Islamic rapists and the proof is it never happened anyway! If it did the newspapers would be all over it!

I am losing the will to live.

originally posted by: oldcarpy
I am losing the will to live.

Maybe if YOU tried shouting RANDOM words it might HELP...

a reply to: ScepticScot

I'm beyond that, I'm afraid. Must...try...to stay.....awake.....

a reply to: oldcarpy
Try sticking to discussing the subject and it might help