Jump to content

Tommy Robinson,


redial
 Share

Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, Gordon R said:

He knew what he was doing was wrong, but went ahead and did it. He sought publicity and got it. He has to face the consequences of his actions.

That said, he is slated for basically telling the truth. He has a very narrow range of which subjects he speaks about and his motives are clearly open to question. His background and past behaviour do his credibility little good, but tell me if he is lying.

 

A fair assessment of the situation.

I’m surprised by the lack of grasp of why he has been prosecuted, even on this thread the straightforward explanations have been provided.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 153
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

On ‎06‎/‎07‎/‎2019 at 08:41, Ultrastu said:

He reported the news about some rapists going to court to highlight the truth of the situation .and made a video about it and posted it on social media .

Exactly the same as every other reporter from any news network is doing every day around the world .BUT because he  is who he is .and the dangerous string pullers at the top of the chain dont like that he is exposing their agendas then have him silenced .

Make no mistake-  to find tommy "guilty "of this trumped up charge is a warning to us all .that the freedoms we once took for granted have gone and you will "tow the line or be punished "

 

Well said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 06/07/2019 at 08:06, henry d said:

As Zapp said, plus he is right wing/fascist agitator.

Is that as opposed to a left-wing fascist agitator? They do exist, you know!

On 06/07/2019 at 10:20, Zapp said:

He jeopardized their trial.  They might have walked because of his antics. 

I want child rapists locked up, not have their cases thrown out for the sake of a bit of publicity for TR.

No, apparently he did not jeopardise their trial, they had been found guilty, and were there to be sentenced.....unless I,m mistaken?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, pinfireman said:

No, apparently he did not jeopardise their trial, they had been found guilty, and were there to be sentenced.....unless I,m mistaken?

Daveboy's post on page 1 explains the ins and outs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2012/oct/22/daily-mail-mirror-fined-contempt-court

No journalist had ever gone to prison for contempt of court. TR will probably go back to prison for who he is not what he did! "Causing the defendants distress whilst going back to be sentenced ". That's a lame excuse and it took the top lord justice to come up with this as all the other trumped up charges got dropped  which led to TR being released from Belmarsh the first time. 

I can't find the case, but a journalist did collapse a well known trial in this country and only got a fine for his trouble, double standards! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, henry d said:

Can't find it and it's a well known trial???

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13905765

 

Take your pick of the few trials towards the bottom of the link. 

As stated, no journalist have ever gone to prison! 

3 minutes ago, henry d said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13905765

On my phone, so hopefully this is the one

Looks like you beat me to it! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No you said there was a well known trial, if it is the same context as TR's then we can say he is unfairly treated, however he was already under a suspended sentence for contempt of court in similar circumstances and at his initial trial said that he was aware he could face a jail term. If the journo in the "well known trial" was under the same circumstances then it could be said that TR is possibly unfairly treated, but I suspect that is not the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whatever your sympathies with Tommy Robinson, he can hardly claim ignorance. He did what he did in the full knowledge of the consequences. Now he has to face them. 

Sympathy is not what he wants, nor leniency. He is hell bent on becoming a martyr.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, PIL1 said:

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2012/oct/22/daily-mail-mirror-fined-contempt-court

No journalist had ever gone to prison for contempt of court. TR will probably go back to prison for who he is not what he did! "Causing the defendants distress whilst going back to be sentenced ". That's a lame excuse and it took the top lord justice to come up with this as all the other trumped up charges got dropped  which led to TR being released from Belmarsh the first time. 

I can't find the case, but a journalist did collapse a well known trial in this country and only got a fine for his trouble, double standards! 

There are cases where journalists have been held in contempt of court for breaching court orders in the UK.  I cannot argue whether any have been sentenced to prison, as I don't know, however sentencing in any case takes into account several factors including the offenders criminal history and background.

TR has convictions for violence (assaulting a police officer who was attempting to protect TR's girlfriend from being assaulted by TR), financial and immigration frauds (false mortgage documents and a false passport), drug possession, various public order offences and of course contempt of court.  He has had two previous custodial sentences as well as a suspended prison sentence for contempt of court.

So is TR being treated unfairly for being given jail time for yet again wilfully choosing to ignore the rule of law? I don't think so considering his history.

I very much hope the suggestion earlier in the thread suggesting rehabilitation instead of a custodial sentence was tongue in cheek.

The excuse that he was simply calling out child rapists as being evil is nothing other than a deflection.  Of course they are evil and deserve severe punishment, however saying that TR is an out an out scumbag does not detract from that in any way.

For completeness I should also say that Stephen Yaxley-Lennon or Andrew McMaster or Paul Harris or Wayne King or Stephen Lennon or whatever pseudonym he chooses to use cannot hide that he is an out and out scumbag.

I struggle to understand why anyone rational would choose to defend him because some of what he says is true.

So often the contributors to PW criticise the justice system in this country as being too soft and lenient, but when we jail a scumbag for being a repeat offender who has deliberately chosen to publicly flout the order of the court for nothing other than self publicity they scream it's the establishment running scared or it's a stitch up, just because some of what TR says they agree with.  If you find yourself in that camp then you need to take a long hard look at yourself in the mirror and think about what you stand for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, grrclark said:

So often the contributors to PW criticise the justice system in this country as being too soft and lenient, but when we jail a scumbag for being a repeat offender who has deliberately chosen to publicly flout the order of the court for nothing other than self publicity they scream it's the establishment running scared or it's a stitch up, just because some of what TR says they agree with.  If you find yourself in that camp then you need to take a long hard look at yourself in the mirror and think about what you stand for.

This ! 👍

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, grrclark said:

For completeness I should also say that Stephen Yaxley-Lennon or Andrew McMaster or Paul Harris or Wayne King or Stephen Lennon or whatever pseudonym he chooses to use cannot hide that he is an out and out scumbag.

Correct - just one look at his history shows that.

2 hours ago, grrclark said:

I struggle to understand why anyone rational would choose to defend him because some of what he says is true.

+1

2 hours ago, grrclark said:

So often the contributors to PW criticise the justice system in this country as being too soft and lenient, but when we jail a scumbag for being a repeat offender who has deliberately chosen to publicly flout the order of the court for nothing other than self publicity they scream it's the establishment running scared or it's a stitch up, just because some of what TR says they agree with.  If you find yourself in that camp then you need to take a long hard look at yourself in the mirror and think about what you stand for.

+1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, grrclark said:

There are cases where journalists have been held in contempt of court for breaching court orders in the UK.  I cannot argue whether any have been sentenced to prison, as I don't know, however sentencing in any case takes into account several factors including the offenders criminal history and background.

TR has convictions for violence (assaulting a police officer who was attempting to protect TR's girlfriend from being assaulted by TR), financial and immigration frauds (false mortgage documents and a false passport), drug possession, various public order offences and of course contempt of court.  He has had two previous custodial sentences as well as a suspended prison sentence for contempt of court.

So is TR being treated unfairly for being given jail time for yet again wilfully choosing to ignore the rule of law? I don't think so considering his history.

I very much hope the suggestion earlier in the thread suggesting rehabilitation instead of a custodial sentence was tongue in cheek.

The excuse that he was simply calling out child rapists as being evil is nothing other than a deflection.  Of course they are evil and deserve severe punishment, however saying that TR is an out an out scumbag does not detract from that in any way.

For completeness I should also say that Stephen Yaxley-Lennon or Andrew McMaster or Paul Harris or Wayne King or Stephen Lennon or whatever pseudonym he chooses to use cannot hide that he is an out and out scumbag.

I struggle to understand why anyone rational would choose to defend him because some of what he says is true.

So often the contributors to PW criticise the justice system in this country as being too soft and lenient, but when we jail a scumbag for being a repeat offender who has deliberately chosen to publicly flout the order of the court for nothing other than self publicity they scream it's the establishment running scared or it's a stitch up, just because some of what TR says they agree with.  If you find yourself in that camp then you need to take a long hard look at yourself in the mirror and think about what you stand for.

Just about nailed it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, grrclark said:

There are cases where journalists have been held in contempt of court for breaching court orders in the UK.  I cannot argue whether any have been sentenced to prison, as I don't know, however sentencing in any case takes into account several factors including the offenders criminal history and background.

TR has convictions for violence (assaulting a police officer who was attempting to protect TR's girlfriend from being assaulted by TR), financial and immigration frauds (false mortgage documents and a false passport), drug possession, various public order offences and of course contempt of court.  He has had two previous custodial sentences as well as a suspended prison sentence for contempt of court.

So is TR being treated unfairly for being given jail time for yet again wilfully choosing to ignore the rule of law? I don't think so considering his history.

I very much hope the suggestion earlier in the thread suggesting rehabilitation instead of a custodial sentence was tongue in cheek.

The excuse that he was simply calling out child rapists as being evil is nothing other than a deflection.  Of course they are evil and deserve severe punishment, however saying that TR is an out an out scumbag does not detract from that in any way.

For completeness I should also say that Stephen Yaxley-Lennon or Andrew McMaster or Paul Harris or Wayne King or Stephen Lennon or whatever pseudonym he chooses to use cannot hide that he is an out and out scumbag.

I struggle to understand why anyone rational would choose to defend him because some of what he says is true.

So often the contributors to PW criticise the justice system in this country as being too soft and lenient, but when we jail a scumbag for being a repeat offender who has deliberately chosen to publicly flout the order of the court for nothing other than self publicity they scream it's the establishment running scared or it's a stitch up, just because some of what TR says they agree with.  If you find yourself in that camp then you need to take a long hard look at yourself in the mirror and think about what you stand for.

Hi grrclark, your an upstanding fella and what you have wrote can't be argued with as that's his charge sheet. 

TR is no angel as your post hilights the fact but if it was not for him the general public would be unaware what's been happening all over this country concerning the asian grooming gangs. Police officers right to the very top knew what was going on as did the councilors in these northern towns and cities. Some either turned a blind eye or just did not know what to do affraid they would be  labelled racists. I don't know the full facts of the matter but I have watched the  inquiries where these councillors and top brass officers have been made to step-down because they failed to act on information given to them. Maybe without TR and the attention he brought to what was/is going on, these people would probably still be in their jobs! 

Going back to your post above, I believe I may be wrong, his girlfriend then is his wife now had a heated drunken domestic and the police officer was off duty, so not in uniform? I would not of thought if he was that bad a partner then they would not of had two children together, has he ever been arrested for domestic violence, again, I think not. 

Drug possession, I would say more than half of our honourable politicians sat in Parliament fall in this category! 

Like I said, definitely no angel but with his background he never could be. There must be something that motivates him as he puts his head above the parapet, so to speak. He had a thriving plumbing business and about five home's so he's not doing his thing for the money. The msm claim he's a racist yet he has black and Asian friends so this can't be right either. He has never been charged with racism as far as I know, an easy arrestable offence as a few careless words and he'd of found himself carted off and rightly so! 

I'm nearly 53 so no spring chicken but I find myself agreeing with a lot that he talks about. Maybe there's more to him than most know about, until that day, I'll follow what he has to say! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot of"I think" in your post, let's look at the facts. He is a racist, a thug and a self publicist, regarding the knowledge of whether officials knew about what was going on; this all came out during the trials and didn't need TR getting embroiled in it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, henry d said:

A lot of"I think" in your post, let's look at the facts. He is a racist, a thug and a self publicist, regarding the knowledge of whether officials knew about what was going on; this all came out during the trials and didn't need TR getting embroiled in it.

So that’s what you think . Others like what he dose. carry on tommy so we know what’s happening around us 

ps Tommy go after all paedo’s not just of colour or religion 

Edited by martyn2233
Add more information
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...