Tommy Robinson case is thrown out as his supporters say it is a "win"

[daviemac]

Banning someone from a area or district is one thing, being banned from entering the geographical area inside the M25 is ridiculous, but it was done for a reason.

You are so tied up in defending this lowlife you are showing you haven't got a clue, they can set any bail conditions they like, ban you from whole towns/cities/counties, they can even tell you where you have to live or put you on curfew with a tag if necessary.

For someone like him it was far easier to ban him from anywhere withing the M25 than select certain areas.

[Jerboa]

Clearly you just parrot what Tommy says


The court case outside of which Tommy live-streamed was part one of a multi part trial.
Those under part one had already been found guilty and were being sentenced, but those under parts two and three had not been put to trial.

Reporting restrictions were in place during the trial, the document Tommy read out had previously been reported prior to restrictions and was out of date.  He read out the names of people who were not subject to prosecution

Do you get the irony of Tommy ‘reporting’ what the main stream media won’t report by reading out a main stream media report?
Do you get he was reading public information from local news and bbc, he also stated on the livestream that it is only alleged until they are found guilty, and not all Muslim men are like them, I was watching it live btw.

Persons under parts two and three pushed for mistrial due to Tommy’s live stream

The names and details were public knowledge, he didn't collapse the court case, the court did not have warnings about restrictions, which they are obliged to do. There wasn't just TR reporting outside the court. And the appeal to the rapists conviction was thrown out, as TR did not cause a unsafe conviction. Name me one journalist in this country who was sentenced immediately to 13 months on contempt of court charges, I will be happy to wait a long time.

[Jerboa]

You are so tied up in defending this lowlife you are showing you haven't got a clue, they can set any bail conditions they like, ban you from whole towns/cities/counties, they can even tell you where you have to live or put you on curfew with a tag if necessary.

For someone like him it was far easier to ban him from anywhere withing the M25 than select certain areas.

They do have the power, but that doesn't make it right, a peaceful free man should have the liberty to come and go as they please, no different to the hypocritical Gideon Faulter who called out the Met interaction with him. Bail conditions should always be balanced and fair and not draconian, the police have used bail conditions on TR for years, example when he was released from prison after the mortgage fraud on licence, he was banned from contacting members of the EDL, what has that to do with so called fraud?

[David1970]

Stalking? that was a bag of total bollocks, definition of stalking, perusing someone over a set period of time that causes alarm and distress. He rang her intercom from outside her apartment block, as she had a hit piece on him, but she didn't want his right to reply.

On 17 January 2021 at around 9.50pm, far-right English Defence League founder Stephen Yaxley-Lennon appeared at Dearden's home after hiring a private investigator to find her address, and threatened to falsely accuse her partner of being a paedophile after she reported in The Independent that Yaxley-Lennon had been accused of misusing supporters’ money. He was given a temporary stalking prevention order in a hearing at Westminster Magistrates' Court, which he did not attend and in October 2021 was given a five-year stalking prevention order, banning him from contacting her about anything other than her news stories about him

So according to you he got a 5 years stalking prevention order for not stalking 

You have totally lost the plot when it comes to your hero the criminal Yaxley-Lennon.

[daviemac]

They do have the power, but that doesn't make it right, a peaceful free man should have the liberty to come and go as they please, no different to the hypocritical Gideon Faulter who called out the Met interaction with him. Bail conditions should always be balanced and fair and not draconian, the police have used bail conditions on TR for years, example when he was released from prison after the mortgage fraud on licence, he was banned from contacting members of the EDL, what has that to do with so called fraud?

Just because you don't think it's right for them to set bail conditions doesn't make it wrong. They set the conditions to suit who is being bailed and he is nothing but a trouble maker so has strict conditions, if he wasn't such a tosser he wouldn't have committed the offence so wouldn't need bail.

I don't know the details of his fraud case but I'm sure his solicitor would have argued on his behalf regarding the licence conditions set. I would imagine the conditions of the licence when he was released from prison would be set by the courts, not the police. The police would only enforce what the court ordered.

[RedKettle]

They do have the power, but that doesn't make it right, a peaceful free man should have the liberty to come and go as they please, no different to the hypocritical Gideon Faulter who called out the Met interaction with him. Bail conditions should always be balanced and fair and not draconian, the police have used bail conditions on TR for years, example when he was released from prison after the mortgage fraud on licence, he was banned from contacting members of the EDL, what has that to do with so called fraud?

Who is the “peaceful man” you reference?  I thought we were talking about that lowlife thug Tommy Robinson?

[mills_and_bhuna]

They do have the power, but that doesn't make it right, a peaceful free man should have the liberty to come and go as they please, no different to the hypocritical Gideon Faulter who called out the Met interaction with him. Bail conditions should always be balanced and fair and not draconian, the police have used bail conditions on TR for years, example when he was released from prison after the mortgage fraud on licence, he was banned from contacting members of the EDL, what has that to do with so called fraud?

Much as I dislike Robinson I agree with pretty much everything you've said here.

[Bigwilts]

The names and details were public knowledge,

The details he read out were public knowledge & also out of date
Why did he need to ‘report’ on what was already out there and previously reporting ?

 he didn't collapse the court case, the court did not have warnings about restrictions, which they are obliged to do. There wasn't just TR reporting outside the court.

Tommy was very aware of the restrictions - he stated that they were in force

And the appeal to the rapists conviction was thrown out, as TR did not cause an unsafe conviction.

However he did cause appeals for mistrial
(He also harassed  passing brown members of the public accusing them of being defendants)

 Name me one journalist in this country who was sentenced immediately to 13 months on contempt of court charges, I will be happy to wait a long time.

Immediately?   You mean acting in contempt of court whilst being under conditions for being in contempt of court

[Bangman]

Where is the video of TR apologising? Come on must try harder, if it was posted I guarantee someone would of saved it, and posted it.
Did you watch his documentary on the case, what did you think?

Your nonsense and blind love is evident and over the top,
The video was on his Facebook, and I have seen it, if you don't want to beleive it, that's your problem. I'll attach The sun newspaper, theres many others.
Attached below..The video is playable on the sun website, he admits he is embarassed he lied.
So now what do you have to say Jerboa?.
Let me guess, Tommy's still a hero and blah blah blah and you will change narrative and ask another question

And yes I did see a few minutes of those videos you shared the link of.
Absolute bollocks, I didn't know why I gave you the benefit of the doubt and wasted a few minutes watching Tommy fan boys share their conspiracy theory.

If you don't want to beleive what the evidence says, the police reports, the lawyers reports, the jury, the judge.. but you'd rather listen to some childish theories, your free to do so.

I won't be replying to Jerboa and waste my valuable time with ignorance. Feel free to beleive in what ever you desire.


Hidden Image/Members Only

Hidden Image/Members Only

[PumpDump]

Just because you don't think it's right for them to set bail conditions doesn't make it wrong. They set the conditions to suit who is being bailed and he is nothing but a trouble maker so has strict conditions, if he wasn't such a tosser he wouldn't have committed the offence so wouldn't need bail.

I don't know the details of his fraud case but I'm sure his solicitor would have argued on his behalf regarding the licence conditions set. I would imagine the conditions of the licence when he was released from prison would be set by the courts, not the police. The police would only enforce what the court ordered.

I despise Yaxley-Lennon, but even I can see it is wrong to use bail conditions to restrict his freedom of movement and speech. It is a very slippery slope when we excuse the government and allow them to shut down people we don't like or don't agree with.

[scutty brown]

I despise Yaxley-Lennon, but even I can see it is wrong to use bail conditions to restrict his freedom of movement and speech. It is a very slippery slope when we excuse the government and allow them to shut down people we don't like or don't agree with.

The bail conditions are there to stop him interfering with anyone else's freedom of movement or speech prior to any trial. It's not to "shut him down", but rather to prevent him "shutting anyone else down"

[daviemac]

I despise Yaxley-Lennon, but even I can see it is wrong to use bail conditions to restrict his freedom of movement and speech. It is a very slippery slope when we excuse the government and allow them to shut down people we don't like or don't agree with.

So you disagree with bail conditions being imposed on anyone no matter the risk they might pose without them or is it just this thug's freedom you want to protect.

If you cause bother in any city centre the police can ban you from the said city for the night. it's for the benefit of the majority of law abiding citizens. You appear to favour a system where thugs and trouble makers can do as they please.

It's very simple, if you don't want to have bail conditions restricting your movement or you don't want to be banned from a city centre don't break the fucking law.

[PumpDump]

So you disagree with bail conditions being imposed on anyone no matter the risk they might pose without them or is it just this thug's freedom you want to protect.

If you cause bother in any city centre the police can ban you from the said city for the night. it's for the benefit of the majority of law abiding citizens. You appear to favour a system where thugs and trouble makers can do as they please.

It's very simple, if you don't want to have bail conditions restricting your movement or you don't want to be banned from a city centre don't break the fucking law.

Admittedly I didn't know the background to this so just did some research. Apparently last November he was in the vicinity of a march against antisemitism. The organisers said they didn't want him there. The complained to the police, the police asked him to leave the area. He refused. He was arrested, charged and appeared at court the next day. He was released on bail, his bail condition was that he is not to enter London.

Have I got anything wrong there?

[daviemac]

Admittedly I didn't know the background to this so just did some research. Apparently last November he was in the vicinity of a march against antisemitism. The organisers said they didn't want him there. The complained to the police, the police asked him to leave the area. He refused. He was arrested, charged and appeared at court the next day. He was released on bail, his bail condition was that he is not to enter London.

Have I got anything wrong there?

I've no idea but the police were justified in asking him to leave in order to prevent a possible breach of the peace, it's the sort of thing they do all the time. He refused to comply with a lawful order given by the police so he was rightly arrested. His arrest was for refusing to comply with the order to leave the area given by the police not for being where he was. When he appeared in court his bail conditions were set by the court not the police, he then had a choice accept the conditions or be remanded in custody. I'm sure his lawyer would have put an argument forward regarding the conditions set which the court would have considered.

Whether or not you agree it was all done within the law. If he wanted to avoid any hassle he should have left the area and complained about it afterwards but that's not his style, doing that wouldn't stir enough shit up or get his fanboys rushing to his defence.

[PumpDump]

I've no idea but the police were justified in asking him to leave in order to prevent a possible breach of the peace, it's the sort of thing they do all the time. He refused to comply with a lawful order given by the police so he was rightly arrested. His arrest was for refusing to comply with the order to leave the area given by the police not for being where he was. When he appeared in court his bail conditions were set by the court not the police, he then had a choice accept the conditions or be remanded in custody. I'm sure his lawyer would have put an argument forward regarding the conditions set which the court would have considered.

Whether or not you agree it was all done within the law. If he wanted to avoid any hassle he should have left the area and complained about it afterwards but that's not his style, doing that wouldn't stir enough shit up or get his fanboys rushing to his defence.

What right have the organisers got to ask the police to remove him from the area? Exactly what was the risk of him being there? I don't believe the police were justified in asking him to leave in order to prevent a "possible" breach of the peace. That is bullshit. Can the same argument therefore be
 used to compel pro-Israel supporters from the route of a pro-Palestinian march? As I said, a very slippery slope.

[daviemac]

What right have the organisers got to ask the police to remove him from the area? Exactly what was the risk of him being there? I don't believe the police were justified in asking him to leave in order to prevent a "possible" breach of the peace. That is bullshit. Can the same argument therefore be
 used to compel pro-Israel supporters from the route of a pro-Palestinian march? As I said, a very slippery slope.

Like I have said all along just because his fanboys don't think it's right doesn't make it wrong.

Anyone can make a complaint to the police or express concerns and if they think it's justified they will act as they did in this case.

What you believe is totally irrelevant, the police gave him a lawful order, he ignored it and was arrested, he appeared in court and was given bail with conditions. The police order people to leave ares all the time, it happens in city centers all over the country.

Anyway I can't be arsed with those who hero worship and stick up for that lowlife scum especially when they introduce irrelevant arguments to try and justify their stance. It was one man in one place who was instructed to leave and that has nothing to do with any hypothetical scenarios.

[Bigwilts]

Admittedly I didn't know the background to this so just did some research. Apparently last November he was in the vicinity of a march against antisemitism. The organisers said they didn't want him there. The complained to the police, the police asked him to leave the area. He refused. He was arrested, charged and appeared at court the next day. He was released on bail, his bail condition was that he is not to enter London.

Have I got anything wrong there?

Nothing wrong, but you’re only missing the hours that the police gave him.

He spent those hours having breakfast (hence he makes claims that he was arrested for having breakfast), trying to get a live stream set up (complaining to his buddy that just recording him isn’t good enough - it’s the livestreams that generate more income), gettting the message out and gathering a group of his followers to also film/livestream and considering leaving the cafe as a group circling him to get some ‘better’ action with the police, and also being asked by the police if he has press credentials (he doesn’t despite Ezra Levants efforts to train Tommy) or who his employers are (He brands as Urban Scoop, which was ‘owned’ by ‘Freestyle freelance Ltd’ and is now ‘Thinking independent media Ltd’)

* Freestyle went into ‘liquidation’ without submitting any accounts as is standard for all businesses associated with Tommy, and at that time was with the receivers, this didn’t stop Tommy’s fund raising emails coming with the liquidated business’s details and before being associated with the new Thinking independent media
Funnily enough all of these ‘businesses’ that collect funds, and don’t produce accounts all use the same Mail Drop box address and end up in liquidation with the same solicitors

[PumpDump]

Anyway I can't be arsed with those who hero worship and stick up for that lowlife scum especially when they introduce irrelevant arguments to try and justify their stance. It was one man in one place who was instructed to leave and that has nothing to do with any hypothetical scenarios.

Are you referring to me as someone who "hero worships" him?

[daviemac]

Are you referring to me as someone who "hero worships" him?

You are one of the ones on this thread defending him so if the cap fits. . . . . .

Anyway I have better things to do than continue on this thread, I've said all I need to say so would only be repeating myself. Whatever question you might want to ask have been answered already.

I can do not more than state what I think of this lowlife scum and those who support him.

I should add that you are extremely naive or have led a very sheltered life if you think it's only the likes of Tommy Robinson who have severe bail conditions set by courts.

[Bangman]

What right have the organisers got to ask the police to remove him from the area?

Should I respond to such ignorance. Here goes..
   ermmm, They are the organisers. They have a responsibility and having Tommy attend endorses Racism whether his fan boys like it or not.

And FYI, when ever that Thug and his hooligan supporters turn up, they throw missiles, act violent, last time a police horse was punched as well as many of our officers being pushed.
Way too much hard work for our boys and this criminal should be banned from London.

One of my offices is few mins walk from Whitehall, central London and I occasionally go saturdays and have seen the protests.
If you think the 10,000s of pro Palestine protesters are all mis behaving you really are deluded by news and a video or 2.
If 5 people misbehave and 10,000 don't. That's not even 1%, and it is overall peaceful.
When I witnessed Tommy's thugs on St georges day, felt like I was witnessing Football factory live. Absolute thuggish behaviour, frequent swearing and provoking officers to fight. And it's about 85%.

Pro Palestine supporters, If there are idiots who throw missiles at police or attack police, then they should also be arrested and from what I've seen, they have been arrests.

Nothing compared to the violence when your Hero Tommy comes and much more hard work for our Police being abused by thugs that beat up there girlfriends.

[PumpDump]

You are one of the ones on this thread defending him so if the cap fits. . . . . .

Anyway I have better things to do than continue on this thread, I've said all I need to say so would only be repeating myself. Whatever question you might want to ask have been answered already.

I can do not more than state what I think of this lowlife scum and those who support him.

I should add that you are extremely naive or have led a very sheltered life if you think it's only the likes of Tommy Robinson who have severe bail conditions set by courts.

As I said I do not support him, in fact I despise the man, I despise everything he stands for. However I do believe in freedom of speech. And I do notice his freedom of speech is curtailed, he is being targeted by the authorities and treated more harshly than others. I am not afraid of the opinions of idiots like him, I am not a baby who needs my ears protected by the nanny state. I believe idiots should be allowed to speak freely, to show themselves for the fools they are, and ridiculed for it.

But you would rather act like a child and call names. I'm not surprised actually, it's what I've come to expect from you.

[PumpDump]

Should I respond to such ignorance. Here goes..
   ermmm, They are the organisers. They have a responsibility and having Tommy attend endorses Racism whether his fan boys like it or not.

And FYI, when ever that Thug and his hooligan supporters turn up, they throw missiles, act violent, last time a police horse was punched as well as many of our officers being pushed.
Way too much hard work for our boys and this criminal should be banned from London.

One of my offices is few mins walk from Whitehall, central London and I occasionally go saturdays and have seen the protests.
If you think the 10,000s of pro Palestine protesters are all mis behaving you really are deluded by news and a video or 2.
If 5 people misbehave and 10,000 don't. That's not even 1%, and it is overall peaceful.
When I witnessed Tommy's thugs on St georges day, felt like I was witnessing Football factory live. Absolute thuggish behaviour, frequent swearing and provoking officers to fight. And it's about 85%.

Pro Palestine supporters, If there are idiots who throw missiles at police or attack police, then they should also be arrested and from what I've seen, they have been arrests.

Nothing compared to the violence when your Hero Tommy comes and much more hard work for our Police being abused by thugs that beat up there girlfriends.

It's bloody typical, people just want to label others and shut them up. I am not a supporter of him. My political views are complete opposite. In fact I have attended almost every pro-Palestinian protest in London. So put that in your pipe and smoke it.

[RedKettle]

As I said I do not support him, in fact I despise the man, I despise everything he stands for. However I do believe in freedom of speech. And I do notice his freedom of speech is curtailed, he is being targeted by the authorities and treated more harshly than others. I am not afraid of the opinions of idiots like him, I am not a baby who needs my ears protected by the nanny state. I believe idiots should be allowed to speak freely, to show themselves for the fools they are, and ridiculed for it.

But you would rather act like a child and call names. I'm not surprised actually, it's what I've come to expect from you.

Everybody's free speech is to an extent curtailed - quite properly by laws that are passed by us via our democratically elected government and then enforced by our justice system.  Whilst free speech is to be cherished and protected there have to be limits around for example hate speech and libel.  Tommy Robinson abuses his rights for his own ends and therefore rubs up against those limits.

[daviemac]

But you would rather act like a child and call names. I'm not surprised actually, it's what I've come to expect from you.

Now we are onto something different to the topic of this thread, I have stated my opinion of him and those who support him so where does the 'childish name calling' come from.

I have explained in a reasoned and rational manner how he is not unique and it is common place for severe restrictions to be a condition of bail. You on the other hand have totally ignored my comment on a very important point "So you disagree with bail conditions being imposed on anyone no matter the risk they might pose without them or is it just this thug's freedom you want to protect."

I'll ask it directly -

Do you disagree with conditions being set when granting the accused bail no matter the circumstances or is it just the conditions imposed on Tommy Robinson you object to.

This is for my own curiosity to help determine a bit more about you, I do not intend discussing it with you.

BTW bail conditions can include being banned from certain towns/cities, streets, whole areas, individual houses, being banned from contacting certain individuals, be placed on a curfew or ordered to live a certain address, all decided on an individual basis.

[Followyourdick]

I repeat

He is nothing more than a grifting gobshite.

[PumpDump]

Now we are onto something different to the topic of this thread, I have stated my opinion of him and those who support him so where does the 'childish name calling' come from.

Because I clearly stated several times I don't like him, yet you refer to me as one of his fanboys. I am not a supporter of his political beliefs.

I have explained in a reasoned and rational manner how he is not unique and it is common place for severe restrictions to be a condition of bail. You on the other hand have totally ignored my comment on a very important point "So you disagree with bail conditions being imposed on anyone no matter the risk they might pose without them or is it just this thug's freedom you want to protect."

I'll ask it directly -

Do you disagree with conditions being set when granting the accused bail no matter the circumstances or is it just the conditions imposed on Tommy Robinson you object to.

This is for my own curiosity to help determine a bit more about you, I do not intend discussing it with you.

BTW bail conditions can include being banned from certain towns/cities, streets, whole areas, individual houses, being banned from contacting certain individuals, be placed on a curfew or ordered to live a certain address, all decided on an individual basis.

"Do you disagree with conditions being set when granting the accused bail no matter the circumstances or is it just the conditions imposed on Tommy Robinson you object to." - I don't disagree with bail conditions being opposed, as long as they are fair and proportionate. I am not convinced that they were proportionate in this case. What crime are the bail conditions aiming to stop Yaxley-Lennon committing?

[RedKettle]

What crime are the bail conditions aiming to stop Yaxley-Lennon committing?

I am guessing violence and incitement of violence given his track record.

[JontyR]

Exactly that.

Would anyone who is barred from a pub having their freedom of expression curtailed unnecessarily? No.

Is anyone who has been banned from football grounds having their freedom of expression curtailed unnecessarily? No.

So to act in such a way that results in a similar set of restrictions but then to claim because you are banned from attending an organised protest (not one you want to even partake in) and are having your rights to expression curtailed is a bit rich. To then claim that you are having your rights to attend work (by self identifying as a journalist) is frankly taking the piss.

If any non-British resident tried to ape the system like this Yaxley-Lennon and his followers would be screaming about it.

[scutty brown]

"Do you disagree with conditions being set when granting the accused bail no matter the circumstances or is it just the conditions imposed on Tommy Robinson you object to." - I don't disagree with bail conditions being opposed, as long as they are fair and proportionate. I am not convinced that they were proportionate in this case. What crime are the bail conditions aiming to stop Yaxley-Lennon committing?

Based on his history I would suggest witness intimidation and harassment was a big concern

[RedKettle]

Because I clearly stated several times I don't like him, yet you refer to me as one of his fanboys. I am not a supporter of his political beliefs.

But I can see why several people on here see you like that - you are just like one of his fan boys fighting to, excuse the pun, make black white.  You turn a blind eye to all his terrible behaviour, accept at face value the bollocks about his good work and then sob your heart out about apparent injustice to him when the law is acting as it is supposed to - to protect decent people from scum.  So yes I can see why he calls you a fan boy despite your less than convincing protestations.

[PumpDump]

But I can see why several people on here see you like that - you are just like one of his fan boys fighting to, excuse the pun, make black white.  You turn a blind eye to all his terrible behaviour, accept at face value the bollocks about his good work and then sob your heart out about apparent injustice to him when the law is acting as it is supposed to - to protect decent people from scum.  So yes I can see why he calls you a fan boy despite your less than convincing protestations.

You're trying real hard for that promotion to Mod, aren't you 

[scutty brown]

You're trying real hard for that promotion to Mod, aren't you 

You can't attack the facts so instead you attack the man. A tactic used by bullies,incompetents and fools when they know their argument is unsupportable.

[RedKettle]

You can't attack the facts so instead you attack the man. A tactic used by bullies,incompetents and fools when they know their argument is unsupportable.

 

[daviemac]

You can't attack the facts so instead you attack the man. A tactic used by bullies,incompetents and fools when they know their argument is unsupportable.

That's been his tactic throughout the thread.

Rational discussions Tommy Robinson style, along with his moronic fanboys egging him on and that's a fellow England football fan. He just doesn't care who he's violent against. In fact there's a very good case for him to be remanded in custody whenever he appears in court.

External Link/Members Only

Yet still people defend the indefensible.   

Another example of a calm and reasoned discussion TR style. -

External Link/Members Only
 

[Jerboa]

On 17 January 2021 at around 9.50pm, far-right English Defence League founder Stephen Yaxley-Lennon appeared at Dearden's home after hiring a private investigator to find her address, and threatened to falsely accuse her partner of being a paedophile after she reported in The Independent that Yaxley-Lennon had been accused of misusing supporters’ money. He was given a temporary stalking prevention order in a hearing at Westminster Magistrates' Court, which he did not attend and in October 2021 was given a five-year stalking prevention order, banning him from contacting her about anything other than her news stories about him

So according to you he got a 5 years stalking prevention order for not stalking 

You have totally lost the plot when it comes to your hero the criminal Yaxley-Lennon.

To start with that headline is wrong, TR is not far right. Dearden was going to publish a hit piece helped by corrupt NGO Hope not Hate, using his former employee Caolan Robertson, Caolan has been a proven liar and to have stolen and embezzled funds of Tommy when he was thrown in jail at the Leeds court. Tommy was making the point to her, that he could make up BS allegations himself, but it doesn't make it right. He filmed himself outside her apartment building on the intercom, he wasn't aggressive or threatening, one visit does not make it a stalking, typical use of the law against TR.

[Jerboa]

Just because you don't think it's right for them to set bail conditions doesn't make it wrong. They set the conditions to suit who is being bailed and he is nothing but a trouble maker so has strict conditions, if he wasn't such a tosser he wouldn't have committed the offence so wouldn't need bail.

I don't know the details of his fraud case but I'm sure his solicitor would have argued on his behalf regarding the licence conditions set. I would imagine the conditions of the licence when he was released from prison would be set by the courts, not the police. The police would only enforce what the court ordered.

The fraud case was a clear example of using the law to stop TR. The state investigated him and his family from the very beginning of the EDL, thinking Tommy would crumble and go away, most would of. They used anti-terror legislation against him, froze his bank account for years, and the only thing they could find to lock him up. Was he leant his brother-in-law £10k for a deposit on a mortgage several years ago, but oh dear the brother over estimated his income, now nobody ever did that when they applied for a mortgage right? How was that a custodial offence for Tommy? 

[Jerboa]

Who is the “peaceful man” you reference?  I thought we were talking about that lowlife thug Tommy Robinson?

It's called English law, a free man can exercise his god given right to be in a public place, he was not acting in a way that was breaching the King's peace.
So what you might think about his character has zero relevance on his liberty.

[Jerboa]

The details he read out were public knowledge & also out of date
Why did he need to ‘report’ on what was already out there and previously reporting ?Tommy was very aware of the restrictions - he stated that they were in force
However he did cause appeals for mistrial
(He also harassed  passing brown members of the public accusing them of being defendants)Immediately?   You mean acting in contempt of court whilst being under conditions for being in contempt of court

He went to Leeds to report because the corporate media don't, one of the real reasons that reporting restrictions are enforced, is so that the public only ever get 24hrs worth of news after a guilty verdict, the next day it's chip paper, the state don't want the details out.

He didn't harass brown people, he asked questions that he was asked himself like how do you feel about your verdict, to men covering their faces and carrying bags that indicate they expected a trip to HMP.

[Jerboa]

Your nonsense and blind love is evident and over the top,
The video was on his Facebook, and I have seen it, if you don't want to beleive it, that's your problem. I'll attach The sun newspaper, theres many others.
Attached below..The video is playable on the sun website, he admits he is embarassed he lied.
So now what do you have to say Jerboa?.
Let me guess, Tommy's still a hero and blah blah blah and you will change narrative and ask another question

And yes I did see a few minutes of those videos you shared the link of.
Absolute bollocks, I didn't know why I gave you the benefit of the doubt and wasted a few minutes watching Tommy fan boys share their conspiracy theory.

If you don't want to beleive what the evidence says, the police reports, the lawyers reports, the jury, the judge.. but you'd rather listen to some childish theories, your free to do so.

I won't be replying to Jerboa and waste my valuable time with ignorance. Feel free to beleive in what ever you desire.

I have not seen this video, so I can't say it's real, the sun newspaper, wow must be true then?

So you watched a few minutes of the videos I posted, ok I proved that it was a lie that Tommy organised a hate campaign in Barrow, when in the video, if you had actually bothered to watch, you would see he was one of the few who actually went there with a open mind, and found discrepancies in the case, Tommy and Mohammed Razzman have become good friends, Tommy was the only journalist who believed Mo was innocent. Did you bother watching the Silenced doc? The hidden camera doesn't lie, teachers admitted that they had been paid thousands to keep their mouth shut, and that the Syrian boy was a violent thug.

So you won't reply to me, because you have no argument? Well that is a weak way out isn't it? I started posting in this thread, because I read some absolute lies, and felt the truth should be heard. I'm somebody who lived in Luton for a fair few years, knows the town and many of the details that might not be known by much of the general public.

[RedKettle]

He went to Leeds to report because the corporate media don't, one of the real reasons that reporting restrictions are enforced, is so that the public only ever get 24hrs worth of news after a guilty verdict, the next day it's chip paper, the state don't want the details out.

You really don’t understand the law or the justice system do you?  Perhaps do some basic research before you let rip with so much rubbish.

[Jerboa]

I've no idea but the police were justified in asking him to leave in order to prevent a possible breach of the peace, it's the sort of thing they do all the time. He refused to comply with a lawful order given by the police so he was rightly arrested. His arrest was for refusing to comply with the order to leave the area given by the police not for being where he was. When he appeared in court his bail conditions were set by the court not the police, he then had a choice accept the conditions or be remanded in custody. I'm sure his lawyer would have put an argument forward regarding the conditions set which the court would have considered.

Whether or not you agree it was all done within the law. If he wanted to avoid any hassle he should have left the area and complained about it afterwards but that's not his style, doing that wouldn't stir enough shit up or get his fanboys rushing to his defence.

You start your post by saying you have no Idea  But of course the police were justified, because it was Tommy Robinson right?
Like I have said before, love him or hate him, TR should have the same civil rights as everyone else. So because some people didn't like him being there, then that could cause a breach of the peace? (No difference to the Gideon Faultner indecent recently) So was the police argument that if TR wasn't removed, others would become violent and attack TR for being present? Because Tommy clearly did not bring a big mob, he was with 2 others, he was there at the demo reporting as a journalist, what was done to him by the police was a clear example of fascism. As for the bail conditions, banning him from entering the entire M25 was absolutely ridiculous, but it was done because the state didn't want Tommy to be able to report live from any Palestinian demos. 

[Jerboa]

What right have the organisers got to ask the police to remove him from the area? Exactly what was the risk of him being there? I don't believe the police were justified in asking him to leave in order to prevent a "possible" breach of the peace. That is bullshit. Can the same argument therefore be
 used to compel pro-Israel supporters from the route of a pro-Palestinian march? As I said, a very slippery slope.

Gideon Faultner has been proven a hypocrite, for screaming discrimination on every corporate media outlet that would have him about how he was treated by the Met, but back at the TR arrest he was one of the organisers who wanted Tommy not to attend. You don't get to pick and choose who is allowed to attend a public demo. Tbf his arrest had a lot to do with the establishment, there were MP's and well known so called celebrities at the demo, the state couldn't have TR interacting at the demo with them.

[Jerboa]

Like I have said all along just because his fanboys don't think it's right doesn't make it wrong.

Anyone can make a complaint to the police or express concerns and if they think it's justified they will act as they did in this case.

What you believe is totally irrelevant, the police gave him a lawful order, he ignored it and was arrested, he appeared in court and was given bail with conditions. The police order people to leave ares all the time, it happens in city centers all over the country.

Anyway I can't be arsed with those who hero worship and stick up for that lowlife scum especially when they introduce irrelevant arguments to try and justify their stance. It was one man in one place who was instructed to leave and that has nothing to do with any hypothetical scenarios.

It wasn't a lawful order, the judge has ruled on it. the order ddidn't come into affect until 2pm in a limited geographical area, Tommy was arrested at 1pm, and was physically not in the said area where the order was active for.

[Jerboa]

Should I respond to such ignorance. Here goes..
   ermmm, They are the organisers. They have a responsibility and having Tommy attend endorses Racism whether his fan boys like it or not. What race is TR against?

And FYI, when ever that Thug and his hooligan supporters turn up, they throw missiles, act violent, last time a police horse was punched as well as many of our officers being pushed.
Way too much hard work for our boys and this criminal should be banned from London. So what mob turned up with him at this demo?

One of my offices is few mins walk from Whitehall, central London and I occasionally go saturdays and have seen the protests.
If you think the 10,000s of pro Palestine protesters are all mis behaving you really are deluded by news and a video or 2.
If 5 people misbehave and 10,000 don't. That's not even 1%, and it is overall peaceful.
When I witnessed Tommy's thugs on St georges day, felt like I was witnessing Football factory live. Absolute thuggish behaviour, frequent swearing and provoking officers to fight. And it's about 85%.

Pro Palestine supporters, If there are idiots who throw missiles at police or attack police, then they should also be arrested and from what I've seen, they have been arrests.

Nothing compared to the violence when your Hero Tommy comes and much more hard work for our Police being abused by thugs that beat up there girlfriends.

I watched what the police did on St. George's day, unfortunately for the state the same day TR was found to have no case to answer. Peaceful people were walking down Whitehall towards the arranged event, then the cops in meat wagons tried to stop them, it was a clear act of provocation, to get footage that the media could pump of violent EDL types in Whitehall, which media like Sky did immediately

[Jerboa]

As I said I do not support him, in fact I despise the man, I despise everything he stands for. However I do believe in freedom of speech. And I do notice his freedom of speech is curtailed, he is being targeted by the authorities and treated more harshly than others. I am not afraid of the opinions of idiots like him, I am not a baby who needs my ears protected by the nanny state. I believe idiots should be allowed to speak freely, to show themselves for the fools they are, and ridiculed for it.

But you would rather act like a child and call names. I'm not surprised actually, it's what I've come to expect from you.

Interesting, so out of interest what is it that he stands for that you despise? I ask with sincerity, because so much has been said about what TR stands for or has said, much of it is complete lies.

[Jerboa]

It's bloody typical, people just want to label others and shut them up. I am not a supporter of him. My political views are complete opposite. In fact I have attended almost every pro-Palestinian protest in London. So put that in your pipe and smoke it.

You are only allowed one approved opinion on Tommy, otherwise you're just one of those terrible fanboys. Is that not a clear example of fascism?

[Jerboa]

Everybody's free speech is to an extent curtailed - quite properly by laws that are passed by us via our democratically elected government and then enforced by our justice system.  Whilst free speech is to be cherished and protected there have to be limits around for example hate speech and libel.  Tommy Robinson abuses his rights for his own ends and therefore rubs up against those limits.

TR has never been found guilty of any hate speech or racism law, for some one who apparently is so racist and hateful, that's quite a surprise. 

[Jerboa]

Exactly that.

Would anyone who is barred from a pub having their freedom of expression curtailed unnecessarily? No.

Is anyone who has been banned from football grounds having their freedom of expression curtailed unnecessarily? No.

So to act in such a way that results in a similar set of restrictions but then to claim because you are banned from attending an organised protest (not one you want to even partake in) and are having your rights to expression curtailed is a bit rich. To then claim that you are having your rights to attend work (by self identifying as a journalist) is frankly taking the piss.

If any non-British resident tried to ape the system like this Yaxley-Lennon and his followers would be screaming about it.

That's not comparable, being barred from a pub or a football ground is one thing, being banned from entering the whole of the area inside the M25 for 6 months just because you peacefully turned up at a demo, is clearly a over reach and abuse of power, personal feelings about TR are of no relevance, as the judge ruled, you don't have to have a special licence to practice journalism.

[Jerboa]

That's been his tactic throughout the thread.

Rational discussions Tommy Robinson style, along with his moronic fanboys egging him on and that's a fellow England football fan. He just doesn't care who he's violent against. In fact there's a very good case for him to be remanded in custody whenever he appears in court.

External Link/Members Only

Yet still people defend the indefensible.   

Another example of a calm and reasoned discussion TR style. -

External Link/Members Only

Context is key, the lad he hit in Portugal was harassing and being obnoxious to Tommy while he was there with his Mrs, most blokes would of done the same, the only reason it's public is because of who he is, he get's this by idiots all the time who are either pissed or retarded, like that Derek guy, pretend football hooligan. 

[Jerboa]

You really don’t understand the law or the justice system do you?  Perhaps do some basic research before you let rip with so much rubbish.

Give me a name of anyone who has been found guilty of contempt of court, and was sentenced in 2 hours to  13 months?
Remember the Millie Dowler contempt of court cases? where the Mirror and Mail caused jurors to be discharged, they got £10k fines, who went to prison for that? Answer nobody.