It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Dozens of reporters film defendents outside of pedophile trials in UK; no arrests

page: 7
41
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 01:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Isurrender73


Which is way we have said laws so jurors are more focused on the facts.

Here's one, how about the Michael Jackson trail a few years back. That was a crazy media frenzy, and like I said the O.J. trail.
edit on 1-6-2018 by Kurokage because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 01:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: djz3ro

I am so tired of the name calling and insinuation about me on this

So if Tommy is my hero

I guess your hero is the rapists

So all of your posts are defending you heroes the child rapists

Man are you disgusting


Bring against Robinson attempts to derail the trial of accused child molesters does not put you on the side of the child molesters.

Quite the opposite in fact. It's those who are supporting him despite his actions in risking the trial that need to consider whose side they are on,



posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 01:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: Isurrender73


Which is way we have said laws so jurors are more focused on the facts.

Here's one, how about the Michael Jackson trail a few years back. That was a crazy media frenzy, and like I said the O.J. trail.


Yet the jurors in the cases were intelligent enough to seperate the media circus from the facts presented in the trial. You provided no proof that the legal system was at all hindered by the media circus.

I prefer transparency over secrecy. But maybe freedom of speech is an American value that you don't appreciate because it's something you never had.

Tommy Robinson, or whatever his name is would be a free man allowed to speak freely in America. For that I am grateful.


edit on 1-6-2018 by Isurrender73 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 01:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: TheLead
a reply to: Grambler

No but you see his restrictions didn't allow for him to occupy public space they deemed inappropriate. Or he's racist so.his rights don't matter, I think that's how it goes.


All of these posters, all of them claiming how much they know, and I am just dumb, and I dont understand the law.

And all the while it was exactly as I thought it was; the law was selectively applied, because they hate tommy and dont want people discussing these grooming gangs.

For the same reason they allowed these gangs to rape children for decades.

And people gleefully cheer this draconian system. Its surreal.


This is called "Virtue Signalling", the social media generation who want more 'likes' in their narcissistic world.
They can't handle the real one, all you younger folks, be careful what you wish for because it's your future you're going to inherit.
Tools.



posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 01:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Isurrender73

There are lots of reports out there on this......
article

Penn state article

Prezi article

How the CSI effect influnces jurors

loyola law school pdf


Freedom of speech is fine as long as it doesn't influence the out come of a trial. Which is why here it's fine to report on a trail, but most details come out after a jury has decided on a verdict, and not before to try and keep a jury impartial.



posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 01:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: Grambler


Dear God, how many times do people have to point out to you that his charges are from a previous crime, and he was trying to commit a similar crime!!!!!! REALLY try and read links that have been provided by posters to show you how silly your arguments are!!
That dog with no teeth analogy is soooo fitting!!





Again, the name calling, the absolute arrogance of your tone, you sound ridiculous.

I have pointed out again and again what happened here.

first, when tommy was given his suspended sentence, the judge said it would be reinstated if he was help in contempt again, by doing things like showing up to a trial and CALLING PEOPLE GUILTY.

he did not show up anjd call people guilty.

Secondly, the second case found tommy to have committed a crime aside from his previous suspended sentence.
'we know this because in order for tommy sentence to be reinstated, he had to be help in contempt.

This a judge felt tommy taping outside the courthouse was contempt. Secondly we know this because the judge reinstated tommy 3 month sentence, and then gave him a 10 month sentence for being in contempt again.

Meaning.....

That you are wrong, as I have showed over and over.

Tommy wasnt arrested because he was on a suspended sentence.

he was arrested because the judge found that what he did with the live stream was contmept of court. His suspended sentence was reinstated, and he perhaps got a more lengthly sentence because of his previous charge; but that charge had no bearing on the judge fining him of being in contempt in his liverstream.

This means that if he is guilty for filming outside a trial, so should the peoplke I showed in the OP



posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 01:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: Grambler

thesecretbarrister.com...

Explanation in here.


That really should be read by everyone who defends Yaxlet-Lennon. It's easy to follow and very informative...



posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 01:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: Grambler


It happens one or twice here and usually after trials but before sentencing, America is a completely diffrent ball game!!



And so what?

Either its a crime becauise it affects jurors, or its noit.

To selectively enforce it, but to allow it once or twice a year is a joke, and proves the jhudges just want to shut tommmy up.

Which makes sense, seeing as how we know the authorities tried to supress and downplay the child rape gangs for years, knowing that it cause who knows how many more girls to be raped.



posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 01:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: djz3ro

I am so tired of the name calling and insinuation about me on this

So if Tommy is my hero

I guess your hero is the rapists

So all of your posts are defending you heroes the child rapists

Man are you disgusting


Bring against Robinson attempts to derail the trial of accused child molesters does not put you on the side of the child molesters.

Quite the opposite in fact. It's those who are supporting him despite his actions in risking the trial that need to consider whose side they are on,


Being for free speech doesnt make nme a nazi supporting racist, but I hear that over and over.

So if tommy is my hero, kthen the people against him must have the rapists as their heros.

Or both of those are dumb, and we should just lay of accusing others of one of these sides being heros to people.



posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 01:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
I am sure all of the UK members who bragged how their system would not allow a media circus showing defendants outside a trial, and how people that film defendants outside the court would be arrested will be here any minute to voice their outrage, and tell us how they are going to write their MP's to ensure these reporters all get jailed.

Any second now....


There has never been any problem with reporting on trials outside a courtroom and there is NO law that prohibits it. The specifics of reporting is very clear and the name of the defendants and the charges are completely allowable.

Tommy Robinson is a political prisoner - plain and simple.

There are now 563,000 people who have signed the petition for his release and thousands will be turning up to protest at Downing Street on the 9th June (I heard one report that tens of thousands have already confirmed they will be attending).



posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 01:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: djz3ro

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: Grambler

thesecretbarrister.com...

Explanation in here.


That really should be read by everyone who defends Yaxlet-Lennon. It's easy to follow and very informative...


Yes its so easy to read while it calls people questioning this knuckle dragging racists.

And yes, I have seen people post it and just say "This answers everything!"

It does not. It offers no reason why reporters like in the OP would be allowed to film and questioon defendants outside of their trials.

But I can play that game to.



This should be required viewing for all you child rapist defenders. Its easy to understand and answers everything.



posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 01:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: Grambler


Dear God, how many times do people have to point out to you that his charges are from a previous crime, and he was trying to commit a similar crime!!!!!! REALLY try and read links that have been provided by posters to show you how silly your arguments are!!
That dog with no teeth analogy is soooo fitting!!





The judge who sentenced Tommy Robinson made a point to say that the previously suspended sentence had nothing to do with his decision. So get your facts straight.

In addition, even if it was taken into account, a previous unwarranted arrest and conviction DOES NOT justify a future unwarranted arrest and conviction - EVER.

Get your head straight - regardless of what you think of Robinson, this behaviour by a govt can not be allowed to stand.



posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 01:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler




the absolute arrogance of your tone, you sound ridiculous.

This is pretty "ridiculous" coming from you, who keeps posting the same nonsense again and again.



I have pointed out again and again what happened here.


And again, you haven't.
Robinson was filming before and during said trial. Like I said watch your own vids. The media where there as people were coming out of a FINISHED trail.



posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 01:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: Grambler




And again, you haven't.
Robinson was filming before and during said trial. Like I said watch your own vids. The media where there as people were coming out of a FINISHED trail.


No you are flat out wrong.

The gary glitter nfootage is him on his way out of the court a week before the trial began.

The rolf harris footage was footage of him entering the court for the first day of his trial.

Again, you just make stuff up.

The info is right there in the details of the video, and yet you just make up a lie, and claim it was when the trial had ended.



posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 02:00 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth


Robinson was on a suspended sentence!! those are the facts and my heads on pretty straight thanks.

My opinion on Robinson is thats he's a numbty for standing on the court steps like he did and try and record whilst on a suspended sentence. He should have report on the case after the conclusion of the trail and not during like most reporters do.



posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 02:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: UKTruth


Robinson was on a suspended sentence!! those are the facts and my heads on pretty straight thanks.

My opinion on Robinson is thats he's a numbty for standing on the court steps like he did and try and record whilst on a suspended sentence. He should have report on the case after the conclusion of the trail and not during like most reporters do.



Again, you deny reality.

His suyspended sentence had nothing to do with the judge fining him guilty of him breaking the law with his livestream in this case.

Please post where the judge said he was only guilty because of his suspended sentence.



posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 02:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Kurokage

You realize those links were all "Opinion" based without any numerical facts or actual studies done.

I disagree with that particular opinion and prefer to think logically for myself.

I would agree that televison shows that portray the law have influence on the public and subsequently jurors.

But in a courtroom part of proceedings deal directly with what is and is not allowed as evidence. The jurors are not just blindly expected to know the laws. Maybe you could be swayed by the media circus but I know I would not. In the court of public opinion emotions rule the day. But thank God that in a court of law facts rule the day.

I still prefer transparency over secrecy. Because the idea of secrecy in a free society is repugnant. - JFK


edit on 1-6-2018 by Isurrender73 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 02:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler




The gary glitter nfootage is him on his way out of the court


see what you typed here.



The rolf harris footage was footage of him entering the court


Before the case had started.



posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 02:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: UKTruth


Robinson was on a suspended sentence!! those are the facts and my heads on pretty straight thanks.

My opinion on Robinson is thats he's a numbty for standing on the court steps like he did and try and record whilst on a suspended sentence. He should have report on the case after the conclusion of the trail and not during like most reporters do.



Again - the judge said that he was sentencing Robinson regardless of the existing suspended sentence. You are uninformed, the hallmark of the arrogant fool.

...and once again, it matters not that there was a previous unwarranted arrest. The issue here is that the British govt is arresting people because of their political and social views. Those that would so arrogantly support that are not just stupid, but dangerously stupid.

Good day.



posted on Jun, 1 2018 @ 02:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: Grambler




The gary glitter nfootage is him on his way out of the court


see what you typed here.



The rolf harris footage was footage of him entering the court


Before the case had started.


He was on his way out of court as the trial was going to happen.

Rolf was on his way into the trial, it being before it started is irrelvant under the contempt laws.

My god hopw you will struggle and move goal posts to jsutify this.

The entire idea is that what tommy did was illegal because it may sway jurors.

So if a defendant isnt allowed to be filmed walking in to court on day 20 of the trial, why would it be ok to film him walking in on day one of the trial?




top topics



 
41
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join