Tommy Robinson Freed On Bail As Court Orders Retrial

originally posted by: testingtesting
a reply to: Words
Robinson plead guilty once it was explained.
But yeah let's let the guy off even though he broke the law. Does it work that way in the states...nope.
Streaming yet sentenced people could have brought a mis trial I for one do not want the victims of abuse to have to go through it all again. Robinson could have caused all that pain plus the many hundreds of thousands of pounds it would have cost.
He was an idiot tbh he knew what he was doing and still did it.

I don't find "he broke the law" to be a great argument, especially when the law is trash. Think about all the homosexuals who broke the law in your country and had to spend time in jail. Would you dismiss them by saying "well, they broke the law"?

No, facebook streaming or whatever does not cause pain and misery and money nor a mistrial. The silly law does./

originally posted by: Words

originally posted by: testingtesting
a reply to: Words
Robinson plead guilty once it was explained.
But yeah let's let the guy off even though he broke the law. Does it work that way in the states...nope.
Streaming yet sentenced people could have brought a mis trial I for one do not want the victims of abuse to have to go through it all again. Robinson could have caused all that pain plus the many hundreds of thousands of pounds it would have cost.
He was an idiot tbh he knew what he was doing and still did it.

I don't find "he broke the law" to be a great argument, especially when the law is trash. Think about all the homosexuals who broke the law in your country and had to spend time in jail. Would you dismiss them by saying "well, they broke the law"?

No, facebook streaming or whatever does cause pain and misery and money nor a mistrial. The silly law does./

No he did jeopardise the trial under UK law.

You might disagree with law and you and indeed Robinson would have every right to protect against it, or petition your MP, or even make YouTube videos about how stupid you think the law is.

What any reasonable person would not do is knowingly break that law at the trial of accused child molesters. Not unless you where a shameless self promoter like Robinson.

a reply to: ScepticScot

Again, he did not "jeopardise" the trial. The law does. The only reason that trial would go to mistrial is because of the law, not because of Robinson.

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: Boadicea

Robinson's actions did jeopardise the trial.

How? Spell it out for me. Draw me a picture. Just don't tell me your presumptions. Don't give me your opinions. Don't tell me what someone told you might happen or could happen. Give me cold hard facts that prove beyond any reasonable doubt that his action jeopardized the trial.

You might disagree with the law but it is the law and Robinson was well aware of that.

Yup, I sure do disagree with the law... yup, it sure is the law... and yup, I'm pretty sure Robinson was well aware of that.

His actions were all but his own self promotion.

Maybe... maybe not. But we both know that's just your opinion. You have absolutely no way to know what's really in Tommy's heart and mind. But you've already presumed so much, why not presume this as well?

a reply to: Boadicea


What the Tommy Robinson haters don't realize or maybe they do and that is why the are defending an authoritarian judicial system that can change the laws at the whim to lock up someone who speaks out against said government, it that Tommy has awakened the Nationalists! Nope, not the NEW definition of Nationalism that the Progressive Globalist humpers use, but the one where it means a person who loves their country/culture.


The Progressive/Globalist agenda is running scared, and it's quite evident when we see people propping up the authoritarian state that some day might arrest them for hate speech and have their ass locked up!

originally posted by: Words
a reply to: ScepticScot

Again, he did not "jeopardise" the trial. The law does. The only reason that trial would go to mistrial is because of the law, not because of Robinson.

Yes he did as he knowingly broke laws on reporting on ongoing trials that could have resulted in a mistral.

Again you are free to disagree with those restrictions but that doesn't change the fact that he knowingly flouted them.

a reply to: Words

Well I for one want laws like this so people get a fair trial.

originally posted by: Boadicea

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: Boadicea

Robinson's actions did jeopardise the trial.

How? Spell it out for me. Draw me a picture. Just don't tell me your presumptions. Don't give me your opinions. Don't tell me what someone told you might happen or could happen. Give me cold hard facts that prove beyond any reasonable doubt that his action jeopardized the trial.

You might disagree with the law but it is the law and Robinson was well aware of that.

Yup, I sure do disagree with the law... yup, it sure is the law... and yup, I'm pretty sure Robinson was well aware of that.

His actions were all but his own self promotion.

Maybe... maybe not. But we both know that's just your opinion. You have absolutely no way to know what's really in Tommy's heart and mind. But you've already presumed so much, why not presume this as well?

Because if the defence can show that his actions could have prejudiced the opinion of the jury it would result in a mistrial. Not complicated.

a reply to: ScepticScot

Yes he did as he knowingly broke laws on reporting on ongoing trials that could have resulted in a mistral.

Again you are free to disagree with those restrictions but that doesn't change the fact that he knowingly flouted them.

Again, the only reason that trial would go to mistrial is because of the law, not because of Robinson. People do exactly the same thing as Robinson in trials elsewhere, and no mistrial occurs. This is because the laws are different, not because they were streaming outside of a courthouse.

originally posted by: Words
a reply to: ScepticScot

Yes he did as he knowingly broke laws on reporting on ongoing trials that could have resulted in a mistral.

Again you are free to disagree with those restrictions but that doesn't change the fact that he knowingly flouted them.

Again, the only reason that trial would go to mistrial is because of the law, not because of Robinson. People do exactly the same thing as Robinson in trials elsewhere, and no mistrial occurs. This is because the laws are different, not because they were streaming outside of a courthouse.

Yes laws are different. UK puts a lot of emphasis on ensuring a fair trial. Still Robinson who broke the law in a spectacularly stupid way,

a reply to: ScepticScot

Yes laws are different. UK puts a lot of emphasis on ensuring a fair trial. Still Robinson who broke the law in a spectacularly stupid way

Yet Tommy was just released because he had an unfair trial.

originally posted by: seeker1963
a reply to: Boadicea


What the Tommy Robinson haters don't realize or maybe they do and that is why the are defending an authoritarian judicial system that can change the laws at the whim to lock up someone who speaks out against said government, it that Tommy has awakened the Nationalists! Nope, not the NEW definition of Nationalism that the Progressive Globalist humpers use, but the one where it means a person who loves their country/culture.

Yes! From what I've read about Tommy, he is quite the enigma... and more than a little rash and reckless, but his heart seems to be in the right place. He's willing to talk to people, to discuss, to put his own well-being on the line for the greater good, and he's got the courage of a lion. I think that's what people are responding to. They know things aren't right, and this guy's standing up loud and proud and saying so.

England has such a long and proud legacy of championing the rights of the people. And that's the country her people knew and loved and want back. Not this cheap plastic imitation.

All of which is quite dangerous to the status quo. Anyone who fails to comply is dangerous to the status quo. And when that someone is actually educating and informing and empowering others to do and be the same, he is most definitely a threat.

The Progressive/Globalist agenda is running scared

Couldn't happen to a more deserving bunch of critters!

originally posted by: Words
a reply to: ScepticScot

Yes laws are different. UK puts a lot of emphasis on ensuring a fair trial. Still Robinson who broke the law in a spectacularly stupid way

Yet Tommy was just released because he had an unfair trial.

Yes try reading that back and see if it makes the point you think it does...

a reply to: ScepticScot

Because if...

Weasel word.

... the defence can show that his actions could have...

Weasel words.

...prejudiced...

Weasel word.

...the opinion...

Weasel word.

...of the jury it would result...

Weasel words.

...in a mistrial.

So it would be the authorities who would jeopardize the trial by making one assumption after another about their fellow countrymen and then use their own prejudice and faulty reasoning to declare a mistrial.

And that's presuming they aren't outright protecting the guilty for reasons of their own.

Not complicated.

Not proof that Tommy in any way tainted a fair trial either.

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Words
a reply to: ScepticScot

Yes laws are different. UK puts a lot of emphasis on ensuring a fair trial. Still Robinson who broke the law in a spectacularly stupid way

Yet Tommy was just released because he had an unfair trial.

Yes try reading that back and see if it makes the point you think it does...

It was toward your point that UK puts a lot of emphasis on ensuring a fair trial. It was not ensured in this instance.

originally posted by: Words

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Words
a reply to: ScepticScot

Yes laws are different. UK puts a lot of emphasis on ensuring a fair trial. Still Robinson who broke the law in a spectacularly stupid way

Yet Tommy was just released because he had an unfair trial.

Yes try reading that back and see if it makes the point you think it does...

It was toward your point that UK puts a lot of emphasis on ensuring a fair trial. It was not ensured in this instance.

After he got released by said legal system as it was not sure he got a fair trial...

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Words

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Words
a reply to: ScepticScot

Yes laws are different. UK puts a lot of emphasis on ensuring a fair trial. Still Robinson who broke the law in a spectacularly stupid way

Yet Tommy was just released because he had an unfair trial.

Yes try reading that back and see if it makes the point you think it does...

It was toward your point that UK puts a lot of emphasis on ensuring a fair trial. It was not ensured in this instance.

After he got released by said legal system as it was not sure he got a fair trial...

Hopefully his next trial will be fair, because his first one wasn’t. Either way, a fair trial wasn’t ensured. The circumstances ensured it was an unfair trial. It would have been a better result had if someone was out there live-streaming, and it went to mistrial.

a reply to: Words

A better result? So you want the victims to go through the ordeal of going through the trail again? And maybe the scumbags getting off?.
Nope.

originally posted by: testingtesting
a reply to: Words

A better result? So you want the victims to go through the ordeal of going through the trail again? And maybe the scumbags getting off?.
Nope.

It was a joke to match the joke of a case against Robinson. Scumbags will not get off because of Robinson, but because the laws are BS.

a reply to: Words

You think so most here do not.