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.

 

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

page: 10
14
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 6 2019 @ 09:16 AM
link   
a reply to: MickyKnox

Well, our laws are what put the beasts away for quite some time.

Speaking sacrilegiously about God or sacred things in an uncouth manner in front of a judge will probably land you with contempt of court charge also if truth be told, they can be funny that way.

I'm about as much of a ""government lapdog"" as i am a good Christian. LoL

But like i said in another post "The Sun does shine on a dog's ass some days".

In this instance, i canny really fault there logic nor law.




posted on Jul, 6 2019 @ 09:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: MickyKnox

Well, our laws are what put the beasts away for quite some time.

Speaking sacrilegiously about God or sacred things in an uncouth manner in front of a judge will probably land you with contempt of court charge also if truth be told, they can be funny that way.

I'm about as much of a ""government lapdog"" as i am a good Christian. LoL

But like i said in another post "The Sun does shine on a dog's ass some days".

In this instance, i canny really fault there logic nor law.



In this case you anti-Tommy crowd have proven you’ll accept anything so long as a judge says so and simply repeating the opinion of the court suffices to defend it.



posted on Jul, 6 2019 @ 09:33 AM
link   
a reply to: MickyKnox

When a judge lays it out for you, there is not much choice but to accept it I'm afraid.

You can appeal there judgment if you have the grounds, but as you can clearly see, Tommy did not have a leg to stand on appeal wise. Which is why this has all came back around to bite him on the arse.

Not "anti-Tommy crowd" more like anti-racist twat crowd.



edit on 6-7-2019 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 6 2019 @ 10:54 AM
link   
a reply to: MickyKnox




Yeah, your law and skewed version of justice is bullocks.

Of course it is cause it aint Murican , your justice system is the envy of the world.




He did nothing wrong and this rule of law claptrap exposes you all as authoritarians who do not value human rights.

Whatever you say man.



posted on Jul, 6 2019 @ 11:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: MickyKnox

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: MickyKnox

Well, our laws are what put the beasts away for quite some time.

Speaking sacrilegiously about God or sacred things in an uncouth manner in front of a judge will probably land you with contempt of court charge also if truth be told, they can be funny that way.

I'm about as much of a ""government lapdog"" as i am a good Christian. LoL

But like i said in another post "The Sun does shine on a dog's ass some days".

In this instance, i canny really fault there logic nor law.



In this case you anti-Tommy crowd have proven you’ll accept anything so long as a judge says so and simply repeating the opinion of the court suffices to defend it.


Under UK law Robinson's actions could have resulted in a mistrial that would have resulted in child abusers going free.

You might not like that, but it is the case and importantly Robinson was well aware of that. He was more concerned with his own self promotion than the possibility of causing a mistrial of child abusers.



posted on Jul, 6 2019 @ 11:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: MickyKnox




Yeah, your law and skewed version of justice is bullocks.

Of course it is cause it aint Murican , your justice system is the envy of the world.




He did nothing wrong and this rule of law claptrap exposes you all as authoritarians who do not value human rights.

Whatever you say man.


A man twice convicted and punished for the victim-less crime of filming outside. I think for authoritarians it goes like this: “Whatever the judge says man”.



posted on Jul, 6 2019 @ 11:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: MickyKnox

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: MickyKnox

Well, our laws are what put the beasts away for quite some time.

Speaking sacrilegiously about God or sacred things in an uncouth manner in front of a judge will probably land you with contempt of court charge also if truth be told, they can be funny that way.

I'm about as much of a ""government lapdog"" as i am a good Christian. LoL

But like i said in another post "The Sun does shine on a dog's ass some days".

In this instance, i canny really fault there logic nor law.



In this case you anti-Tommy crowd have proven you’ll accept anything so long as a judge says so and simply repeating the opinion of the court suffices to defend it.


Under UK law Robinson's actions could have resulted in a mistrial that would have resulted in child abusers going free.

You might not like that, but it is the case and importantly Robinson was well aware of that. He was more concerned with his own self promotion than the possibility of causing a mistrial of child abusers.


That’s right under UK law a judge can let child abusers go free before the trial even began, and jail the man who filmed them. Absolutely brilliant.



posted on Jul, 6 2019 @ 11:25 AM
link   
a reply to: MickyKnox

Have you seen the rest of his extensive criminal record? LoL

It includes convictions for violence, financial and immigration frauds, drug possession, public order offenses, and contempt of court. He has served at least three separate custodial sentences in 2005 for assault, in 2012 for using false travel documents, and in 2014 for mortgage fraud.

There's your ""social justice warrior"" in spades.
edit on 6-7-2019 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 6 2019 @ 11:27 AM
link   
a reply to: MickyKnox

Kind of does not work unless you are presumed innocent until found guilty.

And my understanding is your own system of law follows a similar ethos.



posted on Jul, 6 2019 @ 11:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: MickyKnox

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: MickyKnox

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: MickyKnox

Well, our laws are what put the beasts away for quite some time.

Speaking sacrilegiously about God or sacred things in an uncouth manner in front of a judge will probably land you with contempt of court charge also if truth be told, they can be funny that way.

I'm about as much of a ""government lapdog"" as i am a good Christian. LoL

But like i said in another post "The Sun does shine on a dog's ass some days".

In this instance, i canny really fault there logic nor law.



In this case you anti-Tommy crowd have proven you’ll accept anything so long as a judge says so and simply repeating the opinion of the court suffices to defend it.


Under UK law Robinson's actions could have resulted in a mistrial that would have resulted in child abusers going free.

You might not like that, but it is the case and importantly Robinson was well aware of that. He was more concerned with his own self promotion than the possibility of causing a mistrial of child abusers.


That’s right under UK law a judge can let child abusers go free before the trial even began, and jail the man who filmed them. Absolutely brilliant.


You are entirely free to belief that that UK laws protecting the right to a fair trial are too strict. Feel free to start a thread to discuss.

That in no way changes the fact that Robinson was well aware of the law and the potential consequences of his actions.



posted on Jul, 6 2019 @ 11:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: MickyKnox

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: MickyKnox

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: MickyKnox

Well, our laws are what put the beasts away for quite some time.

Speaking sacrilegiously about God or sacred things in an uncouth manner in front of a judge will probably land you with contempt of court charge also if truth be told, they can be funny that way.

I'm about as much of a ""government lapdog"" as i am a good Christian. LoL

But like i said in another post "The Sun does shine on a dog's ass some days".

In this instance, i canny really fault there logic nor law.



In this case you anti-Tommy crowd have proven you’ll accept anything so long as a judge says so and simply repeating the opinion of the court suffices to defend it.


Under UK law Robinson's actions could have resulted in a mistrial that would have resulted in child abusers going free.

You might not like that, but it is the case and importantly Robinson was well aware of that. He was more concerned with his own self promotion than the possibility of causing a mistrial of child abusers.


That’s right under UK law a judge can let child abusers go free before the trial even began, and jail the man who filmed them. Absolutely brilliant.


You are entirely free to belief that that UK laws protecting the right to a fair trial are too strict. Feel free to start a thread to discuss.

That in no way changes the fact that Robinson was well aware of the law and the potential consequences of his actions.






You’re entirely free to appeal to law as if that was a sufficient argument.

Robinson never got a fair trial, and in fact you were applauding his unjust treatment and jailing.



posted on Jul, 6 2019 @ 11:37 AM
link   
a reply to: MickyKnox

What about the rest of the trials he has attended, were those also "unfair" or "unjust"? LoL



posted on Jul, 6 2019 @ 11:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: MickyKnox

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: MickyKnox

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: MickyKnox

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: MickyKnox

Well, our laws are what put the beasts away for quite some time.

Speaking sacrilegiously about God or sacred things in an uncouth manner in front of a judge will probably land you with contempt of court charge also if truth be told, they can be funny that way.

I'm about as much of a ""government lapdog"" as i am a good Christian. LoL

But like i said in another post "The Sun does shine on a dog's ass some days".

In this instance, i canny really fault there logic nor law.



In this case you anti-Tommy crowd have proven you’ll accept anything so long as a judge says so and simply repeating the opinion of the court suffices to defend it.


Under UK law Robinson's actions could have resulted in a mistrial that would have resulted in child abusers going free.

You might not like that, but it is the case and importantly Robinson was well aware of that. He was more concerned with his own self promotion than the possibility of causing a mistrial of child abusers.


That’s right under UK law a judge can let child abusers go free before the trial even began, and jail the man who filmed them. Absolutely brilliant.


You are entirely free to belief that that UK laws protecting the right to a fair trial are too strict. Feel free to start a thread to discuss.

That in no way changes the fact that Robinson was well aware of the law and the potential consequences of his actions.






You’re entirely free to appeal to law as if that was a sufficient argument.

Robinson never got a fair trial, and in fact you were applauding his unjust treatment and jailing.


It's not an appeal to law, its pointing out the law to someone who seems ignorant of it.

What was unfair about his most recent trial?

Since it has reached the same judgement as his original one what was unfair about his jailing?

You have also failed to address that Robinson was well aware that his actions could result in a child abusers walking free and apparently didn't care.

edit on 6-7-2019 by ScepticScot because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 6 2019 @ 11:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: MickyKnox
It’s clear the activist Tommy Robinson has been unjustly, and perhaps politically convicted for the victimless crime of filming outside the courtroom.


Now, where is your legal interpretation on this? It's only unjust if the law is flawed or - as you say - there has been political interference. So, please provide a modicum of opinion, or evidence to support your assertion.

The legal summaries are available in all judgements for and against the person who calls himself Tommy Robinson. Have a look and then come back with a proper assessment.

Here's the relevant law



posted on Jul, 6 2019 @ 11:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: MickyKnox

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: MickyKnox

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: MickyKnox

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: MickyKnox

Well, our laws are what put the beasts away for quite some time.

Speaking sacrilegiously about God or sacred things in an uncouth manner in front of a judge will probably land you with contempt of court charge also if truth be told, they can be funny that way.

I'm about as much of a ""government lapdog"" as i am a good Christian. LoL

But like i said in another post "The Sun does shine on a dog's ass some days".

In this instance, i canny really fault there logic nor law.



In this case you anti-Tommy crowd have proven you’ll accept anything so long as a judge says so and simply repeating the opinion of the court suffices to defend it.


Under UK law Robinson's actions could have resulted in a mistrial that would have resulted in child abusers going free.

You might not like that, but it is the case and importantly Robinson was well aware of that. He was more concerned with his own self promotion than the possibility of causing a mistrial of child abusers.


That’s right under UK law a judge can let child abusers go free before the trial even began, and jail the man who filmed them. Absolutely brilliant.


You are entirely free to belief that that UK laws protecting the right to a fair trial are too strict. Feel free to start a thread to discuss.

That in no way changes the fact that Robinson was well aware of the law and the potential consequences of his actions.






You’re entirely free to appeal to law as if that was a sufficient argument.

Robinson never got a fair trial, and in fact you were applauding his unjust treatment and jailing.


It's not an appeal to law, its pointing out the law to someone who seems ignorant of it.

What was unfair about his most recent trial?

Since it has reached the same judgement as his original one what was unfair about his jailing?

You have also failed to address that Robinson was well aware that his actions could result in a child abusers walking free and apparently didn't care.


I looked at the responses to his first unfair trial on this board. You were applauding it, even saying you would be happy if he got more time.

His actions consisted of filming a video. Your coveted judge and the laws you appeal to would have resulted in the child abusers walking free.



posted on Jul, 6 2019 @ 11:50 AM
link   
a reply to: MickyKnox

You might look at the responses but you sure as hell dodge the awkward information and questions that surround the racist bastard that Robinson assuredly is, that's a given.
edit on 6-7-2019 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 6 2019 @ 11:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: paraphi

originally posted by: MickyKnox
It’s clear the activist Tommy Robinson has been unjustly, and perhaps politically convicted for the victimless crime of filming outside the courtroom.


Now, where is your legal interpretation on this? It's only unjust if the law is flawed or - as you say - there has been political interference. So, please provide a modicum of opinion, or evidence to support your assertion.

The legal summaries are available in all judgements for and against the person who calls himself Tommy Robinson. Have a look and then come back with a proper assessment.

Here's the relevant law


He was already convicted in a “fundamentally flawed process” and punished, and now he is convicted and punished again....for filming a video.



posted on Jul, 6 2019 @ 11:53 AM
link   
a reply to: MickyKnox




I think for authoritarians it goes like this: “Whatever the judge says man”.

We live and prosper under a law based system , looking at the US prison population I think it a bit rich calling us authoritarian but we all are subject to and enslaved by the law.
www.prisonpolicy.org...


edit on 6-7-2019 by gortex because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 6 2019 @ 11:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: MickyKnox

You might look at the responses but you sure as hell dodge the awkward information and questions that surround the racist bastard that Robinson assuredly is, that's a given.


The information is not awkward, just the tedious way this information is used to dismiss the unjust treatment of an activist.



posted on Jul, 6 2019 @ 11:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: MickyKnox

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: MickyKnox

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: MickyKnox

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: MickyKnox

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: MickyKnox

Well, our laws are what put the beasts away for quite some time.

Speaking sacrilegiously about God or sacred things in an uncouth manner in front of a judge will probably land you with contempt of court charge also if truth be told, they can be funny that way.

I'm about as much of a ""government lapdog"" as i am a good Christian. LoL

But like i said in another post "The Sun does shine on a dog's ass some days".

In this instance, i canny really fault there logic nor law.



In this case you anti-Tommy crowd have proven you’ll accept anything so long as a judge says so and simply repeating the opinion of the court suffices to defend it.


Under UK law Robinson's actions could have resulted in a mistrial that would have resulted in child abusers going free.

You might not like that, but it is the case and importantly Robinson was well aware of that. He was more concerned with his own self promotion than the possibility of causing a mistrial of child abusers.


That’s right under UK law a judge can let child abusers go free before the trial even began, and jail the man who filmed them. Absolutely brilliant.


You are entirely free to belief that that UK laws protecting the right to a fair trial are too strict. Feel free to start a thread to discuss.

That in no way changes the fact that Robinson was well aware of the law and the potential consequences of his actions.






You’re entirely free to appeal to law as if that was a sufficient argument.

Robinson never got a fair trial, and in fact you were applauding his unjust treatment and jailing.


It's not an appeal to law, its pointing out the law to someone who seems ignorant of it.

What was unfair about his most recent trial?

Since it has reached the same judgement as his original one what was unfair about his jailing?

You have also failed to address that Robinson was well aware that his actions could result in a child abusers walking free and apparently didn't care.


I looked at the responses to his first unfair trial on this board. You were applauding it, even saying you would be happy if he got more time.

His actions consisted of filming a video. Your coveted judge and the laws you appeal to would have resulted in the child abusers walking free.


As it turns out I was correct and he is guilty. I think someone willing to risk the trial of child abusers deserves the maximum penalty he can be given. If you disagree it says far more about you than me.

His actions consisted of live streaming a report in direct contraction of reporting restrictions in place to ensure a fair trial. You might disagree with those reporting restrictions but that in no way reduces the severity and potential consequences of Robinson's actions.



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join