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

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: UpIsNowDown

originally posted by: RMFX1

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: andy06shake

Well it takes a special hypocrite to complain about Islamophobia and then smear Christianity

Whatever this is well off topic

Tommy is in jail

So enjoy your celebration

And don’t worry about those pesky officials that let the rapists go on for three decades

As long as we get all the people locked up complaining about them , then problem solved

It should be obvious by now that you are dealing with a muslim plant. Don't waste your breathe, he's trying to fullful an agenda and that's fine. Just be aware of it.

Have you checked out Gramblers youtube channel, he self promotes it on this website, its great, people seem to enjoy the reverb it gives of, have you a link to Andyshake06 youtube channel for me

You implying my channel means I have an agenda?

I guess if wanting child rapists and the authorities that allow it to be brought to justice is an agenda, then I do have one

Send me a link to your channel, I'd love to take a look.

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: UpIsNowDown

originally posted by: RMFX1

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: andy06shake

Well it takes a special hypocrite to complain about Islamophobia and then smear Christianity

Whatever this is well off topic

Tommy is in jail

So enjoy your celebration

And don’t worry about those pesky officials that let the rapists go on for three decades

As long as we get all the people locked up complaining about them , then problem solved

It should be obvious by now that you are dealing with a muslim plant. Don't waste your breathe, he's trying to fullful an agenda and that's fine. Just be aware of it.

Have you checked out Gramblers youtube channel, he self promotes it on this website, its great, people seem to enjoy the reverb it gives of, have you a link to Andyshake06 youtube channel for me

Now that was funny.

Well your agenda on this site seems to be to promote your YouTube channel.

Is that what my agenda seems to be?

Hahahaha!

a reply to: Freeborn

I think every single person that deliberately called tommy guilty or a racist in social media deliberately tried to comprise his case and have him escape justice

a reply to: Grambler

You still seem more intent on Stephen Yaxley-Lennon than you do on getting those perverts locked up and at least getting some semblance of justice for the victims.

Stephen Yaxley-Lennon's grandstanding and self-promoting antics nearly prevented that from happening....but sure, you cry a river over that knobhead, I'll reserve my sympathy for the victims.

He knew exactly what could happen yet still he persisted....how can you defend that?
None of your deflection tactics saying 'what about this?', 'what about that?' etc....WHY DID HE DELIBERATELY TRY TO SABOTAGE THE TRIALS?

a reply to: Freeborn

I’m more intent on the rapists and officials, especially the top end ones, who for decades allowed these rapist gangs to commit those crimes and so many more to be held accountable

I’ve read reports of friends of the accused rapists standing outside of trials and spitting in witnesses; no contempt charges

I’ve seen people film outside of child sex cases before and show faces of the accused ; no charges

I see people call tommy guilty all over social media, even on main stream sites which is against the law; no charges

And so I am to believe the same people that allowed the rapists to go on for thirty years, that also went after victims as criminals, suddenly turned a leaf over night?

Now they are noble and good

Oh and it just so happens they are charging this one guy who complained about them and riled people up against these officials that allowed rapists to reign free

a reply to: Grambler

I’m more intent on the rapists and officials, especially the top end ones, who for decades allowed these rapist gangs to commit those crimes and so many more to be held accountable ....

So you say.....

But your constant blind defence of Stephen Yaxley-Lennon suggests otherwise.

If he hadn't been prevented from doing what he was doing then it would have been very possible that there would have been a mistrial.
It would then have been higly unlikely that there would have been another trial and the other trials that some of the defendants were also involved with probably wouldn't have gone ahead.

As a result the accused would have got off scot free and Stephen Yaxley-Lennon would have been just as complicit as any of those politicians, Social Workers, Police etc.

Thread after thread you have blindly supported Tommy Ten-Names.
No amount of reasoning or explaining has shifted your resolve in supporting him.

Yes, those mentioned above should be held accountable....but that doesn't absolve Yaxley-Lennon of his crimes.

He most definitely is not the Knight in Shining Armour many portray him as.
And he certainly wasn't the first or only person to highlight the activities of these grooming gangs.
Why do you think more and more of them are being prosecuted....all completely free of any Yaxley-Lennon involvement etc.

a reply to: Freeborn

And yet as dangerous as tommy is, many people jeoordized his trial by talking about how guilty and horrible he was before the trial was over

If you think tommy is such a danger, why not call out these people

It’s almost like you didn’t mind the law being broken when it came to Tommy’s case

Maybe you wanted him free

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: Freeborn

And yet as dangerous as tommy is, many people jeoordized his trial by talking about how guilty and horrible he was before the trial was over

If you think tommy is such a danger, why not call out these people

It’s almost like you didn’t mind the law being broken when it came to Tommy’s case

Maybe you wanted him free

People on here weren't live streaming from the court, confronting the accused or witnesses.

There wasn't reporting restrictions on his contempt case.

They weren't under suspended sentence for a previous offence of contempt.

People on here aren't public figures.

Anonymous opinions on a conspiracy site are unlikely to influence a jury.

No one on here is commenting anything that isn't already reported.

And rather importantly by the time anyone commented on here he had already been found guilty.

Not really the same thing.

a reply to: ScepticScot

Not according to the law

The law doesn’t say you have to be a public figure or be in the courthouse steps

Tommy also claimed to only reporting public facts on the case

That didn’t matter

The fact is people who commented on social media (as the ag admitted can be breaking the law) could have influenced people involved in Timmy’s case

It probably didn’t, but that’s no excuse

Thousands of people, some media people with many followers, jeopardized Tommy’s case

But no one seems to care about that

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: ScepticScot

Not according to the law

The law doesn’t say you have to be a public figure or be in the courthouse steps

Tommy also claimed to only reporting public facts on the case

That didn’t matter

The fact is people who commented on social media (as the ag admitted can be breaking the law) could have influenced people involved in Timmy’s case

It probably didn’t, but that’s no excuse

Thousands of people, some media people with many followers, jeopardized Tommy’s case

But no one seems to care about that

Why you targeting has been explained by myself and others to you numerous times. You inability to understand is your problem.

' Tommy also claimed' Tommy also claimed to be someone when using their passport. Proven liar lies.

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: ScepticScot

Not according to the law

The law doesn’t say you have to be a public figure or be in the courthouse steps

Tommy also claimed to only reporting public facts on the case

That didn’t matter

The fact is people who commented on social media (as the ag admitted can be breaking the law) could have influenced people involved in Timmy’s case

It probably didn’t, but that’s no excuse

Thousands of people, some media people with many followers, jeopardized Tommy’s case

But no one seems to care about that

Why you targeting has been explained by myself and others to you numerous times. You inability to understand is your problem.

' Tommy also claimed' Tommy also claimed to be someone when using their passport. Proven liar lies.

Yes it’s been explained with such skill

“Ugh, it’s different”

Never mind me quoting the law and the ag

Even if you think it’s different, you had to know as did everyone commenting on tommy that it could, even if unlikely, jeopardize the case against him

Yet people selfishly were willing to risk that to smear tommy

Just like they claim tommy selfishly wanted to smear the rapists

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: ScepticScot

Not according to the law

The law doesn’t say you have to be a public figure or be in the courthouse steps

Tommy also claimed to only reporting public facts on the case

That didn’t matter

The fact is people who commented on social media (as the ag admitted can be breaking the law) could have influenced people involved in Timmy’s case

It probably didn’t, but that’s no excuse

Thousands of people, some media people with many followers, jeopardized Tommy’s case

But no one seems to care about that

Why you targeting has been explained by myself and others to you numerous times. You inability to understand is your problem.

' Tommy also claimed' Tommy also claimed to be someone when using their passport. Proven liar lies.

Yes it’s been explained with such skill

“Ugh, it’s different”

Never mind me quoting the law and the ag

Even if you think it’s different, you had to know as did everyone commenting on tommy that it could, even if unlikely, jeopardize the case against him

Yet people selfishly were willing to risk that to smear tommy

Just like they claim tommy selfishly wanted to smear the rapists

Thanks for demonstrating my point.

Robinson is convicted violent thug , a proven liar and has been a member of several racist organisations.

You can choose to believe his version of events of you wish but it just shows an immense lack of judgement on your part.

a reply to: Grambler

And still all you talk about is Yaxley-Lennon despite being shown so clearly what a liability he was/is to the prosecution of sex offenders.

I lost any sympathy for him when he repeatedly and knowingly risked the successful prosecution of those involved in those cases and put his own public profile above those poor girls seeing their abusers tried and imprisoned.
The man was prepared to jeopardise that just so that he received an increased amount of publicity.

How you can continually defend the man is beyond me.....you make it all about him when the reality is he's a complete irrelevance, a nothing, a no-mark.

a reply to: Freeborn

Do you still have respect for the legal system that allowed the rapes of girls for thirty years?

And why do you refuse to address the people commenting on him broke the law as well because his trial wasn’t over, and jeopardized letting him go free

I can’t believe you defend the people that jeopardized the case against someone as terrible as tommy

a reply to: ScepticScot

It has nothing to do with believing his version

I followed the case and read read the transcripts

I saw the judge admit the photograph laws , which exist because photo and video can jeopardize a trial, are broken routinely

I read the ag saying social media posts of everyone could be contempt

Now I know you have more anger toward tommy than the rapists and the officials that let them go, as is evident by your post after post about tommy,

And I know you are willing to unquestioningly accept everything the leaders of the system that allowed rapists to prey in little girls for thirty years and treated the victims as criminals

But none of that responds to the fact that people broke the law by commenting on Tommy’s case before it was over

Speaking of child sex cases

So t looks like there is a chance that with the Epstein case, there could be some people from the uk that end up in some legal jeopardy, rumors have it possibly a prime minister and a prince

Now I know based on on the noble people upset about tommy I don’t need to say this. But


Make sure if there is a trial and you are from the uk you don’t comment in any of the people accused until after the trial

Please keep your mouth shut, else you will jeopardize the trial, as the ag said even social media posts can be contempt

a reply to: Grambler

I've never defended the people responsible for the failure to prosecute grooming gangs.

For you to even think so proves beyond doubt that you either don't read peoples posts or you have exceptionally poor comprehension skills.

I've made my feelings about that perfectly clear, as have many other people.

But that isn't what we are discussing here.

Still, you point blank refuse to either acknowledge or admit that Stephen Yaxley-Lennon deliberately jeopardised the trial(s) of suspected sex offenders and paedophiles.
You then use classic 'what about' deflection tactics in a piss poor attempt to divert attention.

If the law is an ass - as it may well be - campaign to get the law changed.
DO NOT COMPROMISE LEGAL PROCEEDINGS AGAINST SUSPECTED SEX OFFENDERS, RAPISTS AND PAEDOPHILES

It really is so #ing simple.

a reply to: Freeborn

And yet you continue to deflect that you defend people that compromised the legal proceedings of a man you claimed compromised the legal proceedings of pedophiles

a reply to: Grambler

That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

No deflection from me mate.....what I wrote couldn't possibly be any more clear, straight forward or misinterpreted.

Examples would be good as if presented even reasonably there should be no misunderstanding.

Or are you just plucking retorts out of thin air?

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: Grambler

That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

No deflection from me mate.....what I wrote couldn't possibly be any more clear, straight forward or misinterpreted.

Examples would be good as if presented even reasonably there should be no misunderstanding.

Or are you just plucking retorts out of thin air?

Sure

Like the threats in ats for example before the end of Tommy’s appeal where people discussed how guilty he was

I think you were one of those people

Of course those comments were made all over the internet and even by mainstream people

That could have jeopardized the case against tommy