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

I take no pleasure in bringing this to your attention:

www.examinerlive.co.uk...

Definitely not laughing, either, just for the record. Honest:

Tommy Robinson was punched in the face by a 70-year-old inmate for behaving "like a celebrity", according to reports. The alleged attack happened days after the English Defence League Founder, real name Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, was jailed for nine months for contempt of court. The 36-year-old put a Huddersfield grooming gang trial at risk of collapsing by filming the defendants in breach of a court order. He pleaded with Donald Trump to offer him asylum in the US and claimed that he would be killed in a British prison. The far-right extremist's words fell on deaf ears and he was attacked in the showers of HMP Belmarsh just days after arriving, according to the Daily Star Sunday . A source reportedly said: "There was a bit of pushing then one prisoner, a 70-year-old, very hard pensioner, decked Robinson with a punch to the jaw. “He didn’t have any idea who he had hit, but he wasn’t going to back down. Those are the rules in Belmarsh, you fight or back down.

a reply to: oldcarpy

Hopefully he gets charged with assault!

What type of scum bag attacks a 70 year olds hand with their jaw?

a reply to: TerryDon79

Apparently, this pensioner was pretty hard. At least he knows not to bend down to pick up the soap.....

originally posted by: oldcarpy
I take no pleasure in bringing this to your attention:

www.examinerlive.co.uk...

Definitely not laughing, either, just for the record. Honest:

Yes . Thanks for that .It is also fake news! It never happened. Just like the original contempt they fakely reported never happened. then when the gagging order was lifted the true report of the actual facts never happened.

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: TerryDon79

Apparently, this pensioner was pretty hard. At least he knows not to bend down to pick up the soap.....

the story is FAKE! TR is in isolation! He doesn't share showers!

a reply to: bartconnolly

What? Fake news? Bummer. I mean....got a citation for that?

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: bartconnolly

What? Fake news? Bummer. I mean....got a citation for that?

Yeah Avi Yemeni Tommy Robinsons Press relations guy
But Ezra Levant also said it:
www.youtube.com...

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: bartconnolly

What? Fake news? Bummer. I mean....got a citation for that?

www.youtube.com...

a reply to: oldcarpy

www.oxfordmail.co.uk...
A WOMAN who was caught taking photos of a live court hearing has been given a slap on the wrist.

The extraordinary incident happened during a sentencing hearing held at Oxford Crown Court yesterday.

A member of the public - Susan Westlake - was spotted by a court clerk taking 'two panoramic photo images'.

When her phone was quickly seized she admitted what could have been tried as a breach under Contempt of Court Act provisions and deleted the images.


THIS WAS INSIDE THE COURT ROOM!

a reply to: bartconnolly

Apples and oranges, old fruit.

a reply to: oldcarpy

So a woman in obvious contempt who admits it is an orange who deserves to walk home and a man under who committed no crime is appeal is an apple who deserves 14 months in a max security prison for doing less then the orange?

a reply to: bartconnolly

1. It was a sentencing hearing so no danger of prejudicing a trial.
2. She was not broadcasting it to thousands of followers on social media.

Apples. Oranges.

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: bartconnolly

Apples and oranges, old fruit.

NOPE! EXACTLY the same offence! Tommy Robinson went on video outside a courthouse. This woman took photographs INSIDE a court room! Both were held in contempt but she got nothing and he got 14 months.

originally posted by: oldcarpy
a reply to: bartconnolly

1. It was a sentencing hearing so no danger of prejudicing a trial.
2. She was not broadcasting it to thousands of followers on social media.

Apples. Oranges.

Guess what Tommy Robinson was outside in Leeds! a SENTENCING HEARING! The Jury was dismissed and already delivered their verdict! The people going into the court room were there for SENTENCING!

2. the Judge himself and the prosecution and the HIGHER COURT to which one of thoise sentenced appealsed all agreed that Tommy Robinsons broadcast did NOTHING to prejudice the trial.
3, If Tommy Robinson took a picture INSIDE the court room then he could be accused of much worse but the images he broadcast outside was considered NOT to have any effect. what they then charged the charges to was that he incited his supporters i.e. VERBALLY not by picture to attack the two rapists but that is a fake charge anyway because what he was saying and it is CLEAR from his video that THE MEDIA should "go after" these rapists insterad of going after people like him who publicise the Islamic rape gangs when the media dont!

a reply to: bartconnolly

Do stop shouting and goodbye.

a reply to: oldcarpy

Run away if you want but you clear denial of the contradictions of it being a Sentencing Hearing and your appeal that my emphasis of that is shouting isnt getting you anywhere.

originally posted by: bartconnolly
Run away if you want but you clear denial of the contradictions of it being a Sentencing Hearing and your appeal that my emphasis of that is shouting isnt getting you anywhere.

I don't think anyone is running away.

It's just that you are trying to compare two different things: Two different cases where there were different circumstances, different context and different infringements.

You have no understanding of how the law works and you won't listen. Baiting does not help press a point. If you have anything different to add, for instance a new perspective, or some solid legal points, then please do. Otherwise I refer you to the responses above, such as:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: bartconnolly
a reply to: oldcarpy

Run away if you want but you clear denial of the contradictions of it being a Sentencing Hearing and your appeal that my emphasis of that is shouting isnt getting you anywhere.

I'm not "running away". Just saying goodbye to you because I have no interest in your circular arguments based upon your evident lack of understanding of the legal process. That, and because my ears are still ringing from all your shouting.

originally posted by: paraphi

I don't think anyone is running away.

I do! Old carpy is!

It's just that you are trying to compare two different things: Two different cases where there were different circumstances, different context and different infringements.

Two CONTEMPT OF COURT cases. Which is whay you CAN compare them!
the difference being the woman did MUCH WORSE than Tommy Robinson and she walked but TR who did a much less extreme thing, if anything bad at all , got 15 Months!

You have no understanding of how the law works and you won't listen.

That is unsupported opinion! what actual EVIDENCE do you have to show what Tommy Robinson did in terms of contempt was not far less serious than the contempt of the woman in the above case?

If you have anything different to add, for instance a new perspective, or some solid legal points, then please do.

I think I already pointed out two of the three grounds are weak and the third ( that TR was asking his supporters to attack the family of the convicted muslim child rapists) is bogus!

a reply to: oldcarpy
You are running away! I havent posted circular arguments. I addressed the three grounds given by the AG and two are weak and the third is bogus!
All you have done is waffle with phrases like "Apples and Oranges"
I supplies actual legal references. How many cases did you cite?