Tommy Robinson

[morpheus2]

They left a Quran on his bedside table instead of a Gideon's Bible.

Cool. Was it Tommy's own 'Mohammed's Koran: Why Muslims Kill For Islam'?

[burnleymik]

How should he have been treated in jail? It's not a summer camp you know.

Considering he should never have been in jail in the first place...

Locked up for 23 per day in his cell.
Put in the cell next to the prison mosque so the others had to walk directly passed. His window each day, which meant abuse, faces, spit etc.
Strange occurrences that slowed his legal team down when trying to visit him, meaning his appeal was delayed.
Moved, inexplicably from a prison where he was a normal prisoner, as such, to a prison where his life was in danger.

At the end of the day the judge said this was contempt of court, not criminal contempt, but contempt, which should not carry a custodial sentence. There was a miscarriage of justice here and just because you do not like him doesn't make this acceptable.

[Walton]

He pleaded guilty

[Jakubclaret]

Tommy’s a good egg I like the bloke often misunderstood & demonised by some well most sections of the media & people who don’t wish to engage in debate, not everybody’s cup of tea granted.

[BurnleyFC]

He pleaded guilty

According to the man himself, he didn’t.

[Burnley Ace]

Considering he should never have been in jail in the first place...

Locked up for 23 per day in his cell.
Put in the cell next to the prison mosque so the others had to walk directly passed. His window each day, which meant abuse, faces, spit etc.
Strange occurrences that slowed his legal team down when trying to visit him, meaning his appeal was delayed.
Moved, inexplicably from a prison where he was a normal prisoner, as such, to a prison where his life was in danger.

At the end of the day the judge said this was contempt of court, not criminal contempt, but contempt, which should not carry a custodial sentence. There was a miscarriage of justice here and just because you do not like him doesn't make this acceptable.

Let's go through this line by line shall we?

Locked up for 23 hours - as are many prisoners
Next to the prison mosque -Thought he was in isolation, that's nowhere near the"prison mosque".
Strange occurrences? Firstly he was serving the remainder of a suspended sentence (the sentences were consecutive not concurrent) the suspended sentence hasn't been appealed. Secondly its a technical appeal, he has no input on that, papers lodged, date fixed and when his sentence finished he got bail pending a fresh hearing.
How was his life in danger when he begged to be put under special protection, locked up for 23 hours and given his own guards to look after him?
What is the difference between contempt of Court and "criminal contempt"?
He pleaded guilty to the contempt, the hearing is effectively a new sentencing hearing not a trial.
We are all looking forward to his "personal mitigation" lol

[Imploding Turtle]

Considering he should never have been in jail in the first place...

Locked up for 23 per day in his cell.
Put in the cell next to the prison mosque so the others had to walk directly passed. His window each day, which meant abuse, faces, spit etc.
Strange occurrences that slowed his legal team down when trying to visit him, meaning his appeal was delayed.
Moved, inexplicably from a prison where he was a normal prisoner, as such, to a prison where his life was in danger.

At the end of the day the judge said this was contempt of court, not criminal contempt, but contempt, which should not carry a custodial sentence. There was a miscarriage of justice here and just because you do not like him doesn't make this acceptable.

This is what it looks like when you're not right smart but think you can win a legal argument because of semantics.

Robinson breached a court order. That is criminal contempt of court. According to this fool unless a judge calls it by its full name then it can't be "criminal contempt of court". Using his dumb logic that means Robinson also didn't commit any other kind of contempt of court, like "civil contempt", or "strict liability contempt". (yes, i'm referencing Wikipedia for this because i'm not a legal expert)

Here is what can constitute criminal contempt of court:

1. Contempt "in the face of the court" (not to be taken literally; the judge does not need to see it, provided it took place within the court precincts or relates to a case currently before that court);
2. Disobedience of a court order; and
3. Breaches of undertakings to the court.

Tommy fell foul of every. single. one.

"Contempt in the face of the court" - He was standing outside the court deliberately violating a court order.
"Disobedience of a court order" - He was ordered by the court not to do something and he did it anyway.
"Breaches of undertakings to the court" - He promised not to commit contempt of court again, as per his suspended sentence, and he did it anyway.



You don't have to be a lawyer or a legal expert to understand any of this. You just have to not be a dribbling idiot.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contempt_of_court#England_and_Wales

[Burnley Ace]

According to the man himself, he didn’t.

It will be on tape! Or is he now saying he wasn't given proper legal advice when entering his "unequivocal" plea?

[Loyalclaret]

Lots of prison are 23 hour lock up, this is down to budget not prisoner profile.

Prisoners are often moved.

[BurnleyFC]

It will be on tape! Or is he now saying he wasn't given proper legal advice when entering his "unequivocal" plea?

I don’t know because I haven’t seen anything, I’m just repeating what he has said, which is that he never pleaded guilty.

Have you seen anything to say otherwise?

[Greenmile]

I don’t know because I haven’t seen anything, I’m just repeating what he has said, which is that he never pleaded guilty.

Have you seen anything to say otherwise?

So you’re just taking the word of a convicted fraudster as gospel. Again. Or did they let him make YouTube videos in prison?

But it’s everyone else who”s gullible, right?

[TheFamilyCat]

Considering he should never have been in jail in the first place...

Locked up for 23 per day in his cell.
Put in the cell next to the prison mosque so the others had to walk directly passed. His window each day, which meant abuse, faces, spit etc.
Strange occurrences that slowed his legal team down when trying to visit him, meaning his appeal was delayed.
Moved, inexplicably from a prison where he was a normal prisoner, as such, to a prison where his life was in danger.

At the end of the day the judge said this was contempt of court, not criminal contempt, but contempt, which should not carry a custodial sentence. There was a miscarriage of justice here and just because you do not like him doesn't make this acceptable.

Did the Muslims complain about being abused and spat on when they walked past his cell?

[fidelcastro]

When Tommy Robinson is being hailed as a hero, yet Jeremy Corbyn is being vilified as a racist, you know the country is Fooked up!

[ClaretMoffitt]

When Tommy Robinson is being hailed as a hero, yet Jeremy Corbyn is being vilified as a racist, you know the country is Fooked up!

You can't lose your job for openly supporting JC, you can and will if you do with TR. So you're statement is just nonsense really, isn't it?

[fidelcastro]

You can't lose your job for openly supporting JC, you can and will if you do with TR. So you're statement is just nonsense really, isn't it?

No. Anyone who openly supports TR deserves to lose their job! Only a Right-Wing whack job like you would think otherwise.

[Burnley Ace]

I don’t know because I haven’t seen anything, I’m just repeating what he has said, which is that he never pleaded guilty.

Have you seen anything to say otherwise?

The Court proceedings are on audio tape and a Stenographer types what is being said, that's how the Appeal Judges know what went on!

To be fair, given how contempt hearings are conducted, he did not stand up and say "guilty" as that isn't the question asked. His Counsel accepted the contempt on his behalf which is one of the grounds of his appeal (he didn't have the opportunity to apologise). So his Counsel either acted on his instructions or didn't take instructions and just made it up.

[Imploding Turtle]

You can't lose your job for openly supporting JC, you can and will if you do with TR. So you're statement is just nonsense really, isn't it?

So are you saying that all those Tommy Robinson supporters who are protesting are all unemployed?

Remind me again, what was your lots favourite criticism of student protesters who had so much time on their hands?

[fidelcastro]

So are you saying that all those Tommy Robinson supporters who are protesting are all unemployed?

Remind me again, what was your lots favourite criticism of student protesters who had so much time on their hands?

The great unwashed, wasn't it?

Ironic really, looking at the state of TR's mindless sycophants.

[ClaretMoffitt]

So are you saying that all those Tommy Robinson supporters who are protesting are all unemployed?

Remind me again, what was your lots favourite criticism of student protesters who had so much time on their hands?

Or more likely they are like me, self employed.

[TheFamilyCat]

How can they be sacked then?

[Damo]

You don't deserve to lose your job for supporting anyone.

Spending your working day supporting/opposing someone on a football messageboard might well be grounds though.

[BurnleyFC]

So you’re just taking the word of a convicted fraudster as gospel. Again. Or did they let him make YouTube videos in prison?

But it’s everyone else who”s gullible, right?

I’m not taking anything as gospel. I’m asking a genuine question.

Didn’t you read the first sentence?

[Imploding Turtle]

Or more likely they are like me, self employed.

I see. So when the educated left have time to protest it's because they're unemployed. But when the uneducated alt-right extremists can do it it's because they're self-employed.

[Imploding Turtle]

You don't deserve to lose your job for supporting anyone.

Spending your working day supporting/opposing someone on a football messageboard might well be grounds though.

It makes me laugh when people say this. It suggests that employers shouldn't have the right to fire someone for embarrassing them publicly and hurting their business. Yet you ask one of these same people if companies should have the right to refuse someone's custom because they're gay they're among the first to stand up and say "but free dumb".

Companies should have the right to fire an employee for doing something that hurts their business. Don't you agree?

[burnleymik]

It's in the court document from the appeal that he didn't plead guilty to anything. Thus shows just how much of the media lies some of your are prepared to swallow, unquestioningly.

[burnleymik]

Whether you like him or loathe him, you should be able to criticise any religion in this country without fear.

That clearly is not the case.

[burnleymik]

No. Anyone who openly supports TR deserves to lose their job! Only a Right-Wing whack job like you would think otherwise.

You are the problem.

[HatfieldClaret]

If anyone publicly supports Tommy Robinson then they could be deemed to be a risk to their companies reputation. Different matter if they're in the public sector though, as the public sector tolerates people with loony left tendencies.

If I employed someone who supported Tommy Robinson, even discretely, I would get rid by whatever means possible as they had shown that they just don't have a grip on reality.

I know that some people think that centrist politics is boring; sometimes it's a relief to be normal.

[Imploding Turtle]

It's in the court document from the appeal that he didn't plead guilty to anything. Thus shows just how much of the media lies some of your are prepared to swallow, unquestioningly.

http://www.kentonline.co.uk/canterbury/ ... il-126340/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Why does anyone have reason to question this reporting? (he won't answer me because he's a coward)

On top of that, the BBC reported that Robinson's own lawyer said he had "deep regret" for what he had done. So why hasn't Robinson or his lawyer disputed that report?

Has Robinson even denied pleading guilty? All these news organisations this idiot is accusing us of swallowing unquestioningly, has Robinson ever once disputed the fact that he pleaded guilty? Have his lawyers disputed it?

[Imploding Turtle]

It's in the court document from the appeal that he didn't plead guilty to anything. Thus shows just how much of the media lies some of your are prepared to swallow, unquestioningly.

Show us that document. (he won't)

[burnleymik]

If anyone publicly supports Tommy Robinson then they could be deemed to be a risk to their companies reputation. Different matter if they're in the public sector though, as the public sector tolerates people with loony left tendencies.

If I employed someone who supported Tommy Robinson, even discretely, I would get rid by whatever means possible as they had shown that they just don't have a grip on reality.

I know that some people think that centrist politics is boring; sometimes it's a relief to be normal.

So you would sack someone for having different beliefs to you? That's actually quite a sad state of affairs.

[Imploding Turtle]

So you would sack someone for having different beliefs to you? That's actually quite a sad state of affairs.

That's not what he said, or implied. You have to be quite special to think he did.
Have you ever, even once, not deliberately misrepresented someone elses opinion?

[BurnleyFC]

http://www.kentonline.co.uk/canterbury/ ... il-126340/

Why does anyone have reason to question this reporting? (he won't answer me because he's a coward)

On top of that, the BBC reported that Robinson's own lawyer said he had "deep regret" for what he had done. So why hasn't Robinson or his lawyer disputed that report?

Has Robinson even denied pleading guilty? All these news organisations this idiot is accusing us of swallowing unquestioningly, has Robinson ever once disputed the fact that he pleaded guilty? Have his lawyers disputed it?

That report is dated May 2017, presumably after his first offence.

[RingoMcCartney]

If anyone publicly supports Tommy Robinson then they could be deemed to be a risk to their companies reputation. Different matter if they're in the public sector though, as the public sector tolerates people with loony left tendencies.

If I employed someone who supported Tommy Robinson, even discretely, I would get rid by whatever means possible as they had shown that they just don't have a grip on reality.

I know that some people think that centrist politics is boring; sometimes it's a relief to be normal.

So some body has a different world view to you and they should lose their livelihood! There's an assumption that some of your customers wouldn't agree with the same views, and a further assumption that other customers wouldn't agree with the views, but believe in tolerance, and respect his right to hold an opinion different to theirs. A tolerance that you clearly lack.

This lack of tolerance is not "centrist politics" it's more akin to the Soviet union or the khmerr Rouge Cambodia.

[Burnley Ace]

It's in the court document from the appeal that he didn't plead guilty to anything. Thus shows just how much of the media lies some of your are prepared to swallow, unquestioningly.

You don’t plead guilty to contempt you either accept or deny. As has already been pointed out it’s in the Court papers that his Counsel accepted, on his behalf presumably with instructions from his client, that he’d been in contempt.

[Damo]

It makes me laugh when people say this. It suggests that employers shouldn't have the right to fire someone for embarrassing them publicly and hurting their business. Yet you ask one of these same people if companies should have the right to refuse someone's custom because they're gay they're among the first to stand up and say "but free dumb".

Companies should have the right to fire an employee for doing something that hurts their business. Don't you agree?

Yes I totally agree.
Supporting tommy Robinson, Jeremy Corbyn, Abu Hamas, isis or even antifa doesn't necessarily bring your position at work into disrepute though.
If you are trying to spread your silly ideologies to your work mates, attending rallies and smashing people over the head with wooden signs then that's a different matter.
Would you be comfortable for someone to be fired for their religious beliefs?

[RingoMcCartney]

No. Anyone who openly supports TR deserves to lose their job! Only a Right-Wing whack job like you would think otherwise.

Now where have we seen this attitude previously?

A couple in Rotherham who'd been foster parents for years, caring for many many children. Committed the heinous crime of being UKIP supporters. The local Labour run council banned them from fostering.

The same Labour run Rotherham council that was involved in a certain 1400 child grooming scandal and was more concerned about being seen as politically correct, than actually looking after the welfare of children, many of whom were in its "care".....

The liberal left- claim to be becons of tolerance. They only tolerate views they approve.

[burnleymik]

You don’t plead guilty to contempt you either accept or deny. As has already been pointed out it’s in the Court papers that his Counsel accepted, on his behalf presumably with instructions from his client, that he’d been in contempt.

Exactly. Which is not what the media came forward with. They said he pleaded guilty. The court documents also show contempt has several different meanings and he wasn't told exactly how he was in contempt. He had removed the video they told him to. It was a kangaroo court and that is why it was quashed. He is still guilty of the original charge at the other location though.

[Imploding Turtle]

That report is dated May 2017, presumably after his first offence.

Yes. To which he pleaded guilty.

[Damo]

Charlie "how dare you say I'm not liberal"

Also Charlie "anyone who's views I dislike should be sacked"

[Imploding Turtle]

Yes I totally agree.
Supporting tommy Robinson, Jeremy Corbyn, Abu Hamas, isis or even antifa doesn't necessarily bring your position at work into disrepute though.
If you are trying to spread your silly ideologies to your work mates, attending rallies and smashing people over the head with wooden signs then that's a different matter.
Would you be comfortable for someone to be fired for their religious beliefs?

Of course not. What sort of stupid question is that?

I love how you casually include Jeremy Corbyn in a list of extremists that include ISIS

[Imploding Turtle]

Charlie "how dare you say I'm not liberal"

Also Charlie "anyone who's views I dislike should be sacked"

Why are you lying? If you have to make **** up about me to attack me then you've already lost.

[Damo]

Of course not. What sort of stupid question is that?

I love how you casually include Jeremy Corbyn in a list of extremists that include ISIS

Someone mentioned Corbyn further up the thread in relation to supporting him or Robinson. World's apart I know bit my point still stands

[Imploding Turtle]

Someone mentioned Corbyn further up the thread in relation to supporting him or Robinson. World's apart I know bit my point still stands

So you accept that Robinson supporters and Corbyn supporters are "worlds apart", yet you think your point comparing the two still stands?

No wonder political discourse is ****** nowadays. Even when you admit you're clearly wrong you still maintain your position.

[BurnleyFC]

Yes. To which he pleaded guilty.

He’s denying pleading guilty to the more recent case, not that one.

[Damo]

I mentioned Corbyn in reply to

When Tommy Robinson is being hailed as a hero, yet Jeremy Corbyn is being vilified as a racist, you know the country is Fooked up!

And

You can't lose your job for openly supporting JC, you can and will if you do with TR. So you're statement is just nonsense really, isn't it?

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, that you didn't read the entire exchange before angrily taking to your keyboard. That you are not just putting words into my mouth instead of countering my point

[Imploding Turtle]

I mentioned Corbyn in reply to

And

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, that you didn't read the entire exchange before angrily taking to your keyboard. That you are not just putting words into my mouth instead of countering my point

Why do you keep thinking i type things angrily? Is it because you want to smear me as just some angry liberal leftie in order to devalue my opinions by means other than with reason?
And what kind of moron thinks a post that ends in the emoji is an angry one?

[Damo]

Why do you keep thinking i type things angrily? Is it because you want to smear me as just some angry liberal leftie in order to devalue my opinions by means other than with reason?
And what kind of moron thinks a post that ends in the emoji is an angry one?

Another swerve. Ok pal I'll leave you to it

[BurnleyFC]

Turtle never gets angry.

Honestly.

[Imploding Turtle]

Another swerve. Ok pal I'll leave you to it

A swerve? You didn't ask anything. All you've done is made up **** about me and i've addressed it as completely made up. That's swerving now?

Damo: when did you stop beating your wife?
Normie: I've never beaten my wife
Damo: Stop swerving the question.