ChatterBank15 mins ago
More On Tommy Robinson.
48 Answers
https:/
/// Robinson’s offense was to film and name suspects in a grooming gang trial. This was illegal, and might have caused a mistrial, but, as his supporters point out, the British press has a long history of doing worse. Perhaps more convincingly, they also argue that had Robinson been a hard-left ‘activist’ rather than a ‘far-right’ bigot or racist, the left-wing press and the BBC that now assail him would be defending him as a fearless ‘citizen journalist’, talking ‘truth to power’. ///
How true is that?
And why is he in a high security prison, he should be in an open prison, if at all.
/// Robinson’s offense was to film and name suspects in a grooming gang trial. This was illegal, and might have caused a mistrial, but, as his supporters point out, the British press has a long history of doing worse. Perhaps more convincingly, they also argue that had Robinson been a hard-left ‘activist’ rather than a ‘far-right’ bigot or racist, the left-wing press and the BBC that now assail him would be defending him as a fearless ‘citizen journalist’, talking ‘truth to power’. ///
How true is that?
And why is he in a high security prison, he should be in an open prison, if at all.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Maybe Pet would take control of his impulse to sneer (only temporarily, Pet, I don't want to deny a good man his pleasures) just for five minutes and give the AB audience (thick as we are) examples of convictions for breaches of reporting restrictions and typical punishments. Most especially I'm concerned with actual cases where a mistrial has been declared.
Pet certainly asserts expertise in this area. He appears, however, to come from a Common Purpose background. So this puts a further challenge on AB's favourite polymath:
Just for five minutes don't sneer, be honest and answer my question.
Pet certainly asserts expertise in this area. He appears, however, to come from a Common Purpose background. So this puts a further challenge on AB's favourite polymath:
Just for five minutes don't sneer, be honest and answer my question.
VE, a quick Google found these, but they're fairly few and far between
https:/
https:/
//Was he not subject to breaking conditions of previous parole conditions by partaking in these actions?//
Yes he was, RockRose. And what a silly idiot knowing that, and also believing (on good evidence - they had a paddy wagon with seven cops lined up to arrest him in a near empty street) that he was a "marked man", going live-stream in front of a court addressing the guys about to hear the verdict.
On one take the idiot was asking for it. On another take you might ask whether the punishment was proportionate to the crime, or, at least, consistent with previous judicial verdicts and penalties.
Which is why I asked AB's legal expert to comment.
In the unlikely event that he does it will be not to comment, but to sneer.
Yes he was, RockRose. And what a silly idiot knowing that, and also believing (on good evidence - they had a paddy wagon with seven cops lined up to arrest him in a near empty street) that he was a "marked man", going live-stream in front of a court addressing the guys about to hear the verdict.
On one take the idiot was asking for it. On another take you might ask whether the punishment was proportionate to the crime, or, at least, consistent with previous judicial verdicts and penalties.
Which is why I asked AB's legal expert to comment.
In the unlikely event that he does it will be not to comment, but to sneer.
