What the death of Freedom really looks like

[~Rocktar~]

So apparently there is this "activist" reporter type guy in the UK named Tommy Robinson and he was reporting or commentating or something on the trial of some Muslims accused of grooming children for rape and or the sex trafficking trade. The police arrested him and apparently the news in the UK has been told not to report on it. This of course is what real authoritarianism looks like and what happens to people when they don't have a 1st and 2nd Amendment. If you post here, and have Facebook, you might not be safe traveling to Europe if you go through the UK, they seem to think it ok to quash reporters and arrest you for Facebook posts. And idiot Liberals/Socialists think Trump is authoritarian calling CNN fake news.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/tommy-robinson-arrested-leeds-court-child-grooming-trial-edl-founder-latest-a8368821.html

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6376643/tommy-robinson-english-defence-league-edl-arrested-facebook-video-grooming-trial/

This is of course after London has starting arresting people for kitchen cutlery and scissors as well as confiscating vegetable peelers because knife crime is on the rise and this will of reduce it instead of dealing with the lawless bands of migrant youth and the no-go areas.

[Gelston]

The UK has always had an Authoritarian lean.

[cwolff]

Your hero was already on probation for this and he violated that probation. Did you even read the article? He was violating laws they have in place to protect court proceedings from interference. Fuck! You're head is not just to hang a hat. Use that noodle a little bit

[~Rocktar~]

Your hero was already on probation for this and he violated that probation. Did you even read the article? He was violating laws they have in place to protect court proceedings from interference. Fuck! You're head is not just to hang a hat. Use that noodle a little bit

He had a suspended sentence for contempt of court and all indications say he was doing nothing to earn a charge of "breaching the peace" which is what he was arrested for. Did you even read the article? If you are standing outside, making no ruckus while live streaming in a public area, then how can you be breaching the peace? Seriously, do you have any idea what the concept of trumped up charges are? Imagine if this had been done to some pesky turd like Brian Stelter in the US or maybe Rachael Maddow?

[cwolff]

He had a suspended sentence for contempt of court and all indications say he was doing nothing to earn a charge of "breaching the peace" which is what he was arrested for. Did you even read the article? If you are standing outside, making no ruckus while live streaming in a public area, then how can you be breaching the peace? Seriously, do you have any idea what the concept of trumped up charges are? Imagine if this had been done to some pesky turd like Brian Stelter in the US or maybe Rachael Maddow?

“This is not about free speech, not about the freedom of the press, nor about legitimate journalism, and not about political correctness,” the judge told Robinson at the time

“It is about justice and ensuring that a trial can be carried out justly and fairly, it’s about being innocent until proven guilty.

“It is about preserving the integrity of the jury to continue without people being intimidated or being affected by irresponsible and inaccurate ‘reporting’, if that’s what it was.”

That's from your article. He had a suspended sentence for breaking UK law protecting their jury system and trials.

If you must be outraged there is plenty here for you to fight against. Philando Castiles killing for example. That's closer to home and he is dead now. Not just getting some slap on the wrist like your UK wing nut. Border patrol stopping women for speaking spanish. That's an American outrage you can be up in arms about. Trump interfering with an investigation and generally lying his ass off everyday and playing golf; that's an outrage. No need to go so afield.

Also, you're judgements about UK law mean shit. Did you ever consider they don't want their jurors getting filmed for extremist tv? They are protecting their legal system and your boy is willfully ignoring that.

[~Rocktar~]

How do you have a free and fair trial if you have it behind closed doors? You know you can go into pretty much any court room in America and sit in the back and watch the trial unless the Judge seals the court for something like a minor's testimony. Also, he wasn't in the court, he was outside on the street. Jurors don't go in and out of the court by the front door dumbass. This is about freedom of the press and free speech, both of which the UK doesn't have.

The UK police and other officials have been turning their head in the face of crime by immigrants for decades because of Liberal white guilt. They are covering for shit and just like that rich drunk fuck that raped the girl and got 3 months, they, meaning the police/judge/politicians in this case need to be dragged out into the light of day and either shown as the process working correctly for once or exposed as the cockroaches they are so that maybe justice can be served. I tend to side with this being a political arrest.

The rest of your spewage isn't worth the time to type a reply.

[cwolff]

How do you have a free and fair trial if you have it behind closed doors? You know you can go into pretty much any court room in America and sit in the back and watch the trial unless the Judge seals the court for something like a minor's testimony. Also, he wasn't in the court, he was outside on the street. Jurors don't go in and out of the court by the front door dumbass. This is about freedom of the press and free speech, both of which the UK doesn't have.

The UK police and other officials have been turning their head in the face of crime by immigrants for decades because of Liberal white guilt. They are covering for shit and just like that rich drunk fuck that raped the girl and got 3 months, they, meaning the police/judge/politicians in this case need to be dragged out into the light of day and either shown as the process working correctly for once or exposed as the cockroaches they are so that maybe justice can be served. I tend to side with this being a political arrest.

The rest of your spewage isn't worth the time to type a reply.

HAHAHA, you just made that shit up. "Jurors don't go in the door dumbass" So let's get this straight. You post some shit online from a whack job English right winger and all the sudden you've a barrister over-ruling an actual British judge. Consider for one second that maybe you don't know what you're talking about. Just consider it. Don't lose you're crazy confidence, simply consider that maybe you don't know everything.

[~Rocktar~]

So, a little more news on the case. Tommy Robinson has already been tried and convicted and the judge has imposed a reporting ban on it. So basically he was tried and convicted in under a day and they made it illegal to report on his arrest, trial or conviction. And idiots like cwolff don't think there is some judicial hanky panky or government trying to cover shit up going on? Hell, it will take years to put Weinstein away and most trials for the average person in the US and the UK take months if not years even if they are politically motivated. This one is over and done in the same afternoon?


Judge Geoffrey Marson QC who sentenced Tommy Robinson to 13 months in prison and imposed a reporting ban on it.

The same judge quashed a conviction against a man for downloading indecent images of children in 2009 - see https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/meehan-abandons-child-porn-appeal-1227244.html

Tommy, having initially been told he was being arrested for breach of the peace on Friday was then convicted - on the same afternoon and within an eyebrow raising short space of time - of contempt of court for 'prejudicing the outcome of the trial'. That is utter nonsense. The men accused of child rape on Friday were attending court to be handed down their sentence. The trial was already over. Tommy was on public land. He did not enter inside the court and he reported directly to his Facebook livestream.

Conversely, this is a link to an ongoing child sex abuse trial where BBC News have in fact prejudiced the outcome of an ongoing trial by quoting a lawyer for the accused in the headline of their article, stating: ''Rotherham child sexual abuse claim 'made up to boost EDL cause''' implying that the defence counsel's submission was a statement of fact: http://www.bbc.co.uk/ne…/uk-england-south-yorkshire-44208512 (http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-44208512)

Reposted from Facebook.

Corroborated by https://www.therebel.media/ezra_levant_show_may_25_2018

and http://www.foxnews.com/world/2018/05/26/right-wing-activist-tommy-robinson-reportedly-jailed-after-filming-outside-child-grooming-trial.html

[Some Rogue]

THERE'S A BAN ON REPORTING ABOUT IT.

Links two UK sources in the original post. :chair:

[cwolff]

You're working so hard to make a conspiracy theory out of this one asshole in England when you've got trump pissing in your face telling you its rain right here.

Your selective moral outrage is fucked up.

[Methais]

“This is not about free speech, not about the freedom of the press, nor about legitimate journalism, and not about political correctness,” the judge told Robinson at the time

“It is about justice and ensuring that a trial can be carried out justly and fairly, it’s about being innocent until proven guilty.

“It is about preserving the integrity of the jury to continue without people being intimidated or being affected by irresponsible and inaccurate ‘reporting’, if that’s what it was.”

That's from your article. He had a suspended sentence for breaking UK law protecting their jury system and trials.

If you must be outraged there is plenty here for you to fight against. Philando Castiles killing for example. That's closer to home and he is dead now. Not just getting some slap on the wrist like your UK wing nut. Border patrol stopping women for speaking spanish. That's an American outrage you can be up in arms about. Trump interfering with an investigation and generally lying his ass off everyday and playing golf; that's an outrage. No need to go so afield.

Also, you're judgements about UK law mean shit. Did you ever consider they don't want their jurors getting filmed for extremist tv? They are protecting their legal system and your boy is willfully ignoring that.

You're such a weak hack. Go be a pussy elsewhere.

And for fuck's sake stop using "you're" when it should be"your." We know you're dumb as fuckall but it's like you're going the extra mile lately.

[~Rocktar~]

THERE'S A BAN ON REPORTING ABOUT IT.

Links two UK sources in the original post. :chair:

UK laws revolve around print and broadcast and apparently don't apply so much to the internet.

[Some Rogue]

Oh, the place most people get their news now.



Why has there been no coverage of Robinson’s conviction until now?

In far-right circles, the lack of media coverage over the weekend was widely touted as further evidence of a conspiracy to silence Robinson.

However, the real explanation lies in the same legislation which landed Robinson in court - contempt of court.


A temporary order had been imposed by the court banning media coverage of Robinson’s trial and conviction while the Leeds grooming trial was ongoing over fears it could further publicise Robinson’s prejudicial broadcast.


“If the jurors in my present trial get to know of this video I will no doubt be faced with an application to discharge the jury,” Marson told Robinson on Friday, the Hull Daily Mail (https://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/tommy-robinson-contempt-of-court-1619252) reports.


“If I have to do that it will mean a re-trial, costing hundreds and hundreds and thousands of pounds.”

However, such orders can be challenged by reporters - as journalists from Leeds Live successfully did on Tuesday.


With the temporary order lifted, the UK press is now free to report on Robinson’s case.


However, legal blogger The Secret Barrister (https://thesecretbarrister.com/2018/05/25/what-has-happened-to-poor-tommy-robinson/) says the reporting restrictions have inadvertently enabled a false narrative to flourish online.

The enforced absence of “accurate reporting by responsible journalists” meant “there was no factual counterpoint to the selective and inaccurate details of Yaxley-Lennon’s situation that were inevitably flooded through social media” by his supporters.

http://www.theweek.co.uk/93916/why-tommy-robinson-is-going-to-prison-and-why-the-uk-media-were-silent

[Gelston]

UK laws revolve around print and broadcast and apparently don't apply so much to the internet.

It does and they've gone after people for internet posts.

[Some Rogue]

It does and they've gone after people for internet posts.

Also this. Pretty sure internet trolls have been prosecuted too.

[~Rocktar~]

It does and they've gone after people for internet posts.

Well, apparently the websites I cited didn't seem to feel all that threatened. They did have a complete print, radio and TV blackout on the issue.

[Gelston]

"The order bans reporters from reporting on a case if there is reason to believe the reporting could prejudice a trial. The order prevents reporting until the conclusion of the trial Robinson was reporting on."

The case is over, there is no longer a reporting ban.

[~Rocktar~]

"The order bans reporters from reporting on a case if there is reason to believe the reporting could prejudice a trial. The order prevents reporting until the conclusion of the trial Robinson was reporting on."

The case is over, there is no longer a reporting ban.

Yeah, he was arrested, tried and convicted in under a a day, in fact, in under 8 hours.

[cwolff]

Yeah, he was arrested, tried and convicted in under a a day, in fact, in under 8 hours.

He was on probation for the same crime?

You've got to be a retard to defend this guy. He's clearly in the wrong.

http://www.newsweek.com/why-was-tommy-robinson-arrested-far-right-activist-jailed-13-months-947525


In a case that has attracted worldwide attention, the far-right activist was arrested for potentially prejudicing a criminal case while streaming an hour-long Facebook Live video outside the court during a rape trial.

At the time, the jury were in the process of considering their verdicts after hearing evidence for the past six weeks, Leeds Live reports. The judge imposed restrictions against reporting on Robinson being jailed over fears it could prejudice the outcome.

In the video, Robinson could be heard reading out defendants' names and the charges they were accused of—some of which were incorrect—as they arrived at the court.

The 35-year-old was eventually arrested on suspicion of causing a breach of the peace and was charged hours later. He admitted to committing contempt of court by publishing information that could prejudice an ongoing trial and was jailed for 13 months.

[~Rocktar~]

He was on probation for the same crime?

You've got to be a retard to defend this guy. He's clearly in the wrong.

http://www.newsweek.com/why-was-tommy-robinson-arrested-far-right-activist-jailed-13-months-947525

I clearly don't agree and I am absolutely not nearly as retarded as you. After all I don't support and advocate for policies and politics that enslave others and end in tyranny, death camps, purges and gulags.

[cwolff]

I clearly don't agree and I am absolutely not nearly as retarded as you. After all I don't support and advocate for policies and politics that enslave others and end in tyranny, death camps, purges and gulags.

Hate to break it to ya, but we know you're a retard. You quote alex jones.

[Gelston]

From what I can tell, it was probably his suspended sentence being unsuspended. That doesn't take a lot of time.

Infact, there is no defense against it, since you were already sentenced to that.

[cwolff]

From what I can tell, it was probably his suspended sentence being unsuspended. That doesn't take a lot of time.

Infact, there is no defense against it, since you were already sentenced to that.

I think you're right though I've not seen it specifically explained that way.

[Gelston]

I think you're right though I've not seen it specifically explained that way.

It isn't, but I do know he had a suspended sentence still in effect. Seems like the most logical thing to me. I don't know why he'd get a brand new sentencing when he already had one.

[cwolff]

They are the victimisers who clothe themselves in the garb of victimhood. “Free speech” is their mantra, but it is nothing more than a political ploy, a ruse, a term the far right wilfully abuse to spread hatred. The arrest and jailing for contempt of court of Stephen Yaxley-Lennon – not “Tommy Robinson”, a name he revealingly took from another football hooligan when he founded the far-right English Defence League – has quickly been mythologised by the international far right as yet more martyrdom. It is victimisation of brave truth-tellers, they screech, by an establishment at war with western culture.

I am heavily restricted in what I can write about Yaxley-Lennon. That’s because I too could be in contempt of court for fatally undermining the right of people to a fair trial. Yaxley-Lennon already had a suspended sentence for this offence, and was warned he would go to jail if his behaviour again risked the collapse of a trial. He is no martyr to freedom of speech, just a career criminal with a history of mortgage fraud, football hooliganism and assault whose craving for publicity put a critical court case at risk.

And here is the wider point: the obsessive tactical misuse of “free speech” by an ascendant far right. Roseanne Barr, a once celebrated US comedian, has had her primetime ABC show dropped because of a gratuitously racist tweet. “Alt-right” campaigners abound on social media screeching about yet another assault on freedom. But Barr remains entitled to spray her bigotry across social media, and to keep retweeting self-pitying justifications for her behaviour, and ABC is entitled not to give her a show. US far-right types such as Richard Spencer hold “free speech rallies”, while Yaxley-Lennon held a “day for freedom” in Britain. When Katie Hopkins was fired by a leading radio station, her far-right supporters again construed it as an attack on free speech.


https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/may/31/tommy-robinson-freedom-of-speech-far-right?CMP=fb_gu

[~Rocktar~]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/may/31/tommy-robinson-freedom-of-speech-far-right?CMP=fb_gu

And this is the argument that will be used to rationalize attacks on the First Amendment and Free Speech.