Mailman. I explained before but I'll repeat.

1) He committed contempt of court. A matter that judges will give harsh sentences for, way above real crimes. They protect their domain like bull terriers. I’ve never seen a contempt of court sentence I didn’t think was outrageously harsh. TR was on his second charge of contempt. Ouch.

2) He was at risk of filming victims, witnesses and jurors, all of whom might be targeted by the defendants and their coterie.

3) He was at risk of filming the defendants and then identifying them for the juries of subsequent trials. There have been several cases similar to this where some of the convicted sex offenders have remained anonymous where their co defendants have been unmasked because they were to be tried for additional crimes. In law, the past convictions of perpetrators are not disclosed until sentencing because their past guilt might influence the jury for a new offence (they may be innocent of). Personally I disagree with this but I can see why it became practice.

4) If the jury had not reached its decision, TR's output may have been seen by a juror. OK unlikely and the jurors aren't supposed to read anything about the case, that is why the ordinary media were also banned from reporting on the case, and still are, but the judges still try to control what gets out and what doesn't. The news blackout on TR being jailed was under the same umbrella. However the cover up was in danger of attracting more publicity than TR ever could.

5) Celebrities argue that they cannot be tried fairly because they cannot have a jury that would be unaware of their record/past behaviour. If TR had made the defendants 'famous', they too could argue that their case has been prejudiced. Leading to maybe a new trial or even a dismissal. Massive expense and also potentially devastating to the victims.

All of which means TR was in the wrong, even if we need to rethink our society’s attitude to minorities, Islam and a million and one other things. People who like our mixed up society the way it is, will use the Tommy Robinsons of our society to justify the madness and more. Labour in particular feed on any hint that a minority might be oppressed by a majority. Their success is due to everyone being in some way a minority.

We need change but TR moves us back as often as he moves us forward. Can we stop debating him now?

Mailman
Have you just libelled the Defendants?

The Defendants, witnesses, victims etc, including Tommy Robinson are entitled to a fair trial, whether they are ignorant of UK Law, or just ignoring the bits they don't believe in.

Rightly or wrongly, UK Law avoids televised farces, like OJ Simpson.

IF the Defendants are found Guilty by the Jury, how many more times should the Witnesses/Victims have to relive their experiences under hostile cross examination?

Do the Victims/Witnesses have a better right to Justice depending on their Race/Colour/Creed?

//

Further to my previous comments, it may be of interest and/or significance, that on Andrew Marr this morning, the UK's Home Secretary said that he did not feel obliged to listen to a particular group of Moslems, that claims to represent Moslems in the UK.

"Sajid Javid is a British Conservative Party politician and former managing director at Deutsche Bank. He was appointed Home Secretary in April 2018, the first Asian and the first from a Muslim background to hold one of the Great Offices of State."

So what did Tommy do that caused such grave concern for the judge that it warranted a 13 stint in the clink? Did he pit new information out in to the public that wasn't disclosed during the trials? Did he dispute anything in the trials that was given as evidence OR did he merely make the grave mistake of calling these scum what they are? Muslim paedophiles?

And yet, here he is, behaving in a distinctly illiberal manner.

Jun 3, 2018 at 8:01 AM | Mark Hodgson

Just another stupid publicity stunt, that he may subsequently regret

Increased energy efficiency? What? But guess what:
"This article is part of Raw Power, a series on Europe’s clean energy revolution."
In other words, it's the sponsored section.

Jun 3, 2018 at 7:57 AM | Mark Hodgson

The last time Germany's demand for Russian fossil fuels exceeded the Russian's supply, it all went a bit wrong:

"World War II fatalities of the Soviet Union from all related causes numbered more than 20,000,000, both civilian and military, although the exact figures are disputed. The number 20 million was considered official during the Soviet era. The Russian government puts the Soviet war dead at 26.6 million based on a 1993 study by the Russian Academy of Sciences, this includes 8,668,400 military deaths as calculated by the Russian Ministry of Defense.

@Jun 3, 2018 at 8:01 AM | Unregistered CommenterMark Hodgson

I found it astonishing - the gall and arrogance of it! Where is the government in all this i wonder.
KFM

Kleinefeldmaus, I saw the piece with AC Grayling on TV, and was appalled. One of our supposedly greatest thinkers openly indulging in anti-UK behaviour to try to get what he wants because he disagreed with the outcome of a democratic process. He and his Liberal MEP pal of course obtained open access to the office of Guy Verhofstadt.

From AC Grayling's Wikipedia entry:

"His political affiliations lie on the centre-left, and he has defended human rights and politically liberal values in print and by activism."

And yet, here he is, behaving in a distinctly illiberal manner.

For those who question whether Germany is seeking to control Europe:

"Germany targets the atom
It’s part of a broader push to shut nuclear power in Europe."

https://www.politico.eu/article/germany-nuclear-energy-belgium-doel-tihange-targets-the-atom/

"Germany is coming after its neighbors’ nuclear reactors.

Berlin is getting rid of its own nuclear plants — the last is supposed to shut down by the end of 2022 — and is turning its attention to the danger posed by rickety reactors in Belgium and France

“Germany has made a decision in favor of a nuclear power exit. It would be desirable if our neighbors would take old plants offline, too,” Environment Minister Svenja Schulze said on May 22.

Berlin’s move is part of a broader push by the EU’s anti-nuclear countries, which include Austria and Luxembourg, to squeeze out nuclear power in favor of greener options such as renewables and increased energy efficiency."

Increased energy efficiency? What? But guess what:

"This article is part of Raw Power, a series on Europe’s clean energy revolution."

In other words, it's the sponsored section.

AC Grayling met Guy Verhofstadt and the Lib Dem MEP to discuss a co-ordinated approach to Brexit negotiations that intended to be so tough that UK voters would regret leaving and come 'knocking on the door.' Henry viii would have known what to do with them.....but then with the boot on the other foot ...so would Guy as you can see...
AC Grayling – classic traitor? –or just ijit - here

Again: Trial was over. Jury retired to deliberate evidence and reach verdict.

Jun 3, 2018 at 1:35 AM | Pcar

Again: just because you repeat yourself, does not make you a reliable source. Do you repeat your trust in stewgreen's legal expertise?

@GC,

I agree with stewgreen:

@Golf you look ridiculous saying Guido has NOT lost the plotCartoon?

See: May 28, 2018 at 7:04 PM Pcar

Contempt of Court: "when that covers disobeying/insulting/obstructing a judge - in his perception - any time, any place, any where...

Is GC on holiday and A Knitpicker hijacked?

May 29, 2018 at 12:57 AM | Pcar