Unthreaded
idau
What we're seeing is open to some interpretation and the discretion of the judge... Given that judge's powers are almost unfettered when it come to contempt of court it's no surprise that TR has purportedly been subjected to that area of law - it has legitimate uses, but it's also a favorite resort for legal eagles who are challenged on dodgy ground.
I'd agree with you about the Rotherham Advertiser - I have noticed their coverage as well.
Elsewhere - I see that the BBC's coverage of the recent thunderstorm flash flooding led for almost a day with a prominent picture of a minaret.
tomo
Have you watched the videos? You appear to be condemning without reviewing evidence.
May 28, 2018 at 2:53 AM | Pcar
No. You are condemning without evidence. Try reading the links provided by IDAU 1:02 am. If the "3rd Case" collapses, who will be blamed?
My interest in this concerns putting an end to the culture that has allowed this sort of crime to carry on for decades (centuries?) whether it involves any religious faith, school, institution etc. Jimmy Saville and Cyril Smith got away with it too.
Discrediting victims and witnesses has always been the tactic of Social Services, Police and Defence Lawyers. If the victims, particularly those under 16, had been plied with drink/drugs, which they had willingly taken to obliviate their own misery, having willingly gone to the perpetrators, their hazy memories of what happened, when, and who did it, may be exposed in Court whether a month, year, or decade later.
As some of the victims and witnesses may still be at risk as vulnerable adults, in these cases, and perhaps many more that you do not know about (but you can be sure the perpetrators DO KNOW the names of their vjctims) who is being put at risk if the boundaries of reporting restrictions become blurred?
golf charlie
Delingpole "Better a cocker spaniel as Prime Minister than Theresa May"
here
Well - she's always been a 'remainer ' and she is making a pig's ear' of her self appointed task of leading the UK anywhere ..perhaps except for going up the creek without a paddle.
Kleinefeldmaus
Stewgreen,
Thanks for the link.
Mailman
Countryfile last night
A homage to HM The Queen and green Windsor Castle and Park. I thought damming of rivers was regarded as non-green as it stops the passage of migrating fish amongst other nasty side-effects. On the other hand as long as she isn't getting a wodge of taxpayer cash then it's up to her what she does with her bit of river. I was mildly puzzled by the desire to replant trees to an old OS map of the area. Other than nostalgia for a bygone era why not plant them where it suts the current layout and land usage. Again her park she can do what she wants with it.
Uibhist a Tuath
Fake news from the MSM is exposed. What Kim and Moon were really concerned about at their historic meeting.- exposed here in an exclusive on the spot capture by KFM.here
Kleinefeldmaus
Re: [Redacted] Jailed
In public domain:
http://causelist.org/leeds/T20187130/
Seems there was a jury, was it dismissed? Due to threats?
Open justice - when was that abolished?
Pcar
@GC,
Talking about, repeating, reporting what has already been published in MSM - Local media is not prejudicial unless those published reports were already "banned".
Mr [redacted] added no new information. He was merely grandstanding to draw attention to trials.
Have you watched the videos? You appear to be condemning without reviewing evidence.
Pcar
stewgreen
Under anti terrorism legislation, the Police can seize the phone of someone once they are arrested. They can download anything they like, including all contacts and details.
What is the significance of the duration of his imprisonment?
Whether you do, or don't know how he could have prejudiced a trial that has not started, how can you state it wouldn't?
Pcar, yes. Reasons can now be found to blame the collapse of a future trial on those not directly connected to the case..
golf charlie
Pcar:
The court record shows there was a jury which went out to consider its verdict the previous day (see Court 12 dropdown arrow). It is not clear whether they reached their verdicts, or whether they had to come back. I have to suspect they were summoned back into court and told arrangements for the next day and possible the weekend. With multiple defendants in a complex case with many charges it is unlikely (although not impossible) that they would complete the jury process in under a day: indeed there is a risk that the jury are unable to reach a decision that is unanimous, or even meeting some lesser standard of majority allowed by the judge, risking the need for a retrial.
The details for the following day do now show TR's appearance in Court 12 - case closed at 14:26 (just click on the calendar date for the 25th). There is no mention of the jury, but the record appears in any case incomplete. Of course, if the judge has to deal with interim arrangements for any found guilty, admitting that such process was occurring would reveal the verdicts. Usually any previous criminal record is revealed after a guilty verdict, and there may be pleas arguing for social reports before deciding on sentence. With these cases I suspect those of the 29 found guilty would be sentenced after the 3rd trial is complete.
GC:
The case of Khurram Javed in Sheffield has nothing to do with the cases of the 29 in Leeds.