Well, I think I can be convinced that the legal system is working flawlessly in its treatment of Mr. Robinson but I still have my suspicions about it failing the victims and all the secrecy, which I believe to be based on fear that the general public might find out what is going on leading to the great white indigenous backlash that the elite worry about so much, despising us as they do.

"I can slowly counter every point made here, step by step, but what is clear is that when I put a link or info it is not followed..instead we get misrepresentation back."
Jun 1, 2018 at 3:57 PM | stewgreen

Is that based on trusting the legal advice that Tommy Robinson chose to trust?

"There is another legal take from (Rob Warner of the Crimebodge website my comment introducing the video
BTW the system has already admitted Judge Marson has made ONE MISTAKE in his judgement on Tommy.
So we can see his judgements are not 100% sound.
He originally judged that Tommy’s case should not be reported in the press until after the end of the next trial in October.
That was challenged easily by lawyers for news site Yorkshire LIve, and found to be unsound.
So other parts of the judgement could similarly be unsound."

Jun 1, 2018 at 3:57 PM | stewgreen

Really? Can it be proved that he did not commit Contempt of Court, by broadcasting live about a Court Case. Can it be proved that he had not been warned about the consequences for him, and any trial he might broadcast about?

If you want to Tie Yellow Ribbons Around the Old Oak Tree, can I recommend you buy UV Light, Fade Resistant ones?

Jun 1, 2018 at 9:09 AM | Rhoda Klapp

Perhaps the Courts and Police should have locked up Tommy Robinson following his previous demonstrations of his contempt for the UK Legal System:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/feb/02/finsbury-park-attack-darren-osborne-jailed
"His trial heard he regularly read material from the former EDL leader Tommy Robinson and the far-right group Britain First, among others. “Over the space of a month or so, your mindset became one of malevolent hatred. You allowed your mind to be poisoned by those who claim to be leaders,” Cheema-Grubb told him."

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2018/feb/06/police-assess-contempt-claims-over-tommy-robinson-videos
"Should the matter be referred to the attorney general’s office and lead to a conviction, the publisher of the videos could face up to two years in prison for breaching contempt of court laws, which are designed to ensure fair trials.

The footage showed Robinson being interviewed by BBC and Sky News journalists. The discussions were recorded during the trial but were only to be broadcast if and when Osborne was convicted, in order to ensure his right to a fair trial was respected.

However, it is understood that the interviews were broadcast live on Robinson’s Facebook page without the journalists’ knowledge. The footage also appeared on other social media platforms afterwards.

Scotland Yard confirmed on Tuesday that its detectives were examining whether or not the release of the material may have risked prejudicing the trial, which could have caused it to be abandoned. “The matter has been referred to us and is currently being assessed. It would be inappropriate to discuss further at this stage,” a spokeswoman said.

Juries are expected to decide their verdicts based only on the evidence put before them in court, rather than on any other content published elsewhere. Public discussion of an ongoing case, beyond contemporaneous reports of the evidence, risks swaying jurors and making a fair trial impossible."

He had some time to consult a Solicitor of his choosing. Even if he did, he decided to ignore the advice. If the Courts, Police and Establishment were conspiring to lock him up, why didn't they act in Feb 2018?

He obviously broke any agreement on trust, between himself and the BBC and Sky Journalists. This may have caused some friction between their respective News and Legal Teams, and some letters of apology to The Court.

I am not someone who normally reads or relies on The Guardian (blame their Climate Science, Politics and Economic Experts amongst others) however The Guardian does normally offer some form of counterpoint. I doubt that Nigel Farage or the Daily Mail would find anything to argue with The Guardian about Tommy Robinson.

If Tommy Robinson had read those Guardian articles about himself, and still did not learn anything about Contempt of Court, then this really is his own stupid fault. Unless you want to blame the Establishment for not locking him up in Feb 2018?

I suspect the 'prejudicing the third trial' is a red herring unless the results of trial 2 ARE to be concealed.

Jun 1, 2018 at 9:09 AM | Rhoda Klapp

Reporting Restrictions were in force. The Defence and Prosecution Lawyers have accepted the reasons why. UK Law and Legal Procedure can be very frustrating, but "The Law" is not always an Ass.

Just because Tommy Robinson cocked-up, there is no reason (or evidence yet) to suspect a Legal or Establishment conspiracy.

"Super Injunctions", as used/abused in Legal Cases, to save the embarrassment of the wealthy/rich/powerful, should not be confused with Reporting Restrictions. The BBC's "Have I Got News For You" have had some good laughs about the secrecy of Super Injunctions, and those that request them. I wonder if they will have any comment on tonights show (recorded yesterday?)

"unless the results of trial 2 ARE to be concealed." Rhoda

That does happen from time to time, particurly when the people are to be tried for addtional crimes. The concern is that knowing about the first conviction might affect the jury of the second trial. Personally I think previous convictions should be part of evidence but I'm not in charge. Witnesses, jurors and victims however deserve anonymity even after the trial if they want it.