A decent explanation of what happened to Tommy Robinson yesterday

Here is a decent thread from Twitter explaining what happened with the arrest of Tommy Robinson yesterday.

As Tommy is a well known person, and as there is a tendency to gossip, speculate, then do analysis on speculation on the internet, it is very hard to get a proper understanding of important events quite often.

As this is a British legal matter, I asked a British lawyer, Gavin Boby, who was, if memory serves, a Crown Attorney for a while as well.

This is what he had to say:

“… it does look like overuse of excessive restriction in this case, probably based on his identity. Ie bad law misapplied, to get an individual.”


“The issue appears to be not so much about breach of the peace as about contempt of court and preventing prejudice to trials. That’s something the courts are hard on and probably should be, but from what I can tell so far the law on that looks excessive, and over applied in this case, to get someone they find troublesome.”

The thread to which he refers is this one. Please take your time and crawl down this information stream from Twitter:

First post on it:

About Eeyore

Canadian artist and counter-jihad and freedom of speech activist as well as devout Schrödinger's catholic

20 Replies to “A decent explanation of what happened to Tommy Robinson yesterday”

      • “Niemöller is perhaps best remembered for the quotation:

        First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
        Because I was not a Socialist.

        Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
        Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

        Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
        Because I was not a Jew.

        Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.”

        This present day UK:

        First they became Socialists, promoting every minority through Diversity – and I did not speak out, because I was told to shut up as I was Privileged.

        Then they became Trade Unionists, sending gangs out into the streets protected by the General Data Protection Regulation – and I did not speak out, because I was not Preferential enough to have a voice.

        Then they became Sharia Policing – and I did not speak out, because killing in the name of Islam was not Islam.

        Then they became me. Replacing my whole genetic existence. The mediocrity of envy. Those formed in submission to The Beast.

  1. That pretty much sums it up, the UK is now a police state who can arrest anyone they want and sentence them to a prison where they have a 99% chance of being murdered.

    Stalin, Hitler and Mao are smiling about how their enemy has become them.

      • Don’t go into the fight expecting to die, don’t fight to get killed, fight to win, the people in Britain and the European nations have a much better chance then they know. They can win this fight, reclaim their nations and culture if they will fight to win instead of fight to die gloriously. When you die all you win is a grave, when you make your enemies die you win the war and your freedom.

  2. http://www.breitbart.com/london/2018/05/26/redacted-arrested-for-redacted-outside-redacted-leeds-crown-court-issues-media-ban/

    This is rather clever by Breitbart.

    I haven’t looked at the footage above but I understand from the comments under the Breitbart article that at one point the police stormed the crowd and tore up placards. They also apparently thew a 66 yo woman to the ground causing injury.
    I’m not sure how much more of this the indigenous Brits will put up with. If TR is murdered in prison there will be riots.

  3. The judge’s reasoning is faulty, the case had already been heard and the guilty were there for sentencing only. Does one judge think his colleague would be prejudiced by Tommy reporting on it?

    • He hates the idea of the little people having a say so he is out to teact the lower classes a lesson, this is going to backfire on him no matter what happens but if the predictions are true about what will happen if Tommy is murdered Britain won’t be safe for a lot of people.

  4. “This is the first of three chapters on court and legal reporting. In this chapter we consider why it is important for court cases to be reported, and how to do it safely and properly. In the next chapter we look at how to write reports that are accurate, fair and interesting. In the final chapter we follow a legal case through from beginning to end.


    The justice system
    It is vital that all people should have a fair trial, if they are accused of doing something wrong or injuring another person in some way.

    People who have done nothing wrong should not be afraid that they will be punished if they are charged, perhaps by mistake, or if someone takes legal action against them in a civil case. They should be able to be confident that they will be cleared of the accusation. Otherwise, all people will live in fear of the law, instead of feeling that it is there to protect them.

    A court is the place where society employs specially trained people to decide whether or not a person really did something wrong.”

    “You can report the fact that the crime happened, that someone is being charged and any facts about it which are not likely to be challenged in court. If a man has been charged with breaking into a store and stealing $500 in cash and goods worth $250, then we must report the fact that he has been charged. We may write:

    A man has been charged with burglary, following the break-in at Cut-Price supermarket at the weekend.

    Bruce Maupiti, 28, of Avarua, Rarotonga, has been charged with stealing $500 in cash and goods worth $250 from the store on the night of July 25.

    It is important to note that we did not say that Maupiti actually committed the crime – that is not a fact. It is the job of the courts to decide whether or not he did it. All we said is that Maupiti has been charged with the crime – that is a fact – and that there was a break-in at the store at the weekend – that is also a fact.”

    • “If the reason you publish or broadcast a court report is to do harm to the defendant – that is, you are being malicious – then you can lose the protection of privilege.”

      “The only time a problem might arise would be if the defendant is a known enemy of you or the owner or editor of the newspaper, radio or television station. In this case, you must be very careful to treat the case in the same way you would treat any other similar case. If you publish every word of prosecution evidence, on page one, and the person is later acquitted, he may try to sue you for defamation. If he can show that the way the case was reported was actuated by malice, you will lose the defence of privilege.”

      The direct link between Islam and sexual grooming of non-muslims is obvious, but a trial.must be undertaken with the assumption of innocence before proven guilty, towards the accused.

      The trial of Count Dankula by editors of newsapers, however malicious, did not get them all sent to court.

      This ‘one law for you and one law for them’ is the very definition of totalitarian International and National Socialism.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.