End of UK as free society RE: Tommy Robinson jailed for BS; released on bail.

[MayhemMonkey]

Well, guess Tommy has a bit more support than the general rank and file for whatever that's worth.

[tweet]

[tweet]

[tweet]

2 MEP's and a fat nasally tv star? who gives a fuck what they think?

 

[Lord Coke]

no he wasnt, other journalists know not to do what Tommy does because its illegal...... he would know if he was an ACTUAL journalist

Let's assume what he did was illegal. Is that the end all to this conversation? Is possible that something can be done under color of government authority and still be immoral? Is it possible that Tommy was still targeted for conduct that typically would not be prosecuted?

What I see here is a human rights abuse sanctioned by the State and I hope that if what happened is technically legal the British people will realize they are living in a police state.

 

[MayhemMonkey]

https://hooktube.com/watch?v=q00QAp7VgkI

within the first two minutes "How are you feelin about your verdict?"

So he was reporting on those found guilty and later sentenced when he was outside in the street asking them about it? There was another trial ongoing, but he was clearly on the street. So people saying "he was arrested for reporting on it" are closer to the truth imo.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018...court-jailed-13-months-judge-orders-orwellian

If he was interfering with court proceedings shouldn't he be charged with doing so? The adamant, smug leftist narrative that it's about jury tampering or whatever is going to be interesting if that's not what they're going with.

well they were probably arresting him anyway, but with him livestreaming the entire time he was there he has provided plenty of other evidence against himself

 

[MayhemMonkey]

Let's assume what he did was illegal. Is that the end all to this conversation? .

yes

Is it possible that Tommy was still targeted for conduct that typically would not be prosecuted?

no

What I see here is a human rights abuse sanctioned by the State and I hope that if what happened is technically legal the British people will realize they are living in a police state.

he broke the law, he was arrested. end of discussion

 

[Soul Crusher]

our population will be 76 million(estimated) by that time

they will always be a minority in the UK. Those numbers dont scare anyone

Tell that to the children that are raped and those that saw other young girls blown to bits. You're a minority living in the UK so I can understand your delusional position.

 

[snakedafunky]

Let's assume what he did was illegal. Is that the end all to this conversation? Is possible that something can be done under color of government authority and still be immoral? Is it possible that Tommy was still targeted for conduct that typically would not be prosecuted?

What I see here is a human rights abuse sanctioned by the State and I hope that if what happened is technically legal the British people will realize they are living in a police state.

Well, I don't think the government has to target Tommy. He has a long criminal history.
I mean how often has he broken the law now? From assault to fraud to this stuff?
And he someone was still a free man. When does a free society says enough?
And locks up career criminals like Tommy? He has convictions for all kinds of stuff, not just this. Society is definitely better off with those guys locked away.

 

[Lord Coke]

yes

no

he broke the law, he was arrested. end of discussion

I truly hope that you don't represent the average person in England because this position is fine with any sort of human rights abuse as long as it is sanctioned by the State. I am not even sure how to have a dialog with someone that thinks like this.

 

[Lord Coke]

Well, I don't think the government has to target Tommy. He has a long criminal history.
I mean how often has he broken the law now? From assault to fraud to this stuff?
And he someone was still a free man. When does a free society says enough?
And locks up career criminals like Tommy? He has convictions for all kinds of stuff, not just this. Society is definitely better off with those guys locked away.

Let me defer to Douglas Murray who has spoke about this issue in relation to Tommy

 

[TONY-T]

#RoyalParden

 

[Neph]

Let's assume what he did was illegal. Is that the end all to this conversation? Is possible that something can be done under color of government authority and still be immoral?

Something can be codified in law and yet be immoral (history is filled with things we no longer accept in this way) so the conversation shouldn't stop just because it is illegal now. The law is an evolving document just like the Constitution has amendments.

For consideration is the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution which reads:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

The key element in question here is the statement of 'by an impartial jury'. It is a Constitutional right and should be held sacred for justice for all that a trial is as fair and impartial as possible.

So what happens if someone uses their so called free speech to sway a jury, by advertising previous convictions, the race, religious beliefs, ethnicity, or other factors such as wealth or infidelity that should not be used in determining guilt? When someone is doing this they impede the right to a fair trial and deny someone their Constitutional rights. That is why there are reporting bans as they can pervert the course of justice and this is, to my knowledge, what he is being charged with.

 

[snakedafunky]

Let me defer to Douglas Murray who has spoke about this issue in relation to Tommy

I can't watch that right now.
But Tommy is a criminal. It is good that he is in jail. Because he can't stop breaking the law. From assaults to fraud to this now. He is not able to live in society.
Also, I don't mind him bringing attention to this rape issue.
But he has a long criminal career. And that is just the stuff he got busted for.

If he wouldn't be doing this he would do something else illegal.
He is just a guy that causes trouble.

 

[MayhemMonkey]

I truly hope that you don't represent the average person in England because this position is fine with any sort of human rights abuse as long as it is sanctioned by the State. I am not even sure how to have a dialog with someone that thinks like this.

wtf are you talking about? he broke the law. How is this a human rights issue?

 

[MayhemMonkey]

Tell that to the children that are raped and those that saw other young girls blown to bits. You're a minority living in the UK so I can understand your delusional position.

yeah because theres never been children raped before muslims started doing it right? theres never been kids blown up in the UK until muslims started doing it right?


wtf do you know about my "delusional position"?

 

[Lord Coke]

wtf are you talking about? he broke the law. How is this a human rights issue?

Is the law always just?
Assuming the law always is just is it just to apply the law in a manner which unevenly targets different groups or persons?

Tommy Robinson was arrested for beaching the peace. That is a extremely subjective crime with a huge gray area. I am arguing that the police found a law to arrest Robinson on because he is Tommy Robinson not because of what he was doing.

 

[Lord Coke]

yeah because theres never been children raped before muslims started doing it right? theres never been kids blown up in the UK until muslims started doing it right?


wtf do you know about my "delusional position"?

The issue is Muslims do so at a disproportionate rate compared to the rest of the English population

 

[irish_thug]

Happy to see some true Patriots take my fight back message seriously.




Looking good

Amazing that that doesn't constitute disturbing the peace. Yet somehow reading does.

 

[MayhemMonkey]

Is the law always just?
Assuming the law always is just is it just to apply the law in a manner which unevenly targets different groups or persons?

Tommy Robinson was arrested for beaching the peace. That is a extremely subjective crime with a huge gray area. I am arguing that the police found a law to arrest Robinson on because he is Tommy Robinson not because of what he was doing.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/academy/journalism/article/art20130702112133630

‘Active proceedings’

Once proceedings are ‘active’, anything which creates a substantial risk that the course of justice in these proceedings will be seriously prejudiced or impeded will be a contempt of court.

your argument is pointless, he broke the law and was arrested for doing so

 

[MayhemMonkey]

The issue is Muslims do so at a disproportionate rate compared to the rest of the English population

theres been countless child abuse 'gangs' around the uk..... it is not just a problem for the muslim population. Its a problem for the entire population.


Also Im not even trying to defend muslims, Im just pointing out that there is more to worry about than just muslims

 

[Lord Coke]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/academy/journalism/article/art20130702112133630



your argument is pointless, he broke the law and was arrested for doing so

Don't you see how arbitrary that standard is? What is substantial? That determination is left completely up to the discretion of a government official. Don't you see that the application of this law in this instance is arbitrary and capricious?

Also I am assuming for sake of argument he was arrested for contempt. All the news reports I have seen says he was arrested for breech of the peace which is even more subjective.

 

[MayhemMonkey]

Don't you see how arbitrary that standard is? What is substantial? That determination is left completely up to the discretion of a government official. Don't you see that the application of this law in this instance is arbitrary and capricious?

Also I am assuming for sake of argument he was arrested for contempt. All the news reports I have seen says he was arrested for breech of the peace which is even more subjective.

dude I have provided you with the reasons to why he was arrested. The law is clear about the ethics journalists have to stick to whilst court proceedings are taking place. He would know if he actually studied to become a journalist, instead of just picking up a camera and harassing people on the streets.

continue creating a conspiracy if you want.... but he broke the law and was punished for doing it. end of story