[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

No, unfortunately, Annie.

For DECADES numerous Authorities - Councils, Police and Governments - have KNOWN about these vile, largely Muslim 'Grooming' gangs and could have acted but did not, some by their own admission, through FEAR of being labelled Islamaphobic and Racist, and if they had not been such cowards and had have cracked down on these bastards earlier instead of protecting them, they could have possibly saved thousands of poor innocent children from becoming victims.

Robinsons alleged 'motives' in doing what he did are totally irrelevant as far as I am concerned but with great irony, the weak, spineless PC-cowered Authorities have inadvertently carried out Robinson's task for him with far more success than if they had merely left him alone because now this incident of Robinson's arrest has caused such controversy that it has resurrected the dead and all but PC buried 'corpse' of the 'Grooming Gang' issue.

Think about it Annie; Would we on Tibb be even talking about these subjects now had it not been for Robinson's arrest? Would the internet be full of it? Would it be now slowly, slightly, but surely be 'trickling in' to rthe orthodox Media?

I completely agree that it's largely Muslims who are paedophiles in this great country of ours, and us native folks haven't had any of these issues because of our strong Judeo-Christian values and heritage. Thank god that our children have been safely cared for and nurtured by priests for centuries.

I give thanks everyday that brave Galahad's like Tommy are stepping up and tackling this head on, and like you, I don't even care about his motives. I mean, motive may be an important factor in the law, but so what? It's just another example of PC culture running amok.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

I completely agree that it's largely Muslims who are paedophiles in this great country of ours, and us native folks haven't had any of these issues because of our strong Judeo-Christian values and heritage. Thank god that our children have been safely cared for and nurtured by priests for centuries.

I give thanks everyday that brave Galahad's like Tommy are stepping up and tackling this head on, and like you, I don't even care about his motives. I mean, motive may be an important factor in the law, but so what? It's just another example of PC culture running amok.

i think we have moved the debate on a little from "what, so every muslim is a paedo is that wot ur sayin????"

[Beso]

I wonder if any of these child rapists were paid 10grand by the police to spy on thier mates.

[Alf]

Some people show more anger towards a tweet by Trump or Rosanne than they do to an epidemic of children being groomed and raped. I don't believe they think that the tweets are worse, I just think they're afraid to speak out about the other.

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

I completely agree that it's largely Muslims who are paedophiles in this great country of ours, and us native folks haven't had any of these issues because of our strong Judeo-Christian values and heritage. Thank god that our children have been safely cared for and nurtured by priests for centuries.

I don't really think an individual muslim is more likely to be a paedo than an individual Brit, but the "prophet" of islam molested a nine year old, so islamically it's okay to be one. Generally speaking - grooming gangs are more likely to be muslims, an individual creep is more likely to be white.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

I completely agree that it's largely Muslims who are paedophiles in this great country of ours, and us native folks haven't had any of these issues because of our strong Judeo-Christian values and heritage. Thank god that our children have been safely cared for and nurtured by priests for centuries.

I give thanks everyday that brave Galahad's like Tommy are stepping up and tackling this head on, and like you, I don't even care about his motives. I mean, motive may be an important factor in handling out justice to begin with, but so what? It's just another example of PC culture running amok.

I know that you are mocking but that's OK.

I just wish you would actually READ my posts before reacting.

You are correct about the perversion of - mainly Roman Catholic - clergy in this Country and their paedophilia and THIS is something which I have often written about and condemned.

This issue is NOT what is being discussed here though, is it?

The Authorities in this country has a historical record of 'shooting themselves in the foot' with some of their decisions and the decision to arrest Robinson is yet another because it has spectacularly and dramatically BACKFIRED on them.

It has now given the Extreme Far-Right an opportunity to make capital out of it and the ensuing controversy has put them firmly in the spotlight which they can use to peddle their vile, racist bile.

What is worse, is that thanks to this 'gift from the Authorities' there are now a lot of ordinary people who hitherto had never heard of Tommy Robinson who - having been angered by the details of his arrest - are being influenced to have 'sympathy' for him if not actually being converted to his cause.

I said that his motives are secondary in this case to his message; reportage of the Grooming Gang trial - and they ARE.

I have stated that in my opinion Robinson is vile and a racist so your last paragraphs are meaningless, but unlike you and others who irrationally seem to be outraged by my posts, as vile as I may find Robinson he is the ARCHANGEL ****ING GABRIEL in comparison to these evil Grooming Gang Members - yet I do not see ANY of you being at all outraged by them, well obviously not enough to post any condemnation of them like you have Robinson.

[AnnieK]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

I know that you are mocking but that's OK.

I just wish you would actually READ my posts before reacting.

You are correct about the perversion of - mainly Roman Catholic - clergy in this Country and their paedophilia and THIS is something which I have often written about and condemned.

This issue is NOT what is being discussed here though, is it?

The Authorities in this country has a historical record of 'shooting themselves in the foot' with some of their decisions and the decision to arrest Robinson is yet another because it has spectacularly and dramatically BACKFIRED on them.

It has now given the Extreme Far-Right an opportunity to make capital out of it and the ensuing controversy has put them firmly in the spotlight which they can use to peddle their vile, racist bile.

What is worse, is that thanks to this 'gift from the Authorities' there are now a lot of ordinary people who hitherto had never heard of Tommy Robinson who - having been angered by the details of his arrest - are being influenced to have 'sympathy' for him if not actually being converted to his cause.

I said that his motives are secondary in this case to his message; reportage of the Grooming Gang trial - and they ARE.

I have stated that in my opinion Robinson is vile and a racist so your last paragraphs are meaningless, but unlike you and others who irrationally seem to be outraged by my posts, as vile as I may find Robinson he is the ARCHANGEL ****ING GABRIEL in comparison to these evil Grooming Gang Members - yet I do not see ANY of you being at all outraged by them, well obviously not enough to post any condemnation of them like you have Robinson.

Condemnation of the gangs goes without saying though Kirk and to say no-one is outraged by them is unfair. As a parent, the thought that these things happen is abhorrent, however, had it happened to my child, I would not want the world and its wife reporting on what my child had been through either. The fact that is was in court and being tried and hopefully the monsters put away would be the outcome I would want. Not some vigilante outside putting the trial at risk. What is there to post about them? They are in court and being tried. The fact that Robinson's actions could have lead to a mistrial is an issue too - these "men" for want of a better word could have been back out on the street if the judge had decided to declare a mistrial because of his actions breaking the media blackout.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by AnnieK

Condemnation of the gangs goes without saying though Kirk and to say no-one is outraged by them is unfair. As a parent, the thought that these things happen is abhorrent, however, had it happened to my child, I would not want the world and its wife reporting on what my child had been through either. The fact that is was in court and being tried and hopefully the monsters put away would be the outcome I would want. Not some vigilante outside putting the trial at risk. What is there to post about them? They are in court and being tried. The fact that Robinson's actions could have lead to a mistrial is an issue too - these "men" for want of a better word could have been back out on the street if the judge had decided to declare a mistrial because of his actions breaking the media blackout.

Yep, exactly. If I was a parent of one of those children and my child didn't get justice because Tommy Robinson reported it, I'd be out for blood, seriously

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by AnnieK

Condemnation of the gangs goes without saying though Kirk and to say no-one is outraged by them is unfair. As a parent, the thought that these things happen is abhorrent, however, had it happened to my child, I would not want the world and its wife reporting on what my child had been through either. The fact that is was in court and being tried and hopefully the monsters put away would be the outcome I would want. Not some vigilante outside putting the trial at risk. What is there to post about them? They are in court and being tried. The fact that Robinson's actions could have lead to a mistrial is an issue too - these "men" for want of a better word could have been back out on the street if the judge had decided to declare a mistrial because of his actions breaking the media blackout.

who actually stated that his actions "could" have led to a mistrial

was it the judge?

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

who actually stated that his actions "could" have led to a mistrial

was it the judge?

Pretty much

Judge Geoffrey Marson QC told him: “I respect everyone’s right to free speech. That’s one of the most important rights that we have.

“With those rights come responsibilities. The responsibility to exercise that freedom of speech within the law.

“I am not sure you appreciate the potential consequence of what you have done."

Robinson's broadcast outside court put him in contempt of court.


Offences like his can cause a trial to collapse, as the jury may be deemed unable to deliver a fair verdict - at great cost to the court (and therefore the British taxpayer).

A mistrial means beginning the process all over again, with witnesses and alleged victims forced to give evidence a second time.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-new...inson-12616429

[Alf]

Originally Posted by AnnieK

Condemnation of the gangs goes without saying though Kirk and to say no-one is outraged by them is unfair. As a parent, the thought that these things happen is abhorrent, however, had it happened to my child, I would not want the world and its wife reporting on what my child had been through either. The fact that is was in court and being tried and hopefully the monsters put away would be the outcome I would want. Not some vigilante outside putting the trial at risk. What is there to post about them? They are in court and being tried. The fact that Robinson's actions could have lead to a mistrial is an issue too - these "men" for want of a better word could have been back out on the street if the judge had decided to declare a mistrial because of his actions breaking the media blackout.

It could only be a possibility of a mistrial if Robinson filmed or took pictures while stood within the precincts of the court (I don't know whether he was or not) Outside the precincts, anybody is free to film or take pictures.

[Beso]

10grand the police paid a child rapists.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Alf

It could only be a possibility of a mistrial if Robinson filmed or took pictures while stood within the precincts of the court (I don't know whether he was or not) Outside the precincts, anybody is free to film or take pictures.

He wasn't filming or taking pictures though, he was broadcasting live. To be fair I don't know if there's different rules for that, but I'd imagine there may well be (as it's obviously harder / impossible to control the content of what's shared in a live stream)

[Alf]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

He wasn't filming or taking pictures though, he was broadcasting live. To be fair I don't know if there's different rules for that, but I'd imagine there may well be (as it's obviously harder / impossible to control the content of what's shared in a live stream)

I doubt there will be a law against that, because live streaming is a fairly modern thing.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Alf

I doubt there will be a law against that, because live streaming is a fairly modern thing.

Personal live streaming is new but for example news channels live streaming is not, but the news channels will be aware of the rules regarding broadcasting live from outside a trial. That's where the water gets muddy I guess with new technology. If the laws do exist, they are laws that weren't relevant to the general public until the last couple of years, because it's only in the last couple of years that anyone with a smartphone has been able to set up their own stream and broadcast to thousands of viewers. So people aren't necessarily aware of the rules surrounding this sort of thing. Unfortunately for Robinsom - as applies to every law - ignorance of the law is never considered a viable excuse for breaking it. e.g. someone wouldn't get away with drinking and driving just because they weren't aware that it was illegal.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by AnnieK

Condemnation of the gangs goes without saying though Kirk and to say no-one is outraged by them is unfair. As a parent, the thought that these things happen is abhorrent, however, had it happened to my child, I would not want the world and its wife reporting on what my child had been through either. The fact that is was in court and being tried and hopefully the monsters put away would be the outcome I would want. Not some vigilante outside putting the trial at risk. What is there to post about them? They are in court and being tried. The fact that Robinson's actions could have lead to a mistrial is an issue too - these "men" for want of a better word could have been back out on the street if the judge had decided to declare a mistrial because of his actions breaking the media blackout.

I was referring to SlimReaper and others who attack me and others like me for stating a perspective different to theirs - not you or others like you Annie.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Pretty much

Judge Geoffrey Marson QC told him: “I respect everyone’s right to free speech. That’s one of the most important rights that we have.

“With those rights come responsibilities. The responsibility to exercise that freedom of speech within the law.

“I am not sure you appreciate the potential consequence of what you have done."

Robinson's broadcast outside court put him in contempt of court.


Offences like his can cause a trial to collapse, as the jury may be deemed unable to deliver a fair verdict - at great cost to the court (and therefore the British taxpayer).

A mistrial means beginning the process all over again, with witnesses and alleged victims forced to give evidence a second time.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-new...inson-12616429

ok, thanks

so not really for what he did but in general a rumpus on a greater scale could

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Personal live streaming is new but for example news channels live streaming is not, but the news channels will be aware of the rules regarding broadcasting live from outside a trial. That's where the water gets muddy I guess with new technology. If the laws do exist, they are laws that weren't relevant to the general public until the last couple of years, because it's only in the last couple of years that anyone with a smartphone has been able to set up their own stream and broadcast to thousands of viewers. So people aren't necessarily aware of the rules surrounding this sort of thing. Unfortunately for Robinsom - as applies to every law - ignorance of the law is never considered a viable excuse for breaking it. e.g. someone wouldn't get away with drinking and driving just because they weren't aware that it was illegal.

Its a bit like my smartwatch, i could get pulled over for using like like if I was using a mobile but the chances are pretty slim as the cops are not yet looking for that

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

ok, thanks

so not really for what he did but in general a rumpus on a greater scale could

Well they locked him up so yeah for exactly what he did?

[bots]

Originally Posted by Alf

It could only be a possibility of a mistrial if Robinson filmed or took pictures while stood within the precincts of the court (I don't know whether he was or not) Outside the precincts, anybody is free to film or take pictures.

Simply broadcasting that a trial is taking place may have been sufficient to break the law. If a judge has placed reporting restrictions on proceedings, that's it, there is no way round it unless it is overturned, and any form of publicising that the event was happening is going to get you in hot water. Just to add, that the reason it warranted Robinson being locked up was due to his previous history of criminal behaviour

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Well they locked him up so yeah for exactly what he did?

no, that it did not cause a mistrial but yes he was breaking the law (or a law that has quite a bit of interpretation in it)?

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

no, that it did not cause a mistrial but yes he was breaking the law (or a law that has quite a bit of interpretation in it)?

It didn't but it could have, you asked originally who said it "could" have caused a mistrial. I don't believe anyone said it did cause a mistrial? I'm getting confused now

[Alf]

An update by Raheem on how Tommy was jailed

Youtube video

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

I completely agree that it's largely Muslims who are paedophiles in this great country of ours, and us native folks haven't had any of these issues because of our strong Judeo-Christian values and heritage. Thank god that our children have been safely cared for and nurtured by priests for centuries.

I give thanks everyday that brave Galahad's like Tommy are stepping up and tackling this head on, and like you, I don't even care about his motives. I mean, motive may be an important factor in the law, but so what? It's just another example of PC culture running amok.

tbf though you only have to mention priest and the word paedo is attached to it, and no one bats an eyelid or stands up for the many who were decent people, but you can't mention the word terrorist, peado gang or muslim in the same breath as you are buried under a ton of bricks

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Alf

An update by Raheem on how Tommy was jailed

Youtube video

I see a guy openly admitting that he has no idea what actually happened and is guessing... but then making that out to be an accurate account of what happened

"As I understand it, he was not represented by his own lawyer."

"He was represented - I'm told - by a public defender"

"A public defender who would not have expertise on contempt of court" (he has no way of knowing this; it's an assumption)

"An I have no doubt that it was that solicitor who convinced him, that if you plead guilty" - This is nothing more than a flat out guess

Then he finishes up by talking about how "other people do not understand what is happening in this case"... suggesting that he actually does... when he's just as much in the dark as anyone else .


Flimsy.