[Cherie]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

there could be lots of reasons. The most logical is that there is an investigation ongoing that they don't want messed up or compromised.

I have no problem with people bring attention to cases of abuse but Robinson is hardly a man known for doing his best for society is he.

99.9999% of the UK population are against abuse, so what makes this guy special other than the fact that he is a racist bigot?

I don’t mean just during the trial but afterwards as well, given how big Rochdale was it’s strange we hear practically nothing

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

But you not one of that club supporting such a cover-up are you!

What 'club' just stop with the silly accusations and generalisations fgs.

I'm in a club that condones covering abuse?... give your damn head a wobble!

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by Cherie

I don’t mean just during the trial but afterwards as well, given how big Rochdale was it’s strange we hear practically nothing

It's a massive problem in Telford too and as I live pretty close to there and have a teenage daughter it is of great importance to me that the pervs who do this sort of thing,need outing and punishing, I work at a school that has kids from these sorts of backgrounds and believe you me many lives are ruined.The public need to know what is going on and by whom.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Kazanne

It's a massive problem in Telford too and as I live pretty close to there and have a teenage daughter it is of great importance to me that the pervs who do this sort of thing,need outing and punishing, I work at a school that has kids from these sorts of backgrounds and believe you me many lives are ruined.The public need to know what is going on and by whom.

Well said, Kaz.

[Jake.]

Robinson does what Robinson does best: Makes it all about him. Now he has the far-right up in arms instead of the focus being on what it should always have been on. The “man” is a disgrace.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Jake.

Robinson does what Robinson does best: Makes it all about him. Now he has the far-right up in arms instead of the focus being on what it should always have been on. The “man” is a disgrace.

No arguments from me that the guy is anything other than a vile racist and worse or that he may have his own motives for doing what he did, my argument is more about the REAL motive of the Authorities for arresting him, and that was to silence him.

[Withano]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

, my argument is more about the REAL motive of the Authorities for arresting him, and that was to silence him.

It's just so convenient that he was committing contempt of court at the exact same time as his arrest. We see right through you, authorities! Waiting to arrest him until he broke the law! Who you tryna fool. We know this has nothing to do with the law really! Am I right Kirk.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Withano

It's just so convenient that he was committing contempt of court at the exact same time as his arrest. We see right through you, authorities! Waiting to arrest him until he broke the law! Who you tryna fool. We know this has nothing to do with the law really! Am I right Kirk.

I am a bit confused, Withano about what you mean.

What I am saying is that; Did what Robinson was actually doing constitute a 'Breach of The Peace'?

If so, how did it?

Was he violently shouting? Vocally inciting others to violent acts? Causing an affray? Disrupting pedestrians/motorists? Forcibly preventing others from going about their legitimate business?

What I am saying, is that in my opinion, the charge against Robinson was a convenience - one which removed him from THAT particular location and stopped him filming and broadcasting THOSE particular events.

What I am further saying - in my opinion - is that his arrest is part of the Authorities policy of suppressing any news of these trials because of P.C. pressure.

You know, Withano - the very same Authorities who TOLERATED a stream of repeated UNLAWFUL acts by Islamic Extremist 'Hate Preachers' from Anjem Choudary to Abu Hamza - for the LONGEST time.

[Withano]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

I am a bit confused, Withano about what you mean.

What I am saying is that; Did what Robinson was actually doing constitute a 'Breach of The Peace'?

If so, how did it?

Was he violently shouting? Vocally inciting others to violent acts? Causing an affray? Disrupting pedestrians/motorists? Forcibly preventing others from going about their legitimate business?

What I am saying, is that in my opinion, the charge against Robinson was a convenience - one which removed him from THAT particular location and stopped him filming and broadcasting THOSE particular events.

What I am further saying - in my opinion - is that his arrest is part of the Authorities policy of suppressing any news of these trials because of P.C. pressure.

You know, Withano - the very same Authorities who TOLERATED a stream of repeated UNLAWFUL acts by Islamic Extremist 'Hate Preachers' from Anjem Choudary to Abu Hamza - for the LONGEST time.

Well, if the livestream wasn't suspiciously deleted, you could have seen for yourself.
It was, in every way imaginable, contempt of court. 'Breaching the peace' is a bit meaningless to me, but I suppose if hundreds of people came to the court as a result of his livestream, then sure.
If you break the law, Kirk, this is what happens. It isn't exclusive to Tommy Robinson.
I don't think this has much to do with political correctness, unless you're willing to state that the majority of the country want some chavvy criminal vigilante and an angry mob dealing with sensitive issues. People not wanting him around is just popular opinion, not 'PC gone mad'

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by Kazanne

It's a massive problem in Telford too and as I live pretty close to there and have a teenage daughter it is of great importance to me that the pervs who do this sort of thing,need outing and punishing, I work at a school that has kids from these sorts of backgrounds and believe you me many lives are ruined.The public need to know what is going on and by whom.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Withano

Well, if the livestream wasn't suspiciously deleted, you could have seen for yourself.
It was, in every way imaginable, contempt of court. 'Breaching the peace' is a bit meaningless to me, but I suppose if hundreds of people came to the court as a result of his livestream, then sure.
If you break the law, Kirk, this is what happens. It isn't exclusive to Tommy Robinson.
I don't think this has much to do with political correctness, unless you're willing to state that the majority of the country want some chavvy criminal vigilante and an angry mob dealing with sensitive issues. People not wanting him around is just popular opinion, not 'PC gone mad'

I'm impressed that you can come to a 'contempt of court' conclusion from the information available. I couldn't do that and I've been working in the law for years...

Next time some hate preachers are burning poppies on Remembrance Sunday let's hope the police deem that worthy of a breach of the peace. Because it's inconsistencies like that that make people angry.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Withano

Well, if the livestream wasn't suspiciously deleted, you could have seen for yourself.
It was, in every way imaginable, contempt of court. 'Breaching the peace' is a bit meaningless to me, but I suppose if hundreds of people came to the court as a result of his livestream, then sure.
If you break the law, Kirk, this is what happens. It isn't exclusive to Tommy Robinson.
I don't think this has much to do with political correctness, unless you're willing to state that the majority of the country want some chavvy criminal vigilante and an angry mob dealing with sensitive issues. People not wanting him around is just popular opinion, not 'PC gone mad'

Is this the same 'law' that Choudary and Hamza and others repeatedly BROKE for years without recrimination - You mean THAT law?

[Withano]

Originally Posted by Livia

I'm impressed that you can come to a 'contempt of court' conclusion from the information available. I couldn't do that and I've been working in the law for years...

Next time some hate preachers are burning poppies on Remembrance Sunday let's hope the police deem that worthy of a breach of the peace. Because it's inconsistencies like that that make people angry.

The livestream wasn't removed until Saturday night. I'm sure you can find it online still if you look hard enough.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Withano

The livestream wasn't removed until Saturday night. I'm sure you can find it online still if you look hard enough.

Deft footwork there, Withano the way you swerved answering Livia's points.

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by Adam.

Maybe they are being kept quiet because of incidents like this? Many people feel the need to take the law into their own hands

What incident are you referring to - some gimp doing a livestream? How is that an example of "taking the law into their own hands" ?

[Withano]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

Deft footwork there, Withano the way you swerved answering Livia's points.

Her first paragraph was a sarcy comment which doesn't hold up too well with my response. I agree with her second paragraph. Let's not try to score weird points Kirk. This isn't a game.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Withano

The livestream wasn't removed until Saturday night. I'm sure you can find it online still if you look hard enough.

And then I can make a solid legal judgement of contempt of court? From a livestream?

[Withano]

Originally Posted by Livia

And then I can make a solid legal judgement of contempt of court? From a livestream?

Give it a go.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Withano

Give it a go.

I'm a lawyer, Withano. It's not how it works.

[Withano]

Originally Posted by Livia

I'm a lawyer, Withano. It's not how it works.

Well you can continue making sarcy comments, or you can choose to contribute.

You're kind of just saying 'I haven't bothered with the information but I have a monopoly on this because I'm me'

Not impressed.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Withano

Her first paragraph was a sarcy comment which doesn't hold up too well with my response. I agree with her second paragraph. Let's not try to score weird points Kirk. This isn't a game.

I'm not point scoring, Withano so stop being disingenuous in trying to make out that I am.

I am making a valid comment that you responded to a post without addressing the points raised in it.

And if you "agree with her second paragraph" then how is it that you have criticised my post because Liv and I are saying the same thing?

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Withano

Well you can continue making sarcy comments, or you can choose to contribute.

You're kind of just saying 'I haven't bothered with the information but I have a monopoly on this because I'm me'

Not impressed.

Misrepresentation. Deflection. Creating a diversionary smokescreen to enable a quick exit to be found out of a discussion which has raised questions you have no relevant answers to and which makes statements of fact which destroys your argument but which you can not contest.

[Withano]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

I'm not point scoring, Withano so stop being disingenuous in trying to make out that I am.

I am making a valid comment that you responded to a post without addressing the points raised in it.

And if you "agree with her second paragraph" then how is it that you have criticised my post because Liv and I are saying the same thing?

Your point seems to be Tommy shouldnt have been arrested because x, y, and z but these people should have been arrested because x, y and z

Me and livia agree that if tommy was arrested for x, then other people should be arrested for x?

They should either all be arrested or none of them should? You seem to be fencehopping based on whether theyre tommy or not.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Withano

Your point seems to be Tommy shouldnt have been arrested because x, y, and z but these people should have been arrested because x, y and z

Me and livia agree that if tommy was arrested for x, then other people should be arrested for x?

They should either all be arrested or none of them should? You seem to be fencehopping based on whether theyre tommy or not.

WHAT??

[Withano]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

Misrepresentation. Deflection. Creating a diversionary smokescreen to enable a quick exit to be found out of a discussion which has raised questions you have no relevant answers to and which makes statements of fact which destroys your argument but which you can not contest.

‘I’m a Lawyer’ isn’t an argument kirk. Even Livia knows that deep down. Not everything everybody says needs commenting on. Some things are silly and can be bypassed.