Tommy Robinson was not ‘convicted of journalism’

But why has he attracted more opprobrium than the Muslim grooming gang he filmed leaving court?

Luke Gittos
Columnist

Share

Tommy Robinson, the ex-leader of the English Defence League, has been sentenced to nine months’ imprisonment after being found guilty of contempt of court. Two Old Bailey judges concluded that Robinson’s decision to film the defendants in a grooming-gang trial, outside Leeds Crown Court in May 2018, not only interfered with the trial but encouraged ‘vigilante action’.

One can see why the judges thought so. Robinson approached the defendants last year as they arrived at court demanding to know their thoughts on the trial, and then asked why the press was not harrassing them as it had harrassed Robinson – which the judge deemed, given the wider context, to be an invitation to Robinson’s supporters ‘to engage in vigilante action’. The trial was covered by reporting restrictions which made it illegal to report details of the case until its conclusion.

Ever since the verdict, Robinson’s supporters have claimed he is the victim of state oppression. Commentator Katie Hopkins claimed Robinson had been ‘convicted of journalism’, echoing the words on the t-shirt Robinson wore to his own sentencing. Geert Wilders, the Dutch far-right politician, said Robinson had been handed a ‘death sentence’ and invited world leaders to intervene. Robinson’s detractors have been even more vocal, celebrating his conviction as a victory against fascism and intolerance.

Robinson was ill-advised to report on the Leeds Crown Court trial in the way he did. The idea that his conviction for contempt of court is evidence of state oppression rather ignores the fact that Robinson himself knew he risked imprisonment when he decided to broadcast the footage of the defendants. He knew that the trial came with reporting restrictions, and he still decided to risk breaking them.

But his supporters do have a point about the level of media hatred thrown at Robinson, compared with the media’s treatment of predominantly Muslim grooming gangs. In the aftermath of the Rotherham sex-abuse scandal in 2013, the police’s cultural sensitivity towards the perpetrators, who were mainly Pakistani Muslim men, was identified as a reason why the gang was not stopped sooner. Labour MP Denis MacShane, who was MP For Rotherham between 1994 and 2012, accepted that there was a ‘culture of not wanting to rock the multicultural community boat’, which prevented him from raising the issue with local police.

Indeed, it is bizarre that Robinson has attracted more opprobrium from the commentariat than the Huddersfield grooming gang he was reporting on. The men involved were convicted of offences that the judge described as sitting at the ‘top of the scale’ of severity. One of the victims, who were almost all white working-class girls, was abducted from a care home, given ecstasy and then made to perform sex acts on the men. The outpouring of loathing for Robinson both ilustrates the skewed moral compass of many of his detractors, and also highlights the mainstream media’s fear of confronting predominantly Muslim grooming gangs.

Robinson was not ‘convicted of journalism’. However, he was convicted under laws which place overly stringent restrictions on what can be reported. The Contempt of Court Act 1981, which created the reporting-restrictions regime, gives the court the power to order the postponement of reporting where this is ‘necessary to avoid a substantial risk of prejudice to the case’. What underlies these provisions is the idea that a jury is liable to be unfairly influenced by media coverage of the case it has been tasked with adjudicating.

Yet there is little actual evidence that jurors are significantly influenced by what they read in the media. Research published by the Home Office in 2010 into juror decision-making claimed that jurors found media coverage about their case ‘difficult to put out of their minds’. But it did not find any connection between media reporting and case outcome. Juries are heavily directed by judges to disregard anything except the evidence before them in the courtroom.

It is true that Robinson risked collapsing the trial. The lawyers for these men could have claimed that their trial was being prejudiced by Robinson’s actions, as two, in fact, did, albeit unsuccessfully. But the bigger problem here was that this trial, precisely because of the reporting restrictions, was made vulnerable to accusations that the jury could be prejudiced. We should be more trusting of jurors to distinguish between evidence and reporting, rather than simply locking people like Robinson up for reporting a particular case.

Robinson did a stupid thing in reporting in the way he did. He knew he was in danger of flouting reporting restrictions. The mere possibility of undermining the trial of these men means he should have been more wary. But his case has revealed that certain sections of the media find it easier to sling hatred at Robinson than engage in an honest debate about why these vile sex-abuse gangs exist. Perhaps, in his limited way, Robinson has a point.

Luke Gittos is a spiked columnist. His new book, Human Rights – Illusory Freedom: Why We Should Repeal the Human Rights Act, is published by Zero Books. Order it here.

Picture by: Getty Images.

Corrections: The original version of this article stated that Robinson directly asked his supporters to harass the defendants, whereas in fact the judge interpreted some of Robinson’s comments as an invitation to his supporters to harass the defendants. The original version also described the Huddersfield grooming gang as a Muslim grooming gang, when it was a predominantly Muslim grooming gang. And it stated that lawyers for the defendants could have claimed that the trial was being prejudiced by Robinson’s actions, which would have caused it to collapse. Two of the defendants’ lawyers did in fact claim this, but were unsuccessful. The article has been amended to clarify these points.

To enquire about republishing spiked’s content, a right to reply or to request a correction, please contact the managing editor, Viv Regan.

Comments

John Marsh

22nd July 2019 at 7:30 pm

This is more of a question that someone may know the answer. With the trial by jury justice system and the watering down of evidence and actually ignoring human rights laws many of these historic evidence trials are based on emotion and a person’s unsubstantiated word. So what evidence did the prosecution present. We know already everyone lies. Tommy Robinson may have fair points but he rants and raves like all news media and others with no detailed arguments. Also defendants as far as I am aware who claim innocence go to trial so I have to presume the “gang” are claiming innocence. Alexis Jay is currently involved in the big abuse enquiry and appears to rely heavily on “stories”. Are Asian men more likely to break the law on underage sex and this grooming thing. I have no idea as I said I know everyone lies and where convenient can also tell the truth. Men and women can do such terrible things to others I know men allow their physical desires to rape and groom, including murder. Women use their desirability to gain money, fame and manipulate. Thus my concern re evidence? I can find no reports from Tommy Robinson or main stream or anyone to what can be established as factual and what is alleged which may be the exact truth or over stated or under stated.

Justin Bieber

19th July 2019 at 7:22 pm

Tommy Robinson’s real name is: Stephen Christopher Yaxley-Lennon

Maybe have a think on that for a bit……

Hana Jinks

20th July 2019 at 11:16 am

Excellent point.

Ummmm, sorry. I don’t get it. What are we meant to be thinking about again?

Justin Bieber

20th July 2019 at 7:35 pm

Keep thinking about it Hana, you’ll get there in the end

James Taylor

17th July 2019 at 11:51 am

I’m astonished, daily, that the mainstream narrative about this case is so brazenly misrepresented and just plain wrong. Not only is it openly the entire edifice of the mainstream media and the legal “experts”, including in the usually

J M

17th July 2019 at 10:12 am

This is one of the first Spiked articles I’ve ever read, but if it’s representative of their level of journalism, it may well be the last.

Thinker Prime

17th July 2019 at 1:57 am

The article and the press in the UK clearly miss the key point that the evil of the Grooming Gang – truly monstrous – because they are afraid of incurring the ire of the Multiculturalists and the Islamist terrorists – and instead distract themselves with the tiny infraction of Tommy Robinson – something that would be covered by freedom of the Press and freedom of Speech in the US. The problem of the UK is not Tony Robinson, it is the way the whole establishment has sold out the underage female population because of their cowardice. .

James Taylor

17th July 2019 at 12:47 am

I think there’s a lot to critique Tommy for. I believe that his inability to be charitable to Muslim reformers like Maajid Nawaz, reveals a certain irrationality many on his side of the debate share. Be it Tommy Robinson or Anne Marie Waters, I believe their inability to see Nawaz as essentially an ally, even if they do not think Islam can be reformed. The decent and logical thing to do with someone like Maajid Nawaz, who shares the ultimate goal of ending the backwards, authoritarian face of Islam, is to agree to disagree but work with him as and where possible. Instead those like Tommy and AMW, people with Islam derangement syndrome, treat Maajid Nawaz as a Trojan horse. That for me is a bad sign. Also Tommy is his own worst enemy. His seeming addiction to unguarded rants are a gift to his enemies, who misconstrue and take him out of context to present him in the worst possible light. His penchant for organizing street protests which occasionally attract a handful of actual far right thugs and devolve into minor scuffles are likewise a gift to his detractors.

But other than that, his reputation (and that of his supporters) as deadly extremists, is, as far as I can tell, almost entirely imagined.

His worst sins appear to be that he briefly joined the BNP in his youth, called someone a Paki in a heated Twitter exchange sometime back in 2012, used the word Paki again in a leaked private drunken conversation he was having with friends, has in the past, failed to distinguish the extremists from the wider Muslim community and has arguably breached reporting restrictions (a crime which is easy to do for the citizen journalist, unschooled in contempt of court law). I might add, that whilst I don’t think Tommy said anything to the defendants outside Leeds Crown Court that day, that the BBC reporters didn’t ask him on his way into the Old Bailey, they behaved like middle class journalists. Biased and hostile journalists but definitely journalists. Tommy’s demeanor outside Leeds was very much that of the rival football supporter confronting the opposing firm. Not exactly criminal but certainly not very journalistic.

A flawed character indeed, but the unconscionable racist, Nazi extremist and menace to society who has escaped justice for far too? Hardly.

So I am not a blind supporter of Tommy but even I can see something is rotten in the state of Denmark.

I’m astonished, daily, that the mainstream narrative about this case could be so brazenly misrepresented and just plain wrong.

The entire edifice of the mainstream media, and the legal “experts” wheeled out to tell us the facts, (including at the usually reliable Spiked) are either woefully uninformed or are lying because they are deranged by their dislike of Tommy.

The media and their “experts” have either totally dropped the ball and uncritically accepted the official narrative, or they are just plain lying about the case.

Demonstrably, Tommy did not jeopardize the case. The verdict was in and it was on the day of sentencing. Also the judge said in no uncertain terms that Tommy’s stream had not biased the jury.

Tommy did not encourage vigilantism. The offending remarks were quite clearly directed at a mainstream media which doorstops and harasses and runs exposes on the dreaded far right, whilst merely reporting responsibly and neutrally on Muslim rape gangs. Under no circumstances could his words be considered a call to arms for his supporters. He was talking about the BBC and the Sun et al hounding a member of Generation Identity and asking why they didn’t hound Muslim pedophiles. This was not a call for vigilantism. It was unambiguously Tommy calling out the media for bias.

Finally, contempt of court/breaching reporting restrictions is a civil offense which almost always results in a fine, yet Tommy did 10 weeks in solitary confinement, overturning the unsound conviction, only for a explicitly political prosecution to manufacture new charges where the old case had failed.

Despite the obvious political nature and manufacturing of this new case, the demonstrable flaw in the charge he incited vigilantism and the fact it was a civil case which should only result in a fine; Tommy was convicted of all charges and sentenced to two months in a Category A prison.

Even if one gives the state the benefit of the doubt and agrees that Tommy did jeopardize the case, he should have been released with a hefty fine as have almost all others who were found guilty before him. The fact he had already served 10 weeks in solitary confinement, should have been more than enough.

Love or hate Tommy, it’s undeniable that this is corruption of the highest order, yet everyone and anyone on the professional legal/journalistic side of this are ignoring all of the red flags and just pretending that Tommy risked the case, called for vigilantism and should be locked up like the animal he is.

I’m disgusted by you all, especially Spiked and Luke Gittos who for some reason have suddenly swallowed the establishment line.

Hana Jinks

18th July 2019 at 1:48 am

Nawaz is a t-h. And there isn’t any such thing as islam-derangement syndrome. Everything else you said is perfect so you must be some kind of stooge.

At 3:15 you can see the cop leading them, and then from 5:30 you can see the cops walking amongst them…on their way to the Tommy Robinson rally in Oldham. You can here them conspiring. You can see rhe half-bricks that caused so much damage. You can see the hands of your government.

https://youtu.be/1mnHzF70Now

Hana Jinks

20th July 2019 at 11:24 am

James Taylor.

I hope that you can accept my apologies. I’m very regretful that l labelled you a ‘stooge’. This is obviously ridiculous.

David Blythen

16th July 2019 at 11:49 pm

Let’s get things straight… Tommy Robinson DID NOT, in his livestream, outside Leeds Crown Court, encourage ‘vigilante’ action.

Watch it for yourselves and you will clearly understand he was referring to the media, not encouraging at all his followers to become vigilantes.

Educate yourselves and watch it and see for yourselves what he actually said that day.

It is so sad that people simply believe the media lies and are not prepared to look deeper.

Tommy did not breach any reporting restrictions – he simply read from articles online already in the public domain, which are exempt from reporting restrictions.

Tommy did not ‘molest’ as the judge accused him of, or cause ‘anxiety’ to the defendents, by asking them how they felt about their verdict as they came to court that day.

Tommy did not prejudice the case, as the judge, in the transcripts, agreed that Tommy did not do this. The trial had already come to its decision by that day.

Tommy did not encourage his followers to become vigilantes – he clearly referred to the media and paparazzi, suggesting that they should be targetting those who are getting involved in the rape of underage girls.

The Court failed to publish information about the public ban on the courts in-house information system.

The Court failed to put a notice of a publication ban on the courtroom door

The Court failed to put the publication ban on the TV information screen in court.

Michelle Dunderdale who was operations manager at Leeds Crown Court admitted these failings under cross examination at The Old Bailey.

The reason why Tommy is in prison is down to the establishment not wanting citizen type journalism, revealing the gravity of the grooming rape issue in the UK and that is why these trials are under reporting restrictions – so as to keep the gravity of the problem away from us.

We only hear for one day when the trials have completed and the media are allowed to report and then it’s all forgotten.

God bless Our Tommy. He is a hero. Shame on those who knock him, for those who do, they are part of the problem we face with rape gangs in this land today.

David Blythen

16th July 2019 at 11:02 pm

This article needs to get its facts correct. Tommy Robinson, in his live stream, DID NOT encourage “vigilantism.” Watch the live stream that Tommy did outside Leeds Crown Court and you will clearly hear Tommy referring to the media, to go after these rapists and not people like him. He NEVER encouraged his supporters to become vigilantes at all.

Kevin McCabe

16th July 2019 at 9:28 pm

It’s becoming more and more like a police state. If they want to put you in jail, they will find a crime for you.

Geraint Hall

16th July 2019 at 6:29 pm

Whatever you think about the rights and wrongs of Tommy Robinson’s latest conviction there is absolutely no justification for him being held in a Category A prison which is full of Islamist extremist prisoners who will be eager to do him harm.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/the-jihadi-training-camp-right-in-the-heart-of-london-a3249941.html

Neil McCaughan

16th July 2019 at 6:04 pm

And out swarm the child rape apologists, Amelia “telemachus” Kantor, Danny Rees, and the rest.
It really does confirm what we all suspected – that Labour knew all about the rape gangs, and considered colluding with them an acceptable price for that fabulous postal vote.

James Knight

16th July 2019 at 5:53 pm

He is the unacceptable face of #MeToo. Same M.O. just taken up a notch.

Nick Cotton

17th July 2019 at 8:01 am

Holy shit. You are 100% correct.

‘Tommy Robinson is the most tireless #metoo activist on the planet.’

I can’t even imagine the levels of reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.

David Goldsmith

16th July 2019 at 5:13 pm

One thing I find odd is why virtually all the media insist on calling him Tommy Robinson AKA Stephen Yaxley-Lennon. It seems remarkably petty. Is there any suggestion that he uses the TR name to deceive? Everyone knows who he is. There are two big films doing the rounds at the moment: one is about Freddie Mercury (and Queen) not about “Farrokh Bulsara AKA Freddie Mercury and the other is not about Reginald Dwight AKA Elton John. Whether you like him or not, it just looks silly.

Rob Allen

16th July 2019 at 8:51 pm

Luke Gittos asked the question: why do journalists spend more time hating Robinson than investigating the rapists (incidently the same question robinson asked on the livestream that the court took as inciting his followers to harass the rapists).

I think the reason they spend more time attacking Robinson is ‘shame’. They had no reluctance to report on other similar cases such as the Catholic Church and Jimmy Savile. In those cases the church authorities and the BBC were singled out for allowing the abuse to continue, but who is willing to investigate the enablers of the grooming gangs?

The Spiked article is in many ways no different from the main stream media in that the ‘real journalists’ are so quick to cheer on the judges jailing of Tommy Robinson without any knowledge of the case e.g. In the article it was said that one of the rapist’s solicitors ” could ” have appealed on the basis that the live-steam prejudiced their case, risking the entire trial. That did in fact happen and it was judged there was nothing in the livestream that could have prejudiced the trial – which was one of the reasons the first appeal against the jail sentence was successful. So much for real journalists.

Hana Jinks

20th July 2019 at 11:30 am

Very powerful post Rob. Thanks.

John Mumaw

16th July 2019 at 3:06 pm

“Contempt” is such a pallid word for the court.

Northern 1312

16th July 2019 at 1:34 pm

All these comments and not one mention he’s on Mossad’s payroll? Age old divide and conquer bull shit. The whole thing was a pantomime farce to cause division.

Hana Jinks

16th July 2019 at 1:56 pm

Since when is it a crime to be on mossads payroll?

Anna Gustova

16th July 2019 at 2:50 pm

How do you know? Are you a Mossad accounts clerk?

James Taylor

17th July 2019 at 12:56 am

……And cue alt right nutters who see the Jews behind everything…👆

Esau Bloggs

16th July 2019 at 11:01 am

Amelia Cantor

16th July 2019 at 10:48 am

The multiply convicted thug, fraudster and hate-criminal Yaxley-Lennon-Robinson is the authentic face of Brexit: cis-gender, white, male, low-information and deeply stupid. This “grooming gang” propaganda is typical far-right hate-hysteria.

But do please tell us again that Brexit “isn’t racist” and “doesn’t appeal to racists”. lol

Eras Bonus-Mus

16th July 2019 at 12:17 pm

You’re the racist.

Hana Jinks

16th July 2019 at 12:37 pm

Ameliorate Cant.

That’s not fair. Mr Robinson is a gentleman and a family man. He has three beautiful children and a beautiful wife that all love him dearly. There are also tens of thousands of people that love him dearly for the sacrifices he has made for them…complete strangers…and Tommy stuck his neck out for them when the people that are elected and paid a fortune to wouldn’t.

He’s an absolute hero.

cliff resnick

16th July 2019 at 12:37 pm

troll baby troll

Adrian W

16th July 2019 at 12:40 pm

“Grooming gang propaganda”? What planet are you on? There have been a large number of trials in the past few years involving hundreds of members who have been convicted of victimising thousands of young girls over decades. How is this in any way propaganda?

As to the author, whatever you think of Tommy Robinson and his past, his actions over the past few years do not deserve the vilification he has been shown by the media (including Spiked) or the state.
The author of this article is incorrect in some of the assertions; Robinson was only stating information already in the public domain (which means contempt should not apply) and says that there were no notices of reporting restrictions and he even asked if there were any.
His questioning of the defendants was no different to the way journalists question him.

What he was convicted for last week was not jeopardizing the trial, but for potentially causing anxiety caused to the convicted grooming gang members.

Also ask yourself – even if he is an idiot and a thug, in the past sixty years, how many other people have been sent to prison for convictions of contempt of court for risking a trial in progress?
The answer is NONE. None at all. Ever. Even in situations where the reporting did actually impact or ruin the trial, it has only ever resulted in fines for the journalist in question (or more typically the media company they worked for).

Does this sound like typical and fair treatment Mr Gittos? Don’t you think the exceptional way he is being singled out is worthy of comment by you or the other Spiked columnists who seem to hate him so much and then publish articles mirroring what he is saying?

James Hall

16th July 2019 at 12:43 pm

You clearly have never read beyond the Guardian and BBC for information about TR.
You have made an offensive and racist post about someone and a subject you clearly know nothing about.
I assume you are a troll.

Neil McCaughan

16th July 2019 at 6:00 pm

How nice. Another child rape apologist.

Hana Jinks

16th July 2019 at 9:37 am

Mr Gittos.

I find it highly unlikely that you’d ever be convicted of journalism either. Why would you bring your slimy prejudices to the story?

This is an extremely serious story. I honestly believe that, on top of May being appointed as the PM to deliver brexit, this is yet another story of how Deepstate, in full knowledge that their cover has been blown by the internet, is mocking our society niow.

Mr Robinson had had problems with this kind of thing before, and so was extra careful to make sure that he complied with law on this occasion, and he did. Mr Gittos. The trial was over, the muslims had been found guilty, and were on their way to sentencing. He didn’t harass them or mock them; merely inquiring in a way that any other fake news rep would.

I’m not so sure that what he does is actually journalism either. But then again, Don lLemon and all the bbc creeps call themselves journalists, so who knows? It’s beside the point anyway.

There is something going on that we can’t see. For a start, why wasn’t that minister, the police and social services all charged with dereliction of duty? Aren’t they all paid to protect our children by us? Have they even been charged? Luke?

In a sane society, what Mr Robinson has done is worthy of the highest civilian honours. I don’t live in England and don’t watch fake news, so perhaps someone could explain to me why this hero is so scorned by you British?

Deepstate run the banks, the governments and fake news. They are behind diversity-communism and the eussr. They want to destroy our societies’, and then bring in totalitarianism to control us through a one-world government. They’re also behind the importation of cheap labour from the third world. They are restricting our opposition to it through the use of hate-speech laws and fake news. Tommy has exposed the fact that in Pakistani culture, there is an acceptance of paedophilia as being somehow ..ok. For decades, rape gangs were formed to prey exclusively on white girls, whom the pakis see as some kinds of lesser beings because they aren’t muslim.
It’s extremely difficult to imagine a much worse story. Extremely vulnerable foster children, for example, were an obvious target.

Why would your authorities cover this up? Don’t you feel enraged about that Luke? Obviously not, judging by your pissy tone, but why not?

Cover it up they did, and since then there has been nothing but smearing and vicious lies perpetrated by fake news against this hero. What the fark is going on there? What is wrong with you people? Where is your moral compass. This is an utter outrage.

He’s attacked by muslims in the streets of Luton, and everywhere else he goes. And your government has been using the police to harass him. (He was in Cambridge with his children to watch the football, and was frogmarched out of the city on the pretext of him just being there posed an imminent threat to security. Did you know about that one Luke? ) He was the first one milkshaked, and it was all a big joke at the guardian. He hosted a political rally in Oldham, and the muslim defence-league showed up 300-strong , with a fucking police escort no less, to rain a fussilade of half-bricks on unsuspecting attendees, causing hundreds of thousands of pounds worth of damage. I mean, Tiommy is a public figure: why on earth was this act of political violence not even reported on by fake news? Absolutely astonishing.

They’ve fitted him up, and put him in Smellmarsh. They are utter bastards. They know that Hellmarsh is run by the muslims.

So what’s going on? He’s done nothing wrong, broken no law, and has on fact performed a great service to many people. I believe that to go against Deepstate invites this. Ask Anthony Bourdain (rumored to know “too much” about the Clinton’s and their paedo ring, and about to blow it open, apparently.) Tommy has exposed just how incompatible these people are to be being brought onto our society in the numbers that they have been. And let’s make no mistake here, they are in no way refugees. They are economic migrants, and have no place in the west anyway, let alone being a burden to the western taxpayer. The vile commies are cool with it, tho.

The legacy parties, not to mention fake news, are our enemies. They are allowing themselves, hopefully unwittingly, to be used to destroy our societies and enslave us under totalitarianism. UKIP was smeared out of existence by fake news, and guees why? It’s because they aren’t controlled. (Farrago, Pox and Witherscum anyone? They’ve got ro be kiddinfg) Gerard Batten is a wake-up to what’s going on, is a man of integrity, and would be the best man to be PM at this stage. He hates the eussr, the U.N., fake news and all of the other assorted detritus that passes for people in public life there.

So could someine please explain why the likes of that scumbad andrew doyle was referring to him as far-right? Why do you scumbag leftists look down on him and despise him? Who the fuck do you think you all are? There were thousands upon thousands of people that marched through Londonistan last week, and they looked like ordinary people to me. Why are you snobby shitfaces in that office …sneeeering at these people.

If anything happens to Tommy, it’s gonna kick off big-time. I mean, it’s gonna have to kick-off eventually anyway.

Hana Jinks

16th July 2019 at 9:42 am

Dudes. The new system is ok, but kinda runs counter to your proclamations about free speech. Why is free speech being moderated, and doesn’t that make you hypocrites. People say I’m a bit blunt, but ljust like to get to the point.

Hana Jinks

16th July 2019 at 10:38 am

I’ve said some pretty harsh things over the past few days about your office. I meant what l said, but to be finally bringing some light to this injustice…l feel absolutely enraged about some of the things that are going on. It’s not about right-left anymore. It’s about right-wrong. And leftism is completely wrong in every single way.

You guys have every right to be incredibly pleased with your contributions to this fine site. All of you. I don’t agree with half of it, and hope to be able to continue to make my ppint. I hate injustice.

Hana Jinks

16th July 2019 at 12:27 pm

Thanks. I really appreciate you allowing me to have my say in this climate.

S Willardson

20th July 2019 at 12:09 am

From the USA, it always looks like Tommy is also being prosecuted for the British sin of being working class and not speaking the proper dialect.

Hana Jinks

20th July 2019 at 11:29 am

Very interesting. Thanks S. It’s why God sent Paul out from his own culture. We’re so similar to the British, and I’m sure that they could see problems in our respective cultures that we can’t necessarily see as well, either.

Hana Jinks

20th July 2019 at 11:41 am

Lol..l meant ..either, as well.

christopher barnard

16th July 2019 at 9:02 am

The state is using all its power to suppress news and discussion of these grooming trials or the cause of most terrorism. The state broadcaster is obviously no problem, and the police and the rest of the media have been brought into line.

What alternative does it have if it wants to maintain its official line on multiculturalism and keep public order?

It is desperately trying to cope with a problem of its own making, one based on a naive, optimistic ideology.

Christopher Hitchens

16th July 2019 at 9:00 am

Have I stumbled onto the Huffington Post or the embarrassment that still calls itself “the Independent”?

I created this profile just to comment on this. Most people below the line have already covered what I was going to say. Gittos, as you have obviously looked at the videos, perhaps you to could direct lesser mortals to the rough timestamps of his incitement and contempt? No? Didn’t think so. So this is how your law firm operates?

Amelia Cantor

16th July 2019 at 11:19 am

Why on earth make a sensible and informed comment under the name of that tedious windbag and warmonger Christopher Hitchens? Hitchens would quite likely have been on Robinson’s side with a lot of other neo-cons.

Samsundar Duvakemar

16th July 2019 at 5:27 pm

Hitchens was a great man.

Steve Waters

16th July 2019 at 8:25 am

His video wasn’t actually inciting fans it was directed at the media and asking them why they harass him instead of harassing the grooming gang defendants, the same point made in the article

Danny Rees

16th July 2019 at 8:27 am

Criticism= Harassment

Danny Rees

16th July 2019 at 8:31 am

Hang on just a minute there.

You mean he filmed these gangs on trial then posted a video complaining that the media have a go at him instead of these rape gangs?

So he made it all about him?

That’s just wrong

Jerry Owen

16th July 2019 at 8:15 am

I think this is a fair article . TR is like a bull in a china shop, he clearly like the rest of us is angry at Muslim grooming gangs, but can’t control his anger in a more positive way, one or two here seem to have no opinion on the grooming gangs just an opinion on TR.. funny that !
I note that no one at the BBC has been imprisoned for their hounding of Sir Cliff.

michael savell

17th July 2019 at 12:14 am

Neither did they follow through with any enthusiasm in the jimmy savill case vis- a vis the reports on the late night parties and the celebrities who were supposedly present at them.It’s so strange how the UK has become hostile to it’s own countrymen.This case should not have been too difficult for members of the bar to understand and be sensible about but it’s like they are all run by alien intelligence now.

John Millson

16th July 2019 at 8:14 am

This piece isn’t trying to say that it’s not possible to be nauseated by both, simultaneously, is it?
The child rapists will be in jail much longer than ‘Robinson’.

Danny Rees

16th July 2019 at 8:17 am

In the eyes of Tommy Robinson supporters if you are nauseated by his behaviour you are sympathisers of the behaviour of grooming gangs.

John Millson

16th July 2019 at 9:01 am

Yep, ‘fraid so. In line with the stuck binary-mentality world we are in.
He’s not qualified to report and he’s not qualified to judge.
No doubt he is happy with the notoriety – the widespread condemnation doesn’t come from nowhere; doesn’t he have ‘form’? – check his Wikipedia page.
This little spell won’t do the brand any harm.

Hana Jinks

16th July 2019 at 10:05 am

That’s pretty bad, john.

How’s his form relevant? And in the current political environment, what kind of form is it anyway?

And yeah, it comes from scumbags like you propagating fake news horseshit.

John Millson

16th July 2019 at 10:59 am

Hana Jinks,
‘Fake news’?
Yaxley-Lennon doesn’t claim to be blemish-free, on the contrary, unless his own Wikipedia page is all lies. People can reform and be a force for good, yes, but not sure if he falls into that category yet. When someone like Yaxley-Lennon uses political crises to stir up trouble, claim false-martyr status over imprisonment for misdemeanours (contempt of court), people should be alert. Sadly, his imprisonment will just enhance his reputation in his followers’ eyes.
( In general, we really are in an upside down world when the unrepentant and clearly unfit consider themselves worthy to lead and inspire others. )

Hana Jinks

16th July 2019 at 12:56 pm

So what have you against him?

Hana Jinks

17th July 2019 at 4:09 am

Stirring up trouble? He uncovered the trouble and has been jailed for trouble.

Hana Jinks

18th July 2019 at 1:54 am

*his trouble

Jack Hennessey

16th July 2019 at 7:50 am

Firstly he never jeopardised the trial, the jury was returning its verdict and couldn’t have seen the broadcast.Secondly he did not ‘incite’ anyone he was asking why journalists don’t report on grooming trials.Thirdly nothing Tommy said wasn’t already in the public domain and as such the Court has no power over its publication or broadcast.Tommy was stitched up by the Attorney General and a couple of bent judges.He committed no crime and anyone saying he did has no business calling themselves a ‘journalist’.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cVuOrQhX6F8

Danny Rees

16th July 2019 at 8:16 am

They did not report on this one because there was reporting restrictions in place.

If they had they would have found themselves in legal trouble like he did.

Jack Hennessey

16th July 2019 at 8:22 am

Except reporting restrictions were lifted before the third trial started which rather begs the question why were they there in the first place?

Danny Rees

16th July 2019 at 8:24 am

In your eyes because the defendants were Muslim.

But whether one likes or agrees with reporting restrictions or not they have to be obeyed.

Any journalist would.

Jack Hennessey

16th July 2019 at 8:34 am

‘In my eyes because the defendants were Muslim’………er sorry where have I mentioned anything about the defendants backgrounds?I am pointing out that TR has been treated unfairly and harshly.Journalists frequently flout reporting restrictions and nothing happens.The BBC asian network named a victim in a rape trial and nothing happened to them.TR has already been jailed unlawfully and has just been sent back to prison on what amounts to a trumped up charge.The manager of the Leeds court house admitted in court under oath that no restrictions notice was displayed at the court……..do you not believe in human rights or the rule of law?

Danny Rees

16th July 2019 at 8:40 am

Yes the restrictions were not displayed that day due to an error but still they had existed and journos had been aware of them.

Tommy pleaded guilty you do know.

Jack Hennessey

16th July 2019 at 8:53 am

Not according to the Crown’s own website which says notice of the restrictions should be posted in the court, he didn’t plead guilty he was found guilty.His first trial was ruled unlawful two subsequent trials had to be abandoned when the judges refused to hear the cases.It took the CPS lawyers months to concoct these charges and over £1 million has been spent procecuting him…….is that ‘normal’ in your eyes?Do you think this was not politically motivated?

Hana Jinks

16th July 2019 at 9:59 am

Give it a rest Danny. He was fitted-up. He wasn’t allowed to appear before a jury. That’s not bent? And no, he would never plead guilty to something of which is he innocent. Check yt.

Peter Ferguson

16th July 2019 at 7:22 am

The trial was over, they had been found guilty and were appearing for sentencing. These child rape gangs arrive at court unrepentant , supported by their families and communities and are hostile to the victims calling them slabs etc. This is why so many of these cases have reporting restrictions and why Tommy has been persecuted for reporting on it. Whatever happens Islam must not be criticised

Danny Rees

16th July 2019 at 8:15 am

Can you show us where their communities supported them?

Quotes?

Jack Hennessey

16th July 2019 at 8:44 am

It’s a very interesting point because after Tommy was jailed the reporting restrictions were lifted, this happened before the third trial had started which rather begs the question why were there restrictions in the first place.The mainstream media show great reluctance to report on these trials often only receiving scant coverage afterwards.The BBC’s favourite trick is to put them on their website for a couple of hours in the middle of the night so they can say they covered them…….but they take them down before 5am so very few people see them.Best of luck to Tommy,I hope he’s ok in Belmarsh and I hope his appeal is successful.

Hana Jinks

16th July 2019 at 10:01 am

Didn’t know that about the bbc, but it sounds about right.

Stephen J

16th July 2019 at 6:36 am

The problem with Tommy Robinson is that he doesn’t have anything to say, other than “poor me”… “look what they are doing to me”.

If he actually had a campaign that he believed in, he might be dangerous, but his vote tally at the EP elections said it all.

Danny Rees

16th July 2019 at 8:25 am

The victim card is popular in politics across the board so he is only taking a leaf out of other political candidate’s book.

That does not mean it is any less shit when he does it but that’s how it is.

James Hall

16th July 2019 at 12:39 pm

His vote tally at the EP elections was the highest ever for an independent candidate. Nearly 50 thousand people voted for him. The next nearest was barely a couple of thousand.
He has a campaign that he believes in. He believes in it so strongly that he’s been in prison several times on trumped up charges.
Before you dismiss TR and his campaign I would suggest you actually learn something about him other that what you read in the Guardian or the BBC. The evidence, and there is plenty of it, is all online. Watch the video of his speech at the Oxford Union, or the one that was recently banned which explains about the police bias, intimidation and harrassment that he and his family have endured.

bad login

16th July 2019 at 3:07 pm

And not only did he get more votes than any other independent candidate (in any EU election ever), but he also managed it without access to any social media such as FB or Twit due to being no-platformed by some very influential people.

Danny Rees

16th July 2019 at 1:30 am

Nice ty Luke Gittos but Tommy’s fans will still accuse you of “defending” grooming gangs if you are not one hundred percent on board with him.

Hana Jinks

16th July 2019 at 10:30 am

Serious question Danny, and no, I’m not gonna accuse you of anything. It’s obvious that you don’t like him, and I’m wondering why? I think that he’s a good man, an honourable man that has put his life on the line for strangers.

What is it about Tommy that some British people don’t like?

S Willardson

20th July 2019 at 12:11 am

Again, the British disdain for the working class

Hana Jinks

20th July 2019 at 11:46 am

S.

Wow. Not one word from the British non-working-class in four days. I’ve learnt not to hold my breath. It’s pretty offensive how they keep making references to it tho.

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to comment. Log in or Register now.