May 30

Tommy Robinson ‘contempt’ in Muslim grooming case

Tommy Robinson

Tommy Robinson

Sky News reports, ‘The former leader of the English Defence League, Tommy Robinson, has been jailed for 13 months after flouting court orders for a second time.’

It goes on, ‘The EDL founder – whose real name Stephen Christopher Yaxley-Lennon was listed on court documents – was sentenced to 10 months for contempt of court.  He was given a further three months for breaching the terms of a previous suspended sentence.’

Mr Robinson was arrested on Friday outside Leeds Crown Court.  Apparently, he and his cameraman Caolan Robertson were broadcasting details of a current trial live on Facebook.  A number of mainly Muslim men stand accused of grooming under-age girls for sexual purposes.

‘Swift injustice’

The trial itself is subject for some reason to blanket reporting restrictions.  Astonishingly, Judge Geoffrey Marson QC also placed reporting restrictions on details of Mr Robinson’s sentence.  Only when these were lifted yesterday ((Tuesday) could the mainstream media report it.  But the details were already all over social media and on news outlets worldwide.  On Zerohedge, Tyler Durden described the events as ‘Swift Injustice’.   Fox News reported on the case on FridayThe same outlet reported later on political leaders across Europe calling the jailing politically motivated.  Even Donald Trump Jr was expressing himself shocked at the UK’s apparent clampdown on freedom of expression.

The judge told Mr Robinson his actions could cause the ongoing trial to be re-run, costing “hundreds and hundreds of thousands of pounds”.  But apparently, to date, the trial is still proceeding.

The hour-long footage had been watched 250,000 times within hours of being posted on Facebook, the court heard.  The judge viewed some of it, we understand.

Of course Sky News, like most of the media, could not resist referring to ‘the right-wing activist, 35, of Wilstead, Bedfordshire’.   All ‘right-wing’ means is that Mr Robinson has taken against Islam.  And that stems from his experience of Muslims on council estates in Luton,

Tommy Robinson on Muslim gangs

When Judy and I met Tommy Robinson in 2010 on one such estate, he expressed no ‘right-wing’ opinions.  He was not for big money, or opposed to trades unions, or an anti-society individualist.  Instead, he told us of drug dealing and prostitution rings all run by local Muslims.  He and his friends had become appalled by the Muslim rackets and the racketeers.  Moreover, they wanted to call attention to it at a time when politicians were denying any problems existed with Islam.  This was even before the Rotherham grooming trial.

At that time I even observed a rally of the English Defence League.  It too is always described to this day as ‘right-wing’ or ‘far-right’.   It was not much more than a bunch of football supporters concerned about encroaching Islam and Islamification.  They were bothered about halal meat in supermarkets, schools and prisons.  They were worried about Islamic violence from murderous Al Qaeda.  Islamic State was not even on the radar at this time.  But for all their chants of ‘E – E – EDL’, the marchers were hardly from the ‘right’.  I gained the impression a distinct majority were working-class Labour Party voters.

As for the Muslims Mr Robinson spoke about, it appeared criminality sat easily with their Muslim faith.  These Muslims went to the mosque and did their prayer.  That alone made them ‘good Muslims.’  Our elite will never admit it, but repentance of sin is not big in Islam.  It is not like Christianity at all.  It is a religion of works.  By that we mean it is built around doing faith activities, the ‘pillars of Islam’..  It is not framed around forgiveness and gentleness.  There is no fruit of the Spirit in Islam.  And no Saviour.

Restrictions Political?

Going back to the court, I am puzzled as to why Tommy Robinson pleaded ‘guilty’.  Such a plea removes a major plank of an appeal.  He can only appeal the sentence, not his conviction.  But these things happen when you are under duress and have an inexperienced duty lawyer.  Maybe he can appeal his conviction on the grounds of being wrongly advised.

Alex Jones on InfoWars is not known for restraint.  But while interviewing Tommy’s cameraman Caolan Robertson (Twitter account here), he described Tommy Robinson as a ‘political prisoner of the West.’  That provocative statement actually seems difficult to argue against.

What tells us that charging and sentencing Tommy Robinson was a political act?  For this writer, above all it was Judge Geoffrey Marson QC imposing reporting restrictions on his jailing.  The Independent newspaper and Leeds Live went back to court to challenge Judge Marson’s order.  The Washington Post says this was  ‘in part by arguing that their competitors were already violating it.’

Either the judge himself or another judge lifted the restrictions.  That means they were wrong in the first place.  And that makes their imposition a political act.

In an editorial, the Indy itself said:  ‘Like him or loathe him, the jailing of Tommy Robinson for contempt of court was an event of legitimate press and public interest. It cannot be right, whatever else, that a British citizen can be deprived of their liberty “in the dark”, the very fact of their whereabouts made a secret. It feels wrong, and, in spirit at least, partly in breach of the ancient principle of habeas corpus.’

Impact on the trial

So the reporting restriction on Tommy’s imprisonment was a political act.  Now, where does that leave the restriction on reporting on the actual trial itself?

The Daily Mirror tries to show in this article why jailing Tommy Robinson was the right thing to do.  It says of his Facebook live stream:  ‘The video included comments that could have caused the collapse of a long-running trial, costing hundreds of thousands of pounds.’

That’s ‘could have’.  Did the trial collapse?  It does not appear to have done.

The Mirror goes on, ‘As well as breaching this order, Robinson also made comments that impacted on the defendants’ right to a fair hearing before a jury.’

Tommy of all people ought to know that being charged is not the same as being guilty.  It really is not right to shoot footage assuming defendants’ guilt before the jury have reached a verdict.

Nor is it right to go up to defendants in the street during a trial and ask if they have their prison bag packed.  And that is what Tommy Robinson was doing on some occasions.

The jury – the weak link

The jury is considered a weak link.  Judges tell jurers not to pay any attention to social media.  In some cases they advise jurers not even to look at it.  It is hard these days to avoid social media.  But it is do-able.  Moreover, jurers are obliged to do their job fairly.  They are essential to the system.  We cannot trust judges alone.

The Mirror asserts, ‘His arrest and conviction were to protect our justice system – under legislation that ensure trials don’t collapse’.

Fair enough, except there appears to be scant evidence that what he did actually prejudiced the trial.  So could there be a political motive behind reporting restrictions on the Leeds case and the earlier one in Canterbury?

It is a fact that those charged were predominantly Muslim.  It is a loathing of Islam that motivated Tommy Robinson to make his broadcasts.  And the establishment have a corresponding defensive attitude towards Islam.  Tony Blair may have been the first politician to say ‘Islam is a religion of peace’.  Even today our leaders do not want to upset the multi-faith applecart.  Muslims are rising to positions of power and influence.  Many are councillors, some are MPs.  And of course a Muslim is now Home Secretary.  Another is the Mayor of London.

Muslim grooming gangs

The backdrop is this.  A malaise has affected Rochdale, Rotherham, Telford, Newcastle, Oxford, and, says the Spectator, eleven other English towns.  In all cases, gangs of Muslim men have been convicted of grooming young non-Muslim girls for sex.  Adherents of the Mohammedan religion see those outside it as inferior.  They would not do it to Muslim girls.  They are seen as ‘haram’.  Their whole community would be outraged.

But other young women hanging around parks or city centres, perhaps involved in the care system, are easy and permitted prey.  They are ‘halal’.  The problem is inherent in the religion.  It is a national scandal.  And apart from a few brave mainstream politicians like gutsy Anne Cryer in Rochdale, no-one wants to admit it.  No-one from the police, to social services, to local councillors, right up to the Prime Minister,  will talk about it.

The subsequent vacuum was always going to be filled.  And Tommy Robinson has taken it upon himself to fill it.  Well, someone had to.  It seems prophets, not just angels, can come in strange guises.

 

We’ll really appreciate your support
Click below to join Christian Voice and stand up for the King of kings

Click on the social media links below to share this post:

Share

14 comments

Skip to comment form

  1. My understanding is that the trial was not ‘on-going’ – the defendants had already been found guilty and were arriving at court in order to be sentenced so nothing Robinson said or did could have any effect upon the verdict.

    I have also read commenters on other sites pointing out that Robinson had continually asked the police if what he was doing was alright, and they had given him the nod for almost an hour previous to the arrest.

    1. Is what Ruth K says true, that the defendants had already been found guilty?

    2. It’s more complicated than that. A first group of ten have been tried and I believe verdicts delivered. I believe they were sentenced yesterday. TR’s action was I think towards the end of the trial of a second group of ten. A third group of nine will be tried in September. But either way, the trial of the second group was apparently not prejudiced. It did continue on Tuesday and Wednesday this week and was continuing today.

  2. It would seem that someone high up in the chain of command decided that this was a chance to silence Tommy when he was saying things that the establishment didn’t want us to hear. The concern now must be for his safety in prison. We need to pray about this and ask that he be protected. We should also write to our MPs asking that they follow up on this to ensure his wellbeing.

  3. Yes he was aking them how the felt about the verdict. Im sure someone will correct me if I am wrong.

  4. Great Article! A question arises , what have been doing our famous child protectors, children services while children were raped and groomed? why no attention was paid on any sings of problem? Perhaps SW were too busy to look for that elusive “emotional harm on balance of probabilities” like in my son s case. It is easier than to struggle with 46000 youth gang members.

  5. Well done Stephen for reporting it. I’ve been looking into this business today and I think he has a fighting chance. There are circumstances where you can appeal even if you plead guilty. Remember the cases where I think it was the Birmingham 6 pleaded guilty and yet they simply didn’t have anything to do with a murder. I can’t believe Tommy would have done that without duress. They did the hearing in a matter of hours, and he only had a duty solicitor, which are known to be often worse than useless.

    You are supposed to be able to appoint your own, or else it is unfair. He could have asked the judge for an adjournment to give him time to review the legality of what he did. Of course we don’t have the court transcript so we are in the dark, but this general business is governed by two ECHR rights. You have a right to freedom of expression except where that compromises the right to a fair trial. The important thing is that it is only in the domain of compromising the fair trial that they can extend the restrictions for. What did the judges order do that the law did not do already? He is allowed to extend the general legal case where the specifics of the trial are concerned, i.e. reasoning pertaining to the trial and not general law.

    Another point is that it would not have cost hundreds of thousands of pounds to rerun the trial. The jury were in the building. If there were risk of them seeing the video that evening then which is cheaper – to rerun the case of keep them in a hotel for the night! This can be done and has been done where there is a risk. The court is under the same obligation as he is. They must not act in a way such that the trial is prejudiced, so hotel it would be.

    That’s just for starters. If people can get some donations rolling in perhaps a top brief could find a ton more points. It looks like a rushed job, so it could be doable on some technicality.

  6. Just to add to the above, I have found out some new information on the case from the official defence people. Apparently he was denied his lawyer, so they are appealing under Article 6 of the ECHR. The two clauses they contravene are right to a legal representative of your choosing and adequate time to p repair your defence. He need only prove one and he walks, and can then get compensated as well for all the trouble. The amount of commotion this is likely to cause around the world if he does walk is going to be interesting. I don’t think we need worry about the lack of public awareness of these cases now. Tommy has done a grand job.

  7. Hi Stephen,
    yes I was wondering if you would get on to this issue! Glad you have! My wife has accessed this on U-Tube and has shown it to me. Issues as I see it include:
    1. The ‘gagging’ order on press reporting. How stupid can the system get! The mere fact that a ‘gagging’ order was made demonstrates that there are truths that the powers that be do not want highlighting. Dangerous and damning.
    2. The prison where Tommy has gone to is full of Muslim extremists who are there for serious terrorist offences. Clearly the intention is that they will kill Tommy and so silence his voice. This highlights the utter corruption of government and Labour party (especially the Labour Party) who want to silence all criticism. It also suggests strongly that integrity in public life is well now a thing of the distant past.
    3. There is a deliberate blocking of telling the truth about the satanic influence that Islam represents. Islam is a satanic religion. Let us get that into our brains emphatically without ambiguity. The government and Labour are intent in muzzling the expressions of such opinions so that we are duped into this falsehood of ‘tolerance’ and duplicity.
    There is no doubt that as a nation, we have lost our integrity and our grasp of truth, even when it hits us in the face. We are only able to indulge in the political prejudices of the left in politics who make statements that have little evidential value and no moral compass with which to guide them
    There are bad days indeed.

    1. You make a lot of good points, but why on earth single out the Labour Party? We need to understand that they all need prayer!
      Psalm 14:1  To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David. The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
      Psalm 58:3  The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies.
      Ezekiel 34:2  Son of man, prophesy against the shepherds of Israel, prophesy, and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD unto the shepherds; Woe be to the shepherds of Israel that do feed themselves! should not the shepherds feed the flocks? (And that is temporal leaders, not church leaders – we often misapply it.)
      Romans 3:12  They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.

  8. “2. The prison where Tommy has gone to is full of Muslim extremists who are there for serious terrorist offences.”

    Prisons avoid mixing people who are likely to harm each other. Sex offenders are most hated in prisons, and can get beaten up. It does happen sometimes but the prison staff are under an obligation to keep them separate. They would not put him on the same wing as Muslim terrorists. News from his man running his campaign is that Tommy says he is OK where he is, and the others there are friendly. He said to start with he thought he was in there and will just be forgotten about, but now he knows what the response has been he is over the moon.

    So what the media says about being scared for his life is a gross distortion. Some of these women journalists like Katie Hopkins might have been shaking like jelly if it had been them, but that is known as psychological projection. People think what it is like for someone based on how they would feel. Since practically all of them were too scared to even report Rotherham, you can see what is going on here! Tommy is made of tougher stuff.

    Meanwhile a Dutch MEP is bringing the issue up in the European Parliament. Things are definitely going our way.

  9. See also the comments by Melanie Phillips.

    1. Yes, she is taking issue with TR for accusing men on trial of paedophilia as if they have already been convicted. And she likens him to the feminists accusing Harvey Weinstein. It’s a neat point. She does not however raise the issue of the initial court ban on reporting TR’s own conviction.

  10. Barrister Blogger, Matthew, has contributed this today, which I found informative.

    Tommy Robinson’s appeal: will his world class legal team get him out of prison?
    http://barristerblogger.com/2018/07/04/tommy-robinsons-appeal-will-his-world-class-legal-team-get-him-out-of-prison/#more-2627

Leave a Reply