Tommy Robinson arrested

Status
Not open for further replies.
We've covered all of this in the original thread. What I'd call very strange values is wanting a case to collapse because of some arse politicking on the court steps. My but there'd be an awful lot of outrage about that wouldn't there?

Perhaps you and I with our strange values need a break from this thread as we just aren't getting that brown muslims are bad!

Fancy coming out for a swift pint, I'm off to meet my upstanding white pals: Peter Sutcliffe, Harold Shipman, Ian Brady, Fred West and Darren Osborne :)

Sarcasm may have been included here.
 
transcripts aren't done by court staff, they are done by private firms and always have been, you have to pay for a transcript and have to tell them the date and time of the hearing you want, they listen to the the recording, type it up and send it to you
Dunno, as I said haven't been in touch for a couple of years. There was some discussion on making stuff available through CCDCS/digitally but it didn't go anywhere afaik.
 
TR quoted numbers though.
He mentioned at least 53,000 muslims, and there are least 2,000,000 in the UK, how nany of those have blown themselves up as you say?
The same goes for the rape phenomenon as you call it
While all rape needs to be sorted, there are over 20,000 people being raped each year in the UK, but perhaps as long as some groups try to make it a race issue or right wing issue the PC brigade will tread much more carefully (pretty much what happened) rather than just treat it as a crime regardless of who commited it.
The whole rape, investigation and conviction rates story is abysmal. Rape is hard to prosecute and get a conviction for, irrespective of gender, race or religion.

Anyone endangering a conviction with reckless self promotion deserves everything they get.
 

Flight

LE
Book Reviewer
Petition unterschreiben

330,000 signatures and climbing.

I understand where you're coming from and believe me I have the same concerns, but I think in this particular case there was only going to be one outcome.
We certainly agree on that. And I do trust your motives, though can't say the same about many others with similar arguments.

Yes it was always going to be thus and more than likely TR prodded the bear into being truly stupid. But that just rather illustrates and enshrines the clear injustice in the system. Were his precautions over careful? Was his language deliberately constrained? In short was it really an act of political theatre with the aim of being martyred. Quite possibly.

What TR was doing on the hour and fifteen minutes before his arrest was not 'illegitimate journalism'. He wasn't using the sorts of language proscribed. In short he wasn't breaking the conditions imposed upon him. He checked this with the police.

I think where you and I differ is that, assuming it was a deliberate provocation, you think his act to be futile. Whereas I, even in the at least suspected knowledge that this was a wanted outcome, think well played.

Maybe a better question would be, in a truly fair and just society should he have been arrested and jailed?

Are you saying that he was always going to be arrested because of his past, or that you should have been arrested had you been doing the same thing?

Equality under the law isn't negotiable.

If the former then maybe he's played it better than you realise. Or more likely the authorities have been more stupid. And I say that as someone who earlier watched 75 minutes of youtube which I would never have considered doing before. As too maybe did some proportion of the 330,000 above. Course there'll be some pillock along to argue that they are all EDL supporters, or Russians soon.

As I said many pages back, the optics on this one could barely be worse.
 
I think that the point was that it was yet another muslim rape gang trial but it was being conducted with a media blackout. His view was that people ought to know that there is yet another one of these trials happening, indicating a bigger problem than Rotheram or Telford alone.

All of the legacy media outlets that reported on this had to change their stories to remove references to the nature of the trial.
There was no media blackout. You can find the names and addresses and the crimes they are accused of on the BBC website. The MSM have also reported on the case. When there was a protest outside Huddersfield (magistrates?) court, the media took lots of photos including photos of the accused and published them.

eg: Trial dates set for 29 people accused of child sex abuse charges

However, there seems to be a large grey area with regards to what is and isn't 'sub-judice'. The Contempt of Court Act 1981 says:

(3)The strict liability rule applies to a publication only if the proceedings in question are active within the meaning of this section at the time of the publication....

.....Subject to the following provisions of this Schedule, criminal proceedings are active from the relevant initial step specified in paragraph 4 [F1or 4A] until concluded as described in paragraph 5.

(a)arrest without warrant;

(b)the issue, or in Scotland the grant, of a warrant for arrest;

(c)the issue of a summons to appear, or in Scotland the grant of a warrant to cite;

(d)the service of an indictment or other document specifying the charge;

(e)except in Scotland, oral charge;

[F55(f)the making of an application under section 2(2) (tainted acquittals), 3(3)(b) (admission made or becoming known after acquittal), 4(3)(b) (new evidence), 11(3) (eventual death of injured person) or 12(3) (nullity of previous proceedings) of the Double Jeopardy (Scotland) Act 2011 (asp 16).]
So technically the strict liability rule applies when the accused were turning up to the first court hearing yet they were photographed by the MSM and those photos published. It appears that the rule is taken to be stricter when a trial is in progress due to the "substantial risk" element:

(2)The strict liability rule applies only to a publication which creates a substantial risk that the course of justice in the proceedings in question will be seriously impeded or prejudiced.
The Postponement Order does not apply to the cases of the 29 as far as I can tell. It's for TR's conviction. There may be another order I don't know, but the media will report on the case once it's closed.
 
Just for the sake of accuaracy, your prediction of what will happen in the future is a prediction and nothing more, certainly not a fact.

I suppose the crime figures that would suggest that the muslim population of this country commit the same percentage of rapes or child abuse as the rest of the population pro rata doesnt sound as inflammatory so TR doesn't mention it.
He also doesnt seem to mention that his supporters have murdered more MPs by a huge amount pro rata than the rest of the population, or commited more religeous terrorism pro rata than UK muslims have. Its a funny old game playing with statistics isnt it :)
This is the crux of the matter for me.

TR is targeting Muslim rapists.

Is there evidence showing the Muslim community commits proportionally more sex crimes than the general population?
 

I can't be arrsed watching it all but the bits i watched didn't appear to be actionable. (There was one stumble about 5 mins in over forgetting to say alledged which he then corrected)
 
So "Lord" Mandelson" , who very clearly did commit mortgage fraud by not correctly declaring where all his money came from, should have been charged and taken to court or not ?

Apart from the fact that this is a spectacular piece of whataboutery he can't be guilty of mortgage fraud as he hasn't been tried and found guilty.
 
And if you read what I said you'll note that I do too. But a child abusers motivation is to abuse a child. In the many scandals involving Asian grooming gangs the race of the child was an enabler to the abuse because of the reasons you quote in my post, but not the prime motivation.

Either way it's sick and disgusting and this is in no way a defence of any child abuser but the far right want you to believe they were abused because they were white. They weren't, they were abused because they were children and their lives and lack of agency made it easy to abuse them and most importantly gave the abusers separation from the abused.
You've clearly not seen some of the comments made by some of the guilty c**ts

Muslim community 'absolutely disgusted' by Newcastle grooming gang

Notice the paragraph that goes
"One member, Badrul Hussain, had claimed “white women are only good for one thing” during a rant at a female ticket inspector who found him travelling on public transport without a ticket in 2014. “All white women are only good for one thing,” he shouted. “For men like me to f*** and use like trash. That’s all women like you are worth.”

I can assure you that sentiments like that were expressed by c**ts involved in the Rotherham scandal.

Race WAS an issue. To deny it is pretty much stupid and so right one it's toe curlingly embarrassing
 
Apart from the fact that this is a spectacular piece of whataboutery he can't be guilty of mortgage fraud as he hasn't been tried and found guilty.
But he committed an act that clearly reached the criteria for charging with Mortgage fraud. He failed to declare a loan and 3 other mortgages when applying for a mortgage. That is attempted fraud as far as I can tell.

The whataboutery is pretty f***king weak. Both men attempted to engage in "conspiracy to commit fraud by misrepresentation in relation to a mortgage application" One man pleaded guilty straight away, one man came up with lots of excuses and was let off scot free.

The simple question is why was one man allowed to get away with unbelievable excuses and one man was prosecuted when the law is supposed to impartial ?
 
Last edited:

Flight

LE
Book Reviewer
The Postponement Order does not apply to the cases of the 29 as far as I can tell. It's for TR's conviction. There may be another order I don't know, but the media will report on the case once it's closed.
Will or should?

They've been as absent of their responsibility to report as they could possibly stretch it.

And I'm sure they have their excuses, maybe even ones rooted in legal minutiae. At the end of the day though both the perception and reality is that they are reluctant to report on something which is fundamentally politically incorrect.

None of their excuses save them from collective professional responsibility dating back 40 years.

At the end of the day we appear to have politically correct scumbags in all the wrong places, and the scale of the end result isn't even knowable yet.
 
This is the crux of the matter for me.

TR is targeting Muslim rapists.

Is there evidence showing the Muslim community commits proportionally more sex crimes than the general population?
It depends on the particular 'sex crime'. In the case of gangs grooming vulnerable teenagers and young adults then yes muslims commit proportionally more crimes. At least 50-84% dependinhg on the report. There's loads of evidence out there that's just a quick google search away.

Grooming gangs of Muslim men failed to integrate into British society
What do we know about the ethnicity of sexual abuse gangs?
 
He doesn't have to be charged. His suspended sentence was activated by his arrest.
He still needs to be convicted of another offence otherwise we'd be in a police state.

It is still justifiable to bang him up in the meantime, he was crayoning all over an ongoing trial. Turning off the mincing machine before running for the box of Bandaids kinda thing.
 
Will or should?

They've been as absent of their responsibility to report as they could possibly stretch it.

And I'm sure they have their excuses, maybe even ones rooted in legal minutiae. At the end of the day though both the perception and reality is that they are reluctant to report on something which is fundamentally politically incorrect.

None of their excuses save them from collective professional responsibility dating back 40 years.

At the end of the day we appear to have politically correct scumbags in all the wrong places, and the scale of the end result isn't even knowable yet.
There have been hundreds of reports on multiple rape gangs across the entire country, before and after trial splashed all over the internet. I don't watch MSM news or read newspapers so I couldn't comment on whether it's been reported on TV, but what tends to be online gets printed.

The idea that the media are not reporting it is untrue. They didn't investigate it when the allegations were made, that's for certain. I have no doubts that they didn't want to due to political correctness.
 
Baglock said:
This is the crux of the matter for me.

TR is targeting Muslim rapists.

Is there evidence showing the Muslim community commits proportionally more sex crimes than the general population?
As it happens, Tommy Robinson’s stats were those put out by the admirable Muslim-run think-tank Quilliam. Their landmark report from December found that:
‘84 per cent of ‘grooming gang’ offenders were (South) Asian, while they only make up seven per cent of total UK population and that the majority of these offenders are of Pakistani origin with Muslim heritage.’

Why can’t we speak plainly about migrant crime? | Coffee House
Douglas Murray

Earlier this year, the former founder of the English Defence League, Tommy Robinson, was suspended from Twitter for tweeting a statistic about rape-gangs – something that has been much in the news of late. Indeed if we are not merely going to pass around cat photos on social media, discussion of the mass-rape of the nation’s children might seem to be a legitimate activity. Just this week another such gang has been convicted – this time once again in Oxford. Saying ‘rape-gang’ or ‘grooming gang’ is of course itself a get-out. As is the dishonest and deliberately misinforming term ‘Asian rape-gangs’. But it is hard to know what one can say these days. ‘Muslim rape gang’ or ‘Pakistani rape gang’ may be accurate, but it will also bring forth a world of problems – including flaggings on social media. In recent days readers have shown me how they have been suspended from Facebook just for posting my recent Spectator article on ‘Rowleyism’. ‘Rape-gangs’ is certainly a flagged term.

And so it is that anyone interested in anything other than just feeling sad about the latest cache of rape-victims, and who, for instance, wonders about the characteristics of the latest Oxford gang (whether it is, for instance, an average Inspector Morse don-on-don style mystery) must work it out for themselves. They might be lucky and see the photo accompanying the BBC’s report of the story here. Or they may not. And more and more one gets the sense – in France, the UK and elsewhere – that there is a hope that we don’t work it out. Certainly an ever-decreasing number of people appear to be allowed to help us.

As it happens, Tommy Robinson’s stats were those put out by the admirable Muslim-run think-tank Quilliam. Their landmark report from December found that:


‘84 per cent of ‘grooming gang’ offenders were (South) Asian, while they only make up seven per cent of total UK population and that the majority of these offenders are of Pakistani origin with Muslim heritage.’

So the suspension of Tommy Robinson from Twitter for saying this raises a fascinating modern conundrum. Is it possible that there are facts which one person is allowed to say, but another is not? Can it be the case that, because of certain racial or religious characteristics, one person’s statement of facts is another person’s demonstration of prejudice? It is a question which Twitter, among others, has clearly made a judgement on. And that is in the affirmative.


As of Wednesday, Robinson (who had almost half a million followers on the platform) has been suspended from Twitter for good, without explanation. Of course Twitter is a private corporation and can do what it likes, though many users may be surprised at the extent to which it is no longer either a free or apolitical platform. But here is the problem. And it is one I encounter everywhere across our continent.

In Germany friends and readers describe to me how they are learning anew how to read their daily newspapers. When the news says that ‘A person was killed by another person’ for instance, and no names or other identifying characteristics are given, people guess – correctly – that the culprit is probably of migrant background. For the time-being serious crimes are still reported, but the decision has been taken that the public should not really be informed about them. Of course if you were to report them, or mull on them on social media then you would now risk losing that platform. So the media isn’t much use. And social media isn’t either.

In this situation how are we to deal with issues like that of grooming gangs? The communities from which the culprits come don’t seem to want to address the issue. Mainstream society and politics has shown itself repeatedly unwilling and unable to do more than commission further, endless inquiries into these issues. And passing around what facts are known appears to have become difficult (and perhaps in the near future wholly impossible). The social media platforms will say that the facts are passed around in a hateful manner. But it is hard to see how exactly one might frame the mass gang-rape of children in an un-abashedly upbeat fashion.

As it is with rape-gangs, so it is with the nameless, perpetrator-less crimes in Germany. And so eventually it will be with the burning of a Holocaust survivor in her Paris flat. We are still allowed to notice the tragedy. We can observe the passing age. But we are losing the ability – and the right – to point to the pyre. Or to identify it. Even as it mounts.
 
It depends on the particular 'sex crime'. In the case of gangs grooming vulnerable teenagers and young adults then yes muslims commit proportionally more crimes. At least 50-84% dependinhg on the report. There's loads of evidence out there that's just a quick google search away.

Grooming gangs of Muslim men failed to integrate into British society
What do we know about the ethnicity of sexual abuse gangs?
If they were integrated they wouldn't have had to groom them on the streets, they could just abuse there positions as teachers, youth workers, priests etc. No doubt there are cultural issues at play, but they're wider than just those of Muslim migrants.
 
Recent events in the United Kingdom bring the topic of grooming gangs back into the public spotlight. Here's a 60 second video showing you the extent of this problem throughout the past decade.



From Douglas Murray book, The Strange Death of Europe 2017

The January before the release of the 2011 census results a gang of nine Muslim men — seven of Pakistani origin, two from North Africa — were convicted and sentenced at the Old Bailey in London for the sex trafficking of children between the ages of 11 and 15. On that occasion one of the victims sold into a form of modern-day slavery was a girl of 11 who was branded with the initial of her ‘owner’ abuser: ‘M’ for Mohammed. The court heard that Mohammed ‘branded her to make her his property and to ensure others knew about it’. This did not happen in a Saudi or Pakistani backwater, nor even in one of the northern towns that so much of the country had forgotten about and which had seen many similar cases over the same period. This happened in Oxfordshire between 2004 and 2012.​
 
Last edited:
The IRA stood up for what they believed in. “Wrong” is a matter of perspective.
******* hell, talk about moral equivalency. The IRA did not "stand up" for what they believed in ....they carried out a campaign of murder to get their own way.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top