Jump to content
ri Alban

Tommy Robinson

Recommended Posts

ri Alban

This piece of filth has just put himself in Prison for 13 months for airing information about a private trial. Haha.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SpruceBringsteen

Been various brain donors crying about it the last few days on Twitter.

 

Extremely keen on some aspects of the law, not so much on others are those lads.

 

:whistling:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cade

On a suspended sentence.

Decides to harass lawyers and witnesses at an ongoing trail in an attempt to sway the course of the trial.

A more textbook case of contempt of court you will never see.

 

Back in the clink where he belongs, the brain-dead prick.

 

If he doesn't like the laws in this country, he should leave (that's what he and his fans keep saying after all) ::troll::

Edited by Cade

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JamesM48

Yeah ashamed that I have some brain dead.  / thickos on my Facebook who are supported " our tommy"...Horrendous vile little man 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Barack

Muslim Judge, hopefully...

 

:greggy:

 

 

Edit: Just read about it. Judge doesn't sound very Muslim...Geoffrey Marson...but still:

 

 

:greggy:

Edited by Barack

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dusk_Till_Dawn

An absolute f4nny, as are his thick followers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
iantjambo

A complete ****wit of a man.

The brain dead of social media are of course all in his corner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Smithee

He's a prick, a real nasty piece of work. 

 

But I have to ask...

What's he actually done? I read that he "admitted contempt of court through publishing information that could prejudice a current trial" but I'm not clear on what exactly that information was. 

I've also seen it reported that in the Facebook video "he made comments that risked causing a trial to collapse."

 

A post above mentions harassing lawyers and witnesses but I'm not reading that anywhere else - can anyone expand?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chester™

He'll be fine. After all, prison is a bit of a skoosh. You know, X-Boxes, 60 inch telly's, SKY TV and en suite showers in every room...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cade

We won't be told what he said until the case has been complete, as that would itself be contempt of court.

There is a total reporting ban around the case to try and prevent jurors and others being influenced by what they read, hear or see in the media.

 

He was attempting to film defendants as they entered the court, which would have led to them being identified and their families harassed (exactly what happened when the other two Britain First trumpets got chucked in prison)

Then the case would have collapsed to due to intimidation of witnesses.

 

"Tommy Robinson" (real name Stephen Christopher Yaxley-Lennon) went from arrest outside the court to being charged, tried, convicted and jailed in 5 hours flat.

:jjyay: 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Joey J J Jr Shabadoo

He won't be raising any money for the IRA on the nick. :laugh: Terrorist sympathising scumbag.

Edited by Joey J J Jr Shabadoo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Phil Dunphy
1 minute ago, Joey J J Jr Shabadoo said:

He won't be raising any money for the IRA on the nick. :laugh: Terrorist sympathising scumbag.

 

Are you sure you’re thinking of the right guy?

 

I can’t stand the prick but he was cutting about Sunderland fighting with Celtic fans last summer, was he not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ri Alban
Just now, Phil Dunphy said:

 

Are you sure you’re thinking of the right guy?

 

I can’t stand the prick but he was cutting about Sunderland fighting with Celtic fans last summer, was he not?

Wrong terrorists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JackLadd
4 minutes ago, Joey J J Jr Shabadoo said:

He won't be raising any money for the IRA on the nick. :laugh: Terrorist sympathising scumbag.

 

Load of nonsense you posted there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Phil Dunphy
4 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

Wrong terrorists.

 

Made the EDL considered a terrorist organisation? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bridge of Djoum
8 minutes ago, Joey J J Jr Shabadoo said:

He won't be raising any money for the IRA on the nick. :laugh: Terrorist sympathising scumbag.

You're thinking of Anthony Stokes.

 

Robinson belongs on the other side of the political spectrum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dusk_Till_Dawn

Has to be said though, the authorities have done their bit to martyr dicks like Lennon with the way they’ve handled the various grooming cases. Situation is partly of their making.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Joey J J Jr Shabadoo
2 minutes ago, New York Fleapit said:

You're thinking of Anthony Stokes.

 

Robinson belongs on the other side of the political spectrum.

Stephen Lennon? Him & his brother raised money in Luton, for the IRA. The guy is not all he says he is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Joey J J Jr Shabadoo
7 minutes ago, JackLadd said:

 

Load of nonsense you posted there.

Nope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dusk_Till_Dawn
1 minute ago, Joey J J Jr Shabadoo said:

Stephen Lennon? Him & his brother raised money in Luton, for the IRA. The guy is not all he says he is.

 

You’d almost think the guy was thick as shit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JamesM48

Never trust anyone who changes their name to " Tommy Robinson" ...Did he have a gang of his followers think that Tommy Robinson was a classic name for a white " straight" English male ??  Maybe he should have called himself Viola D, angelo...or something outrageous...evidences his lack of imagination 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Joey J J Jr Shabadoo
5 minutes ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

 

You’d almost think the guy was thick as shit

He's meant to be quite intelligent. 11 o level passes, apparently. No idea about further education.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
niblick1874

The world is finding out about a publication ban on anything to do with the arrest of someone that was reporting on pedophilia rings. They are finding out about the amount of children involved as well as who are involved in these pedophilia rings. They are finding out the truth. They are astonished that this could happen in Britain. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gashauskis9

I8hibs will put up bail, he’ll be out soon enough ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JackLadd
16 minutes ago, Joey J J Jr Shabadoo said:

Nope.

 

Can you get any dumber? You know the edl were founded in support of British military after muslims abused a parade in Luton?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JamesM48
16 minutes ago, Gashauskis9 said:

I8hibs will put up bail, he’ll be out soon enough ?

LOL ive been waiting for this topic since last Friday, 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Governor Tarkin
1 hour ago, Cade said:

 

"Tommy Robinson" (real name Stephen Christopher Yaxley-Lennon) went from arrest outside the court to being charged, tried, convicted and jailed in 5 hours flat.

:jjyay: 

 

 

:pleasing:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Notts1874
31 minutes ago, niblick1874 said:

The world is finding out about a publication ban on anything to do with the arrest of someone that was reporting on pedophilia rings. They are finding out about the amount of children involved as well as who are involved in these pedophilia rings. They are finding out the truth. They are astonished that this could happen in Britain. 

Just when I thought you couldn't stoop any lower you have.

 

You do know about the reporting restrictions that are part of English law.

 

Despicable human being.....and I'm not just talking about that lowlife Robinson.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
niblick1874
2 hours ago, ri Alban said:

This piece of filth has just put himself in Prison for 13 months for airing information about a private trial. Haha.

 

What is the trial about and why is it private. Just who is the piece of filth here. The one that has put his life on the line trying to show us all what has been going on for years by the likes of those that are on trial, or those that are on trial. Why don't you go and ask the devastated parents of the children who the piece of filth is. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
niblick1874
2 minutes ago, Notts1874 said:

Just when I thought you couldn't stoop any lower you have.

 

You do know about the reporting restrictions that are part of English law.

 

Despicable human being.....and I'm not just talking about that lowlife Robinson.

 

Why not tell me all about the law and how I have, in that post, stooped so low.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Notts1874
3 minutes ago, niblick1874 said:

 

Why not tell me all about the law and how I have, in that post, stooped so low.

Nah. Google it sunshine.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dusk_Till_Dawn
10 minutes ago, niblick1874 said:

 

Why not tell me all about the law and how I have, in that post, stooped so low.

 

Reporting restrictions are a fundamental part of the legal system. They apply in virtually every single case to greater or lesser degree depending on the situation. Hence why child defendants are hardly ever named before conviction and sometimes aren’t identified afterwards. Restrictions apply as soon as someone is formally charged. It isn’t Lennon’s prerogative to just ignore the restrictions that are in place for this case.

 

You can question whether the restrictions in this case are reasonable but quite frankly, I doubt you or anyone else on here listened to the judges rationale so it’s a moot point of discussion anyway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Normthebarman
1 minute ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

 

Reporting restrictions are a fundamental part of the legal system. They apply in virtually every single case to greater or lesser degree depending on the situation. Hence why child defendants are hardly ever named before conviction and sometimes aren’t identified afterwards. Restrictions apply as soon as someone is formally charged. It isn’t Lennon’s prerogative to just ignore the restrictions that are in place for this case.

 

You can question whether the restrictions in this case are reasonable but quite frankly, I doubt you or anyone else on here listened to the judges rationale so it’s a moot point of discussion anyway

Not to mention the fact Robinson stated the defendants had been charged with a different crime altogether. The eedjit has, if anything, damaged the chance of a conviction with his antics. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
moogsy
1 minute ago, Normthebarman said:

Not to mention the fact Robinson stated the defendants had been charged with a different crime altogether. The eedjit has, if anything, damaged the chance of a conviction with his antics. 

I doubt deep down be really cares about about the outcome of the trial tbh. 

 

The man is nothing more than an attention seeking f*ckwit. As are most of his acolytes, on here and in real life. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
peter_hmfc
23 minutes ago, niblick1874 said:

 

What is the trial about and why is it private. Just who is the piece of filth here. The one that has put his life on the line trying to show us all what has been going on for years by the likes of those that are on trial, or those that are on trial. Why don't you go and ask the devastated parents of the children who the piece of filth is. 

 

:spoton:

 

He's fully aware of the dangers he faces for criticising Islam and the fates that others have met, a majority on here wouldn't dare criticise it in public no matter how extreme some parts are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dusk_Till_Dawn
14 minutes ago, peter_hmfc said:

 

:spoton:

 

He's fully aware of the dangers he faces for criticising Islam and the fates that others have met, a majority on here wouldn't dare criticise it in public no matter how extreme some parts are.

 

This isn’t about Islam though. It’s about Asian, and predominantly Pakistani, attitudes to white women. The racial aspect is important but not because a lot of the accused are (probably) Muslims

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JamesM48
2 minutes ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

 

This isn’t about Islam though. It’s about Asian, and predominantly Pakistani, attitudes to white women. The racial aspect is important but not because a lot of the accused are (probably) Muslims

I think you may find  some white men's attitude to women/ girls are not dissimilar. I worked in child protection for years and it was mostly white males who abused women / girls 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
peter_hmfc
2 minutes ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

 

This isn’t about Islam though. It’s about Asian, and predominantly Pakistani, attitudes to white women. The racial aspect is important but not because a lot of the accused are (probably) Muslims

 

I was commenting on Tommy Robinson in general.

 

It could be argued though that the Koran gives justification to such acts (sex with children) as the Prophet Mohammed "consumated" his marriage to a 6 year old when she was 9. By the Koran, these people may not consider it a crime at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Normthebarman
19 minutes ago, peter_hmfc said:

 

I was commenting on Tommy Robinson in general.

 

It could be argued though that the Koran gives justification to such acts (sex with children) as the Prophet Mohammed "consumated" his marriage to a 6 year old when she was 9. By the Koran, these people may not consider it a crime at all.

As far as I'm aware, the Koran states it's OK to have sex with girls if they've reached puberty which is a minimum of 9 years old. Crucially though, it also says sex outwith marriage is a sin.

 

Although someone will probably say that since these girls who were abused weren't Muslims as far as I'm aware, the Koran says they're fair game anyway. I'm not even sure if that's true but like most religious books, there's normally some ****ed up shit that sensible people ignore. 

Edited by Normthebarman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
tynietot
1 hour ago, JamesM48 said:

LOL ive been waiting for this topic since last Friday, 

Yes it's a great day for freedom,  unless you're Tommy Robinson! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
peter_hmfc
2 minutes ago, Normthebarman said:

As far as I'm aware, the Koran states it's OK to have sex with girls if they've reached puberty which is a minimum of 9 years old. That just proves my point? 9 years old is fair game? Crucially though, it also says sex outwith marriage is a sin. Okay?

 

Although someone will probably say that since these girls who were abused weren't Muslims as far as I'm aware, the Koran says they're fair game anyway. I'm not even sure if that's true but like most religious books, there's normally some ****ed up shit that sensible people ignore. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Normthebarman
7 minutes ago, peter_hmfc said:

 

I wasn't trying to disprove your point. Backing it up in a way, in fact. The point about sex outside marriage though was that while the Koran has no problem with shagging wee girls, it still prohibits what these men did. So while you could argue it justifies it, it does specifically say it was wrong. 

 

Unless the end bit of my post is correct, in which case it does justify it. In which case, it's a stupid book in my opinion. Although I thought that anyway. 

Edited by Normthebarman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
peter_hmfc
Just now, Normthebarman said:

I wasn't trying to disprove your point. Backing it up in a way, in fact. The point about sex outside marriage though was that while the Koran has no problem with shagging wee girls, it still prohibits what these men did. So while you could argue it justifies it, it does specifically say it was wrong. 

 

Unless the end bit of my post is correct, in which case it does justify it. In which case, it's a stupid book in my opinion. Although I thought that anyway. 

 

Fair point tbh.

 

The second part is :spoton:, but I think that about most religious books.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JamesM48
9 minutes ago, tynietot said:

Yes it's a great day for freedom,  unless you're Tommy Robinson! 

What don't people understand ? he breached his suspended sentence ? so huckled in the jail right away. It would happen to any citizen. He just has a higher profile than most 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dusk_Till_Dawn
37 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

I think you may find  some white men's attitude to women/ girls are not dissimilar. I worked in child protection for years and it was mostly white males who abused women / girls 

 

I get that and what you’re saying is true. But on the specific issue of Asian gangs targeting white women to abuse, the problem was deliberately swept under the carpet for a long time. It does need addressed and it isn’t necessary to qualify every discussion about it by saying ‘white men abuse women too’

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
tynietot

You've got me wrong Jamesm48.

I'm all for the scumbag doing time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Governor Tarkin
1 hour ago, niblick1874 said:

Why don't you go and ask the devastated parents of the children who the piece of filth is. 

 

Two questions.

 

1. Why should we need to go and ask the parents of the children who the piece of filth is? 

 

2. Why can't you get it into your vacuous skull that in the case of Tommy Robinson Vs The Paedo Beasts, being a piece of shit isn't mutually exclusive?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JamesM48
1 minute ago, tynietot said:

You've got me wrong Jamesm48.

I'm all for the scumbag doing time.

apologies. I mist have misread it 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
peter_hmfc
Just now, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

 

I get that and what you’re saying is true. But on the specific issue of Asian gangs targeting white women to abuse, the problem was deliberately swept under the carpet for a long time. It does need addressed and it isn’t necessary to qualify every discussion about it by saying ‘white men abuse women too’

 

:spoton:

 

I would also say to JamesM48 (and this is in no way a dismissal of the great work he does) that the UK is a majority white, therefore a white man abusing a white girl is not exactly the most unlikely circumstances.

 

I can't remember the exact statistics but it was something like 85% of the grroming crimes were committed by Pakistani men who make up around 2% of the population, and this was based on a frightening number of cases. Someone claimed that 100% of another sex crime (I can't remember which) was done entirely by white males, but it turned out there was only six actual offences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...