Jump to content

  • Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with LinkedIn Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Njord | Market - Classifieds

08:00 Tuesday 11th Dec

Thank you for your continued patience. Shetlink is happy to announce the launch of Njord | Market as an upgraded and focused software development for the local Shetland classifieds market.

With your Shetlink login details, all classifieds, private messages, and invoices can now all be accessed through the new Njord | Market system. Please see Njord | Market FAQ for more details.

Photo

Tommy Robinson stitched-up


  • Please log in to reply
81 replies to this topic

#1 rgibson

rgibson

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 30 posts

Posted 29 May 2018 - 12:47 AM

Any thoughts on the D-Notice calling for a media blackout?

 

 

All UK news sources being forced to take down stories, edit stories and not report on either the arrest of Tommy or the Court Procedings where the Muslim/Pakistani grooming gangs case was being finalised.

 

 

 



#2 Scorrie

Scorrie

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1242 posts

Posted 29 May 2018 - 04:15 AM

Do you have any links to the source of this info?



#3 Colin

Colin

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2113 posts

Posted 29 May 2018 - 06:00 AM

Links all over the 'net



#4 redrobbie

redrobbie

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 319 posts

Posted 29 May 2018 - 07:06 AM

Any thoughts on the D-Notice calling for a media blackout?

 

 

All UK news sources being forced to take down stories, edit stories and not report on either the arrest of Tommy or the Court Procedings where the Muslim/Pakistani grooming gangs case was being finalised.

Its completely illegal to report anything about this case so you might be getting a dawn raid from the boys in blue .



#5 Colin

Colin

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2113 posts

Posted 29 May 2018 - 07:36 AM

So much for freedom of speech...  Whether you agree with the man or not, he is entitled to an opinion.  Smells like a PC type stitch up to me.


  • Suffererof1crankymofo likes this

#6 redrobbie

redrobbie

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 319 posts

Posted 29 May 2018 - 09:08 AM

How they think they can keep this all secret in the age of the internet is a mystery . Its a sad day when you have to depend on Alex Jones or Fox news to find out what is happening in our own country . 


  • Suffererof1crankymofo likes this

#7 Johns68

Johns68

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts

Posted 29 May 2018 - 09:08 AM

Freedom of speech does not entitle you to live stream anything from inside a court building that may compromise the case in question. He already has a court order for doing this, hence his arrest for the repeat offence.

#8 redrobbie

redrobbie

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 319 posts

Posted 29 May 2018 - 09:15 AM

He was not in a court building and he said nothing that was not already in the public domain . Do you think its normal to be arrested charged convicted and sent to jail in under 2 hours and then to have a blanket gagging order on the whole thing . He will probably be killed as the jail he has been sent to is full of people who want him dead . There is a petition to free him which has got half a million signatures in under 24 hours .


  • Suffererof1crankymofo likes this

#9 Johns68

Johns68

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts

Posted 29 May 2018 - 09:25 AM

His chance to become a martyr to his cause then.

#10 redrobbie

redrobbie

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 319 posts

Posted 29 May 2018 - 12:51 PM

The dam is beginning to crumble https://www.independ...n-a8374121.html



#11 Ghostrider

Ghostrider

    1crankymofo

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9047 posts

Posted 29 May 2018 - 01:03 PM

Freedom of speech does not entitle you to live stream anything from inside a court building that may compromise the case in question.

 

How the hell does anybody manage to do that. If its a public hearing its all in the public domain immediately, so streaming anything doesn't let anybody know anything they'd not be equally able to go and find out for themselves as soon by attending. If its a private hearing, nobody should be attending it other than Court appointed or sanctioned people, not random jurnos.


  • Suffererof1crankymofo likes this

#12 Suffererof1crankymofo

Suffererof1crankymofo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 692 posts

Posted 29 May 2018 - 03:34 PM

Censoring Sinn Fein didn't work (you would have thought Big Brother would have learnt their lesson from that) so why they think press reporting on a trial and gagging the media is going to work beats me; it's like taking a sledgehammer to a hazelnut because it doesn't work.  It doesn't matter what anyone's opinions are on Tommy but to me, the whole thing stinks.  He wasn't inciting racism.  He wasn't interfering with a court case; hell, the jury had already been selected.

 

The Defendants were effing and blinding at him, stating what they were gonna do to his mum - were they charged too with a public order offence or are they above the law?  Complaints can be made to the relevant police authority if you have any faith in the system, that is.



#13 jz

jz

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 456 posts

Posted 29 May 2018 - 08:08 PM

Could the supporters of Tommy Robinson please read https://thesecretbar...impression=true
Thank you.
  • tirvaluk and Johns68 like this

#14 Ghostrider

Ghostrider

    1crankymofo

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9047 posts

Posted 29 May 2018 - 10:18 PM

^ Leaving aside the specifics of this case, I'm still struggling to see how anybody not directly involved in a trail can 'put a trial in jeopardy', IF the judge and jury are doing their jobs properly and following instructions properly, and if they're not, they have no business being in those roles.

 

Disrupt and delay a trial, yes, very possibly, but make it fail completely. I'm not seeing it.

 

That aside, with modern technology 'reporting restrictions' are farcical and the courts need to try and catch up with the times, if they can. Long gone are the days that all the judge needed to do was instruct the press attending not to report on anything until a verdict was reached, and it was pretty much a done deal. Now-a-days any Tom, Dick or Harry can publish or broadcast just about anything to the whole world in real time, and before any court realised it was happening let alone figured out who was doing it, the horse would be long since bolted.

 

To briefly touch on the specific case, you have to ask yourself, if this had been Caucasians on trial for the same thing, and a Muslim had behaved in the way this Robinson character has, would the outcome have been identical? In a fair and just society, the answer would obviously be 'Yes', however, I have significant doubts that would be the answer in ours right now.


Edited by Ghostrider, 29 May 2018 - 10:47 PM.

  • George. likes this

#15 Scorrie

Scorrie

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1242 posts

Posted 30 May 2018 - 04:11 AM

He's not been 'stitched up' at all.

 

He knew what he was doing.

 

He knows exactly why he's been arrested despite the staged innocent blustering.

 

There is no other agenda here apart from that of the EDL thug.

 

Well done the courts for jumping on him and good riddance.


  • tirvaluk likes this

#16 Scorrie

Scorrie

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1242 posts

Posted 30 May 2018 - 04:15 AM

https://thesecretbar...tommy-robinson/



#17 Ghostrider

Ghostrider

    1crankymofo

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9047 posts

Posted 30 May 2018 - 09:43 AM

He's not been 'stitched up' at all.

 

He knew what he was doing.

 

I'm not going to argue with that. However the statute(s) concerned, and especially the interpretation of them by the powers that be fall well short of giving you the warm and fuzzies about it all.

 

He maybe had it coming, and he maybe deserves it, but you need to take him out with a slam dunk, not something contrived, opportunistic and somewhat staged as this comes across as.

 

If you choose to turn a blind eye towards anything that appears less than 100% squeaky clean because 'the means justifies the end', which appears to be the attitude of some on this, you've started out down that slippery slope.


Edited by Ghostrider, 30 May 2018 - 09:47 AM.


#18 Wheelsup

Wheelsup

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 363 posts

Posted 30 May 2018 - 10:39 AM

It’s a difficult situation. You think you’re the defender of free speech , yet your then in danger of supporting the nazis. In this case I am happy leave it to the courts.

#19 redrobbie

redrobbie

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 319 posts

Posted 30 May 2018 - 11:02 AM

What was it exactly that he said that got him sent to jail .Was it because he read out the names and charges of the defendants  ? This information was published by both the Huddersfield examiner and the BBC on their web page . Are they going to jail ?http://www.bbc.co.uk...ngland-39580591



#20 Suffererof1crankymofo

Suffererof1crankymofo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 692 posts

Posted 30 May 2018 - 11:32 AM

This is codswallop.  Reporting restrictions normally mean you don't name the victims but can name the defendants.  In addition, trials are frequently heard around the UK at the same time.  Are you seriously insinuating that our justice system is so flaky that it can cope with simultaneous arrests but can't cope with defendants being filmed going into court?  That's the real crime here, the total cover up, let's have our head in the sand approach.

 

It's fine for other defendants to be filmed with a blanket over their heads entering court.  It's been fine to have blow by blow accounts of what's been going down in the Old Bailey on other rape cases too.  There's been numerous occasions when this has been done.

I also saw on Facebook a group of Sikhs who were quietly sitting in the public gallery of one of the courts, the one making the Facebook video appearing to be a rather 'mature, elderly' gentleman.  They had attended a particular Trial for more than one day.  But if my memory serves me correctly, on the last day they were asked to leave because the defendant felt intimidated and upset by their presence.  Well, if found guilty (not sure of the result) then I'm pretty sure that their VICTIMS felt rather intimidated and upset by their actions.  Since when has standing in the dock been a comfortable experience?

This is not about Tommy Robinson.  This is about the systematic failure to recognise the collosal scale of the travesties affecting young girls and women throughout the UK.  Do we seriously want to live in a land whereby people are ejected from court for doing nothing wrong simply because of the colour of their skin and their religion?