What crime EatTheRich? What crime?
He has committed no crime - no crime at all unless you are saying the the whole media, at any given court case, asking any defendant as they go into court to hear their verdict 'what do you feel about your verdict' is criminal --- well? Is that a crime? Only one member of our Media, a journalist from the Beeb, said that they felt very uncomfortable about the verdict because it was something she had done, herself, many many times. The rest are crowing at this Stalinesque Show Trial and NOT telling the truth - even in details such as the victims being underage girls, as young as 11 - the BBC was calling them 'the women' and reporting in such a way as to make the peado rapists the poor victims of Tommy Robinson - they are also reporting that Tommy said 'nasty things' to the defendants as they entered court, which is totally untrue --- the opposite is true. I was watching the live stream that morning, dunno why I was doing a law assignment and flicking on line - and I watched it from beginning to end - He asked the Police if he was OK to film and where he could stand - they said 'you're ok' - and he only asked the defendants 'how do you feel about the verdicts' - to which they answered 'I'll fu'ck your mother's fanny' and ' your wife is a whore' and such like.
If Tommy was guilty of that which they have have tried him for three times now it would be a civil offence anyway not criminal.
14 cases were being heard in the Old Bailey that day 13 murders and Tommy's - WTF does that tell you? What is a poxy little contempt case doing being tired in the highest criminal court of the Land? And for the third time on the same offence? Trial one was found unsafe, legally - even though he spent nearly 3 months in solitary as a criminal, where the offence was civil. Trial 2 the judge was uncomfortable with it and referred the case back to the AG and now we have trial three ----
Guilty count 1) Of causing anxiety to a defendant, as they entered court, by asking ''hey lads, how do you feel about the verdict, Count 2) ditto over the taking of a photo = causing anxiety to defendant so that they may fear coming to court and so more police may be necessary in order for said defendant not to be fearful of coming to court [ that day he, defendant, went straight to jail for his hand in the serial rape and torture of 16 underage girls]
Count 3 - that he read out the names and charges against all 29 defendants which the defence argued was already in the public domain ( BBC and various News papers) for which no one may, under the law, be prosecuted -- 'No', said the judge 'that is wrong' Huh? The law is wrong?! She said she will explain it fully next week - day of sentencing is the 11th, this coming Thursday, giving Tommy six days instead of the usual six weeks to prepare his appeal without a full explanation for the verdict.
Both of the first two cases denied Tommy risked the trial collapsing --- so forget that bull shit! Even Judge Marson said that Tommy did not endanger the trial. The whole thing hinges on whether there was a reporting restriction in place or not, outside the one on publishing verdicts until the three phase trial was over, which is irrelevant here because no-one argues that it was broken, it wasn't: The Officer of Leeds Crown Court told the Old Bailey Court that due to a failure on the part of her office there was NO notice of a reporting restriction given to the media or up on and court notice boards ( it should have been up in three places in court) - the judge said that Tommy should have assumed, should have known, that there might have been a reporting restriction on the case and was therefore guilty of substantive recklessness --- Until recently no-one has been imprisoned for contempt of court for 60 yrs. Very recently a woman was given a 12 week custodial sentence, half to be sat inside and half on licence so 6 weeks for 26 counts of wilful contempt of court ( a human rights thing which we can't talk about because of all of these fu'cking secret trials we have here now).
In every court room in our country now, all over the country these Muslim rape gang trials are going on and on all of them there is now a reporting restriction and even before there was the press never reported the details of the cases, just occasionally they reported the defendants names and charges before the case - then silence during the trials - then the sentences only at the end of the trials - so few of us know the details which are horrific - children hanging in freezers used to terrorize other children ( if you don't do as we say and keep your mouth shut, you are next) - the tortures - the multiple rapes, how the fu'ck does an 11 year old even take 50 men a night? - the kidnaps and murders and most perps still walking around and called 'the untouchables' by the community - they stride around as though they own the country - which in parts they do and they will tell you 'get out of our country, this is our country now'.
This is real EatTheRich - IF they send Tommy to prison again we do not expect to see him alive again.
As a ps on Tommy's asking for asylum 1) his family will be without protection and there have been multiple and real threats to their lives - at one point Tommy was put in the same room in one prison with the men doing 20 yrs for trying to murder his family - but I think the plea is mainly to bring attention to the reality that we now, here, live in a totalitarian state.