Can anyone give me a non biased timeline of the Tommy Robinson events?

[URaflutteringcunt]

I know it’s all online to read, but any google search throws up a hundred articles about different court cases and different retrials and I just want to know a non biased time line of that actually happened. There are so many “free Tommy” articles that I can’t see the wood for the trees.

I know who he is vaguely, I know he splits opinion, and I understand that he is hailed as some kind of spokesperson for the right, but with regard to this particular incident, what exactly happened?

I don’t want a bun fight or anything FWIW I don’t like him, I just a straight timeline of events really. EVen the BBC explanation doesn’t include his being on parole for previous convictions which I assume is relevant?

The irony is he has convicted paedophiles amongst his supporters. They really are filth and don't deserve any airtime.

In think part of the procedural issues was that there was confusion as to what exactly the contempt of court second time around was! (He was initially arrested for breach of the peace I think.) I did read coverage of the appeal but I'm no lawyer as you can tell.

If you want the right story google the appeal court judgement in August.

thesecretbarrister.com/2018/08/01/the-tommy-robinson-judgment-what-does-it-all-mean/

Although the current source of his income is a little hazy.

You will get a slanted view from either Ezra Levant and the Secret Barrister.

I don't think the Secret Barrister is slanted? Their book (and from my recollection of their account of the Tommy saga at the time) is very much focused on the law and its application.

I'm trying to keep an open mind on this. Difficult when some posters are making unsubstantiated (from what I can see) claims and name calling. There is a full interview with Ezra Lavant (can't find it again at the moment) where TR explains how he was moved from a low risk prison to the highest Muslim populated prison in the country, which caused near riots and daily death threats against him, his children and wife.

I don't think TR/S-L or whatever name he has on his passport (and there have been several) is the most reliable narrator.

Woah, that's very revealing.

For anyone tempted to believe that Yaxley-Lennon and his team were just naive about the law and didn't understand... nope.

Seems like they not only understand the law but were gaming it:

However, the Court of Appeal, following the appeal hearing last month, came into receipt of “late disclosure”, which showed that “a deliberate tactical decision was made by [Robinson’s] legal advisers at Canterbury to be complicit in the court’s failure to comply with Rule 48.”

thesecretbarrister.com/2018/08/01/the-tommy-robinson-judgment-what-does-it-all-mean/

The Court of Appeal was not impressed, telling Robinson:

“It lies ill in the mouth of an appellant to complain of the failure of the court below to follow the appropriate procedural steps when that failure was fully appreciated at the time and remained deliberately uncorrected for tactical reasons and collateral advantage.”

The Court added that the new barristers instructed for the appeal were unaware of this until after the appeal hearing, and disclosed it promptly when it came to their attention.

In any case, the Court of Appeal said that nothing procedurally was flawed in Canterbury. The judge had adjourned the contempt hearing for 12 days to allow time for him to take legal advice. Any failure to follow the CrimPR was immaterial.

The appeal against the Canterbury contempt was therefore dismissed.

thesecretbarrister.com/2018/08/01/the-tommy-robinson-judgment-what-does-it-all-mean/

His latest publicity stunt/claims to support victims of crime jeopardised the very court cases he was yapping on about to his fans, meaning the alleged victims would have been unable to have the closure of a verdict and would have gone through the whole traumatic process for nothing. All so that arrogant idiot could feed his own ego

Well, ego feeding is one possibility. Stupidity is another.

A third is that he knew full well what he was doing, and did it because he actually wanted the trial to collapse. If you think about what outcome would've been most useful to him politically and optimum to spin, Muslim paedos let off on technicality that I caused is right up there.

I'd like to hope it was stupidity and arrogance, rather than a calculated willingness to see abuse victims deprived of justice and potentially dangerous men right back on the streets for political gain. But who knows?

Rochdale, Rotherham, Telford etc, Muslim Pakistani Men have been grooming young White girls for years at least he’s not too scared to talk about it unlike our Social Workers and Politicians. If it was the other way round there would be Hell to pay, it wasn’t Contempt of Court he said nothing. One law for some another law for others, hardly fair British Justice.

It was contempt of court ucantpo and the grooming including Asian girls as well. Far from being a "brave hero" talking about such incidents he actually risked a mistrial.

Assigned unhappily I suspect the third option.

A short while after his imprisonment MN and other social media were spammed with the message "Shock horror: establishment throws hero Tommeh in prison, lets this man [recently released brown criminal] go free."

It smelt pre-organised to me, that they had the message and bots/trolls ready to roll and had had to make a last minute substitution when they didn't get their desired "result" – but I wondered if that was just my nasty suspicious mind.

Now that I've seen his team was knowledgeable and was gaming the courts, it suddenly seems much more likely.

I really hope it isn't true. But it's a possibility that has to be considered.

How was it not contempt of court ucant?

And I'm glad I'm not the only one who noticed what a lot Robinson had to gain by the trial collapsing.

One law for some another law for others, hardly fair British Justice.

This is exactly the attitude I have seen online but only with videos of TR ranting about how he has been treated as evidence for it. Thats why I wanted a clear and straight timeline to make what happened make sense to me. That’s been provided and shown that he did commit contempt and his appeal isn’t even based on a denial of that, just of the handling of the charge.

Can I just ask if you have anything that backs up that view (that isn’t from TR himself ie independent) or have you read the same links above and come to that conclusion?

Having seen all this in a straight timeline, I am wondering if it is the third option AssignedNorthernAtBirth.

I switched on that live YouTube thing and it was either just some buses going past while people stood on the street or Katie Hopkins talking to someone I didn’t know

Rochdale, Rotherham, Telford etc, Muslim Pakistani Men have been grooming young White girls for years at least he’s not too scared to talk about it unlike our Social Workers and Politicians. If it was the other way round there would be Hell to pay, it wasn’t Contempt of Court he said nothing. One law for some another law for others, hardly fair British Justice

It was contempt of court. He had already been convicted of doing the same thing at another court case.

He pled guilty to contempt of court. If it wasn’t contempt, surely not guilty would have been a better option? It’s not like he doesn’t know how courts work, he’s been there before...

Yes there were mistakes with rotherham etc. Yes social workers, police etc should be held to account. But people have now been brought to trial. And tommeh’s actions could cause a mistrial, and those people could well walk free.

So what is Tommeh’s intent? if he wants these people to go to prison like he says, then why do something that could cause years of work and months of court action to completely collapse? The rest of the media weren’t “exposing” the trial because they know better.

He’s a hypocrite.