The case of Tommy Robinson: free speech in the UK
Read about it here, as well as here.
From the latter:
On Friday, British free-speech activist and Islam critic Tommy Robinson was acting as a responsible citizen journalist — reporting live on camera from outside a Leeds courtroom where several Muslims were being tried for child rape — when he was set upon by several police officers. In the space of the next few hours, a judge tried, convicted, and sentenced him to 13 months in jail — and also issued a gag order, demanding a total news blackout on the case in the British news media. Robinson, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, was immediately taken to Hull Prison.
From the former:
On Friday, he was standing outside a courthouse where several Muslims were on trial for sex-related crimes, “reporting” on the trial via Facebook live, when he was arrested for breaching the peace…I think what happened is that the judge imposed a 13-month prison term that had been suspended, arising out of a similar incident…
British laws protecting free speech are very different from here; I’ve written about that topic before. In this country the protection is far more robust. In fact, I’d go so far as to say that there is no country in the world that protects free speech to the extent that the US does. So what is puzzling to Americans about the Robinson story may not be as puzzling to Brits. However, it’s should be just as frightening, and just as chilling.
It is very frightening and chilling – and it seems to me that is the way “our betters” in the UK want it – silence any opposition to their grand schemes by any means necessary.
The almost total news blackout has been scary – very scary.
I was very glad to see that some (hard to tell if it is a large crowd or not) are protesting his arrest. I guess the gag order on the news media means they can still report on the protests, no?
Would really want to hear from anyone in the UK how it is really playing out over there.
Although it is the top story on Drudge, and is receiving some attention on social media, so far there has been no mention of this truly frightening abuse of the power of the state (and of the judge in question) in the NYT or the Washington Post, or even the WSJ.
Considerations of abuse of civil liberties aside, it amazes me that a Judge would take such action in the wake of the Rotherham cover-up. Talk about bad optics. It appears that British Judges are immune from introspection, as well as from public opinion or judicial review.
The matter of Tommy Robinson goes far beyond its surface import.
The judge who sentenced Robinson was above looking out a window down upon them SMILING with delight as the 7 British police arrested Robinson. The judge KNOWS that he has effectively condemned Robinson to death for his ‘crime’ of “breaching the peace’…
As Robinson has been put among the general population, which is heavily Muslim jihadist in nature. There are reports that the guards threw Robinson in a room with four of them and as the jihadists beat him up they told him they were going to kill him.
That’s already happened to the man who put the rasher of bacon on the front door handle of a Mosque.
The ‘judge’ also has issued a ‘legal’ edict that the media is forbidden “upon pain of law” from reporting upon Robinson’s imprisonment or of what is happening to him in prison.
It is no longer a possibility, the UK is now a Police State, where political correctness is mandatory with violations resulting in imprisonment.
In London alone, hundreds of people have been brought up on charges of ‘hate speech’.
Seems somehow that the British decided the see no evil, speak no evil, hear no evil monkey figurines should be the operating law of the land.
Anyway, according to modern utilitarian philosophy, evil is relative and besides it doesn’t exist, so no worries. It’s the greater good that’s important… although that doesn’t appear to exist either.
Wacky. I have difficulty imagining British authorities so bent they would do this or allow it.
Thank God for the First Amendment. And the rest of the Bill of Rights.
Tommy Robinson has a book.
It is called Tommy Robinson Enemy of the State
He probably needs all the help he can get right now, and it’s available online through Neo…
Product description:
“The powerful story of Tommy Robinson, former leader of the EDL and a man persecuted by the British state, simply for standing up in support of British troops. Tommy describes growing up on the streets of Luton, a town plagued by Islamic extremism and criminal gangs and how his livelihood was taken from him when he led a street protest against it. Hounded through the courts and thrown to the Muslim underworld which runs England’s prisons, when Tommy refused to be broken the police tried to blackmail him — into working for them.”
Britain: Not “Great” any more.
Legal Insurrection has a post where the defense brought up the danger Robinson would face in prison. The judge is quoted as saying, “… a very large part of me thinks, so what?”
This judge is supposedly the same who has placed the gag order on the press for the incident.
American outlets of good will need to hammer at this story so Brits of good will will get the message.
Also, the name and address of the judge must be made public. Sunlight = disinfectant.
Here’s Breitbart link with good background on Tommy Robinson.
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/12/11/enemy-of-the-state-tommy-robinsons-new-book-says-he-believes-the-state-tried-to-have-him-killed/
The current arrest/incarceration is not out of the blue, but only the latest turn of the screw. However, the press gagging is new.
Reminds me of “Cool Hand Luke.” The authorities are clearly out to break Robinson because he has challenged their authority.
Which seems to be their top priority. See the poor kids forced to die by the UK system despite their parents’ desperate attempts to regain custody so the children can be treated elsewhere.
Nope. The state’s power takes precedence over all.
All power corrupts. By the mercy of God, perhaps less so here than elsewhere, like Britain where a judge smiles down upon one peaceful man arrested by seven (!) Bobbies, knowing he has the power to throw this upstart to the jihadi wolves and will shortly do just that.
Evil is afoot in the land, despite the distraction of a prince’s wedding to a woman of color, delicious though she may be.
The Catholic Church has its saints and martyrs for good reasons, and unlike Islam, these do not ascend to sit at the right hand of God the Father by virtue of murder and rape, but by humility, charity and service to others. I give you St. Mother Teresa as an example.
Islam in England is the 2nd largest religion, after Christianity. A Muslim, Khan, is mayor of London. But who is a Christian in England today? Not the young, and not the people who object to official Church of England homophilia. The churches stand empty.
Ireland in one generation has renounced Christianity, with an overwhelming vote by the young to murder unborn children at the whim of the mother, too busy screwing to observe biological niceties. “That was good! And your name is…?”
A price will be paid.
London will slowly become the New Islamabad.
eeyore:
That comment by the judge was made in a case involving Robinson last year (May 2017) that was also about filming, and the full quote is this:
The judge’s full ruling and sentencing remarks in that case are worth a read.
eeyore,
It is indeed the same judge.
Art Deco,
Judge Geoffrey Marson QC
Ann,
It’s a death sentence and that is the ‘judge’s’ intent.
Odd way of bringing about a “death sentence” wish — the judge gave him only a three-month suspended sentence last year.
Also, that judge was Heather Norton, not Geoffrey Marson.
I am afraid before long it will be, “Another bites the dust”, however this time it will be and adult male they decided to impose their will upon. What a crock, I think we should request that he granted asylum due to dangerous political circumstances and if they won’t release him perhaps we should think about a Delta Force Rescue to save his life.
And now you know why in 1776 we decided to make a nation and get rid of those folks. The kind of people who granted the vote to the chosen only, from time time killed off their kings and queens for the better good of all and up into the last century would read the common folk the riot act before unleashing the military on them.
I love my English heritage and I think we took the best from them and now they have just about pissed away all that was left. It does break one’s heart.
I saw Robinson on Toutube a few months ago. He was driven through the neighborhood in which he grew up, and when the automobile slowed some bearded imam came up to the passenger window and punched Robinson in the face.
Western Europe used to be a nice place.
It’s dead to me now.
The wedding the other weekend was more “bread & circuses” while the Panem dwellers cracked down on the denizens of the Districts.
Wait until the cathedrals & L’ouvre are in flames…
Ann:
There is so much that’s troubling about this case I hardly know where to begin. The idea that someone can be put in prison for filming the area around a trial, and for supposedly trying (not succeeding) in taking photos of the defendants, is ridiculous, and a news blackout on the news of the imprisonment is almost worse (maybe it is worse). What’s up with this “news blackout” business? If they fear a jury is so easily swayed—by a private citizen posting his opinions on social media, or by newspapers posting news of the arrest—then if they’re going to do anything just sequester the jury rather than muzzle the country and its press.
Sounds like what Erdogan has done to the free press in Turkey.
Puzzling, indeed.
My wife and I were traveling in Scotland three years ago this summer. While in a biggish city, Inverness or, perhaps, Edinburgh, I can’t remember which, we came across a group of kindergarten aged kids with their teachers or minders. They were very cute, all walking along while holding on to a tether between the two adult leaders. My wife set about taking a photo of the scene only to be interrupted, very aggressively, but sympathetically, by one of the leaders. She explained that taking photos of young children in public was against the law; some sort of scheme to protect children. Violating this law subjects one to some very serious and long-term punishment.
This is a very strange, bizarre situation to me.
What do we do? Other than voting conservative, I’m stumped.
neo writes fine posts on it all, yet I sense a weariness from her too.
I can’t work up much indignation any more. I can’t believe the stories I keep reading, but they just keep getting worse and the libs/progs/whatever keep spiraling further off from what I consider reality.
It’s still not clear to me if the kangaroo court treatment was tied to his suspended sentence from a court in another part of the country. (Will be interested to hear from someone familiar with the law and this case.) It would not be excusable but would at least relieve some of the kafka-esque stench of this travesty. Arrested and in prison for 13 months in a few hours. Apparently, he was before the judge for less than 5 minutes. They trumped up a mortgage fraud case to put him in prison before. This time it is done without a trial. There was a time when East Germany or the Soviet Union could be shamed in the international arena for behavior like this.
I’ve heard that his fans in the UK are livid and that even his non-fans and liberal people are shocked to see this kind of authoritarian treatment in their country. The powers that be, who want to repress a full realization by the public of the “grooming” gangs because they looked the other way while it was happening, may be trying to cross a bridge too far in their repression of the decent people of the UK. They may have mistakenly alerted the frog in the pot of simmering water. The gag on any discussion of his case should be shocking to any sentient person.
At stake is whether the only people in the UK whom the government responds to are those who threaten disorder. That threat has given criminals of the muslim persuasion the impression that the norms of 1000 years of English culture do not apply to them. It is an affront that cannot be abided if a culture that includes such things as free speech and protection of children is to survive in Great Britain. (and other places)
Ezra Levant gives as good an overview as I have seen in this report on youtube https://youtu.be/bxAk2jGVcZM
“Seems somehow that the British decided…”
It’s called fear.
And when thugs and bullies feel it, they attack those who can be attacked with—so they believe—impunity.
In such cases, the authorities will invoke “rule of law”, “love of country”, “morality” and “public order” (and in some cases, “the word of God”) to rationalize and defend their thuggishness.
To defend their thuggishness and to sustain their delusions…”for the public good”.
Somehow, “the people” will have to push back, will have to defy these delusions and vote in a government that is clear sighted (all things being relative).
The Italians, to be sure, tried to do this—and succeeded!—only a few days ago but they’ve been thus far rebuffed by a panicking Old Guard. It remains to be seen who will have the last laugh in this unprecedented political opera buffa.
Let the Brits be the Brits. Like the USSR, the EU, and the People’s Republic of China, Great Britain has a different way of free speech. And unlike with the EU and USSR, Britain has no constitutional protections for speech.
What do we do? Other than voting conservative, I’m stumped. Beats me. I know what the Founding Fathers did, but Britain is another country.
What Barry said
oww!
Apparently in the UK there are all kinds of legal restrictions on the reporting of court cases. Googling quickly for evidence of that, I find this BBC guide for journalists: http://www.bbc.co.uk/academy/journalism/article/art20130702112133645
In a certain sense, these restrictions are understandable — might keep people from having their reputations ruined needlessly, when they are falsely accused. One could also argue that too much press about a case can influence the outcome. Etc.
But these crimes have been covered up by the authorities, which puts a very different face on things.
Quite a good example of the law of unintended consequences. Good intentions can lead to bad policy.
https://ymarsakar.wordpress.com/2018/05/08/european-lack-of-free-speech-on-ww2/
That reminds me of another incident I saw about free speech in the UK, well EU.
It’s kinda like Snowden’s story, duplicated for other nations and their status quo.
Ann,
The three month sentence was a warning. Robinson didn’t let it frighten him off, so now they’ve decided to murder him while maintaining “plausible deniability”. Letting imprisoned jihadists do the dirty deed for them, so that the “authorities” can claim to have clean hands. While a media blackout provides cover until it becomes “yesterday’s news”.
Your lack of moral outrage speaks ill of your character and apologetics for the UK’s Police State tactics brings shared moral culpability to its supporters.
Looks like the outrage meter is pegged at “11”
As j e indicated above, there is scant coverage of this event in the MSM. In the initial hours of Neo’s post and while it was the lede at Drudge, searching the NYT website for any mention of Tommy Robinson returned no results.
Huxley:
“What do we do? Other than voting conservative, I’m stumped.
neo writes fine posts on it and all, yet I sense a weariness from her too.”
This here’s where it gets bad. See, when enough people, the rational people who would rather ‘all just get along’ start feeling this resignation and weariness, well, that’s bad folks.
Because the people who don’t want to get along are ahead of that curve. Violence is on the horizon.
Regarding Ann,
I tried to reason with her once. She either ignored the attempts or didn’t see them. But I sense she just retreated.
I sense that Ann is a coward at heart. She senses the way the wind is blowing and feels the tyrants will prevail. She’d rather be on their good side.
Let her. May fortune forget she was our countryman.
LOL. Not sure why autocorrect turned ‘posterity’ into ‘fortune’. But that’s what I get for trying to comment on a blog from my phone with giant sausage fingers.
Those reporting restrictions have now been lifted. You can read some of what was said in court during his sentencing hearing here.
…posterity…”
Might it have spell-checked the word you typed, converting it to “prosperity”, and then possibly used an automatically implemented thesaurus (or editor) to change “prosperity” to “fortune”?
(Do they even do things like that?)
“Wise-guy phone”, I guess….
“I sense there is a disturbance in the force,” or something. “Burn the witch! She turned me into a newt! …. I got better.”
I don’t know Ann and don’t often agree with her, but, oh well, who will cast the first stone?
Ann,
They lifted the restrictions? That’s nice.
You seem to be able to scrape up some serious disapproval for our President’s tweets, but seem awfully unperturbed by the actions of the British Courts, even before the restrictions were lifted.
I give some credence to the court’s concerns about Robinson’s action perhaps prejudicing the outcome of the trial. I also agree with what this particular sentencing judge said: “Everyone understands the right to freedom of speech but there are responsibilities and obligations.”
Ann,
How does reporting on a trial prejudice the outcome of a trial? We manage to report on court cases every day here in the States.
Give the judge all the credence you want. I give him none at all.
If anyone is interested in reading it, the UK’s full Contempt of Court Act 1981 is here. It covers the whole shebang, including reporting and how it may prejudice a trial.
Ann:
I already read that and responded. That stupid rule is part of Britain’s lack of free speech and free press—if a jury is unduly influenced by reporting, then they should sequester the jury, not gag reporting.
No wonder we are so confused.
Robinson’s judge at the trial transcribed at this link allowed that the officials in a previous event had told him he could film at court, whereas the officials in the present case (May 2017) told him he could not, and he was in contempt for ignoring the current orders.
And then she said this:
” Moreover, notwithstanding
anything you may have been told elsewhere, at this
court you were told in clear and uncertain terms on
more than one occasion that you could not film. ”
Idiom fail by the judge or the transcriber?
https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/coc-yaxley-lennon-20170522.pdf
page 10.
Protecting the integrity of legal proceedings is a reasonable goal. But the trial that Tommy Robinson was reporting was at the verdict phase. What the British state is really trying to gag is anyone calling attention to the down side of muslim immigration and multiculturalism. The UK government seems to have gone full 1984. As long as this continues, Britain is not a free country any more than Poland or Czechoslovakia or East Germany were three decades ago. Political correctness has the same tyrannical effect as occupation by the USSR once did.