Jump to content
BANGKOK 24 July 2019 00:26
snoop1130

British far-right activist jailed for contempt of court

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, Dumbastheycome said:

So it is ok  with you that the trial of  accused is portrayed  according to an extremist view via social media rather than in a court with the presentation of   factual evidence  versus  defense unhindered by popular  speculative  media ? Innocent  until proven guilty or  guilty until proven innocent? If outcome is  guilty  have the freedom to say what will. Until such time  do  not assume vigilante'  rights.

Who cares what is expressed in social media, whether extremist or not? Can't your British courts distinguish between the two? Or your free and informed populace? Are you going to suppress what your citizens can or cannot say publicly because it might prejudice a jury pool? Are you a bunch of unthinking children?

Edited by OtinPattaya
  • Like 2
  • Confused 2
  • Sad 2

Share this post


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

Who cares what is expressed in social media, whether extremist or not? Can't your British courts distinguish between the two? Or your free and informed populace? Are you going to suppress what your citizens can or cannot say publicly because it might prejudice a jury pool?

The court cares, thats why they had a suppression order. 

 

The short answer to your question is yes. You cannot have a jury influenced by what is said in public, because those comments may be wrong and not subject to rules of evidence.

 

I understand you think its ok to break the laws of the land because you think you know better or that US law is the best ever.

 

Do you live by the laws in thailand or say to a judge that US law is for you.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Mackstask said:

The guy's got ball's to say as it is.  Not like the gutless politicians who are running Great (ha ha) Britain into oblivion.  <deleted> nanny state!

 

         A  Martyr in the making .  He will return a hero . 

         Not part of the establishment ..

        

Edited by elliss
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, OtinPattaya said:

Either you understand the sanctity of freedom of speech or you do not. It's that simple. In America jurors are commonly sequestered but we don't outlaw private citizens or newspapers from posting publicly about the trial because, however prejudicial those posts may be, we hold the freedom of speech as a higher standard, which evidently the UK does not.

lol. That is  obscene! And actually  not  valid.

But it does  explain  the  current POTUS ! lmao

Edited by Dumbastheycome

Share this post


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

The fact that it was the UK and not the US doesn't make it right. Brits on this forum don't seem to have any reservations expressing their opinion about America and its policies. 

Bit even TR said what he was doing was illegal. Live with it.

 

i agree with suppression orders. In oz its illegal to even name a defendant in a pedo case so that the victim cannot be even remotely identified. Its not fair on the victims.

 

but in any event, you are chasing the wrong horse. What he did was illegal, he knew it, yet did it.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He might end up two'd up with the scum he videoed to add to his woes and on the plus side he can continue his interview for authentic journalism 🤔 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, OtinPattaya said:

Either you understand the sanctity of freedom of speech or you do not. It's that simple. In America jurors are commonly sequestered but we don't outlaw private citizens or newspapers from posting publicly about the trial because, however prejudicial those posts may be, we hold the freedom of speech as a higher standard, which evidently the UK does not.

Ok. I have come back to this post. in the US Jurors  are sequestered but the media and public are allowed "comment". The UK  media and public  can also  freely "speculate".

But in the US can you declare they are allowed  to  publish evidential details and pictures of defendants in defiance of a  court ruling  against such?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, Dumbastheycome said:

In what sense? If under the US legal system  he had not contravened law then that be US  law. He  committed an offense under UK law. Knowingly.

I am not about  to get into debate over the US  Constitution. That is a topic which career academics have spent lifetimes debating . However  declaring  it as  some basis  for dispute over juristic  events in the UK  seems a little  desperate

I'm not disputing that Robinson contravened British law, or did so knowingly. But if the pat Brit response to this is, Well, this is British law, end of story--those of you making this so-called argument might  want to refrain  the next time from questioning every American policy with ex cathedra authority. Or maybe the American poster might come back and say, This is America, not your country. End of story.

Edited by OtinPattaya
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...