Tommy Robinson (3 Viewers)

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

So these crimes are not being covered by the media so Tommy Robinson is been given lots of air time by the media for trying to bring them to public attention? That statement is contradictory.

Tommy Robinson has been given loads of air time by media publications (such as the Independent) that wish him to be in jail for their percieved notion that he is a racist etc... They have shown little or no interest in the actual crimes he was trying to report on, which is a large part of the issue for me. They weren't interested in the first place, and now he got himself arrested the media only want to focus on him, not about what he was trying to reveal which is surely much more important.

 

---

[clint van damme]

Tommy Robinson has been given loads of air time by media publications (such as the Independent) that wish him to be in jail for their percieved notion that he is a racist etc... They have shown little or no interest in the actual crimes he was trying to report on, which is a large part of the issue for me. They weren't interested in the first place, and now he got himself arrested the media only want to focus on him, not about what he was trying to reveal which is surely much more important.

there are loads of articles on grooming gangs on the Independent web page. I have no way of knowing if that means they have given them adequate coverage or not but to say they have shown little or no interest in the actual crimes isn't true.

 

[duffer]

I disagree with you.

Just because a journalist eventually outed what was being hidden for so long, does not mean it is being covered extensively. Just because this journalist was then also told to carry on doesn't mean the coverage is ample either. There are more not being covered than covered. As I said, a few links doesn't really prove anything. This has been going on all over the country in countless towns and cities, so to keep highlighting that Rotherham got quite a bit of coverage is pretty blinkered.

If these horrendous crimes, continuously committed by the same people from a small minority were covered by the media and prosecuted fairly by the CPS, you would not have people like TR getting so much air time. It's pure and simple.

If it's not being covered then how do you know how widespread it is?

There's no logic to this argument. If there really was some kind of blanket cover up then you wouldn't be aware of it. Post Rotherham there's been no shortage of main-stream coverage of grooming gangs, as we've seen. If you're saying there are loads more that the authorities are aware of but are not prosecuting, where are you getting your evidence from? EDL message boards and random loons on twitter?

Robinson actually gets in the way of justice being served in this case.

Let me just restate that for clarity; Robinson's actions here actually risked justice being denied to the victims, that's why he's in jail. Do you really want to support someone who would rather provoke a violent, racist reaction than see an abuser go to prison?

 

[NorthernWisdom]

If you're saying there are loads more that the authorities are aware of but are not prosecuting

It's worth noting there are plenty they're aware of and *are* prosecuting, but until the trial there won't be any coverage anyway!

 

[chiefdave]

That's because muslims only make up 5% of the population. It is not racist to highlight that or to express concern.

Its a flawed statistic though. You're making an assumption that all Asians charged are Muslim and then highlighting a particular area of child sexual abuse that fits your point of view.

For child sexual abuse in total those charged are 90% white. So if Tommy Robinson's primary concern is highlighting these cases nine out of ten cases he attends and 'exposes' should involve white people. Oddly I can't find evidence of a single one.

The same as you have with the Huddersfield case we can 'prove' it is being covered up by the media as there's no mention of the recent case in Coventry on the Independent website.

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

If it's not being covered then how do you know how widespread it is?

There's no logic to this argument. If there really was some kind of blanket cover up then you wouldn't be aware of it. Post Rotherham there's been no shortage of main-stream coverage of grooming gangs, as we've seen. If you're saying there are loads more that the authorities are aware of but are not prosecuting, where are you getting your evidence from? EDL message boards and random loons on twitter?

Robinson actually gets in the way of justice being served in this case.

Let me just restate that for clarity; Robinson's actions here actually risked justice being denied to the victims, that's why he's in jail. Do you really want to support someone who would rather provoke a violent, racist reaction than see an abuser go to prison?

That's poor and also pretty predicable.

Don't conform to our way of thinking and you must have got your evidence from EDL message boards. Have a day off.

There is no way there would have been a mistrial with what he said, but you wouldn't know that because you already made your mind up. Again though, this should not be about TR, this should be about the crimes. Why can't you address that?

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

Its a flawed statistic though. You're making an assumption that all Asians charged are Muslim and then highlighting a particular area of child sexual abuse that fits your point of view.

For child sexual abuse in total those charged are 90% white. So if Tommy Robinson's primary concern is highlighting these cases nine out of ten cases he attends and 'exposes' should involve white people. Oddly I can't find evidence of a single one.

The same as you have with the Huddersfield case we can 'prove' it is being covered up by the media as there's no mention of the recent case in Coventry on the Independent website.

I don't think it is flawed, I expect that assumption is nearly correct.

His concern is not about cases that already have coverage, but about ones that don't. Yes there has been a bit more attention since Rotherham, but still no where near enough. He doesn't need to be at a Rolf Harris trial when there are hundreds of press outside, but rather at cases that the media don't want to touch with a barge poll.

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

there are loads of articles on grooming gangs on the Independent web page. I have no way of knowing if that means they have given them adequate coverage or not but to say they have shown little or no interest in the actual crimes isn't true.

So why are they still banging on about TR and not covering the actual trial now?

 

[duffer]

That's poor and also pretty predicable.

Don't conform to our way of thinking and you must have got your evidence from EDL message boards. Have a day off.

There is no way there would have been a mistrial with what he said, but you wouldn't know that because you already made your mind up. Again though, this should not be about TR, this should be about the crimes. Why can't you address that?

Where is your evidence then? Where is this massive cover up that only Tommy Robinson, the many-named fraudster and football thug is honest enough to stand up against?

Evidence please, or it looks a lot like it's just another example of an opinion or prejudice posing as a fact.

You haven't troubled yourself to read the reports for why Robinson is in jail, have you, and you clearly don't understand the rules around reporting cases like this if you think there wasn't a very real risk of a mistrial by his actions. I posted explanations written by a barrister, which also contain specific comments made by the judge. But you don't want to hear any of that because you've already made your mind up! As I see it you're trying to make a hero out of a menace.

And no one here is disregarding the issue of abuse, that's a complete straw man. Robinson made it all about himself by his actions, the motives for which you either sympathise with or choose to ignore for some reason.

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

Where is your evidence then? Where is this massive cover up that only Tommy Robinson, the many-named fraudster and football thug is honest enough to stand up against?

Evidence please, or it looks a lot like it's just another example of an opinion or prejudice posing as a fact.

You haven't troubled yourself to read the reports for why Robinson is in jail, have you, and you clearly don't understand the rules around reporting cases like this if you think there wasn't a very real risk of a mistrial by his actions. I posted explanations written by a barrister, which also contain specific comments made by the judge. But you don't want to hear any of that because you've already made your mind up! As I see it you're trying to make a hero out of a menace.

And no one here is disregarding the issue of abuse, that's a complete straw man. Robinson made it all about himself by his actions, the motives for which you either sympathise with or choose to ignore for some reason.

No, you posted a report up by a barrister who clearly is triggered by Tommy Robinson and anyone who takes a dim view of muslim rape gangs. It was hopelessly biased and didn't really answer anything other than nit-picking. Certainly the impression that article gave was far from professional. In fact, I would go as far as saying the people behind the prosecution of TR are cut from the same cloth with their opinions. They hate anyone that speaks up.

If you cannot admit there has been a cover up, and you still think this is reported openly and honestly then I'm afraid I cannot help you. It's easy to post a few links and scream that you are offended about what the guy does, but it just makes you look weak. Just like the authorities.

I don't actually give a shit about him, I care about what he is talking about. There is a real problem, and once again you decide to focus on him. I don't think this is him looking for attention, this is apologists like you looking for a reason to talk about anything other than the crimes.

I hope you don't have a daughter.

 

[skybluetony176]

Again though, this should not be about TR, this should be about the crimes.

Everything Tommy Robinson does is about Tommy Robinson. He’s an attention seeking knobhead who’s only concern is exposure for himself. Why else do you think he’s latched onto such a controversial subject?

 

[skybluetony176]

I don't think it is flawed, I expect that assumption is nearly correct.

His concern is not about cases that already have coverage, but about ones that don't. Yes there has been a bit more attention since Rotherham, but still no where near enough. He doesn't need to be at a Rolf Harris trial when there are hundreds of press outside, but rather at cases that the media don't want to touch with a barge poll.

But he only covers ones that have been covered already, that’s been pointed out numerous times to you now by numerous posters. He waits until they come to trial, at which point it’s already been reported on pre trial (as per the numerous links shown to you), a subsequent reporting blackout is called as the trial is underway which is actually very common especially when a gang is involved whether that be a drugs gang or grooming gang, at which point Tommy Robinson waltzes in pretending that it’s not been reported. It’s actually a very cheap trick and anyone who falls for it is pretty stupid to be honest with you when 2 minutes on google shows you that not only was it reported pre trial the only reason it’s not being covered during the trial is a very standard issue media blackout has been called for legal reasons.

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

But he only covers ones that have been covered already, that’s been pointed out numerous times to you now by numerous posters. He waits until they come to trial, at which point it’s already been reported on pre trial (as per the numerous links shown to you), a subsequent reporting blackout is called as the trial is underway which is actually very common especially when a gang is involved whether that be a drugs gang or grooming gang, at which point Tommy Robinson waltzes in pretending that it’s not been reported. It’s actually a very cheap trick and anyone who falls for it is pretty stupid to be honest with you when 2 minutes on google shows you that not only was it reported pre trial the only reason it’s not being covered during the trial is a very standard issue media blackout has been called for legal reasons.

So why is it still not being reported properly now?

I guess someone who falls for that must be pretty stupid to be honest...

 

[clint van damme]

So why are they still banging on about TR and not covering the actual trial now?

I don't know? Has it concluded?
My point still stands, plenty of articles in the independent on the subject so seems ridiculous to say they're not interested in covering it.

 

[skybluetony176]

So why is it still not being reported properly now?

I guess someone who falls for that must be pretty stupid to be honest...

Has the trial finished yet?

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

I don't know? Has it concluded?
My point still stands, plenty of articles in the independent on the subject so seems ridiculous to say they're not interested in covering it.

Has the trial finished yet?

Yes. The last day of the trial was when TR got arrested.

It's not ridiculous to say they aren't covering when... well... they aren't covering it.

 

[skybluetony176]

Yes. The last day of the trial was when TR got arrested.

It's not ridiculous to say they aren't covering when... well... they aren't covering it.

A quick look on google and it tells you that the media blackout is still in place and ends later this year. The trial itself might have finished but that doesn’t mean a decision has been handed down, sentences have been passed and crucially this trial isn’t linked to others that could be jeopardised should the media be allowed to report on the details now. They don’t hand out media blackouts without reason.

 

[chiefdave]

A quick look on google and it tells you that the media blackout is still in place and ends later this year. The trial itself might have finished but that doesn’t mean a decision has been handed down, sentences have been passed and crucially this trial isn’t linked to others that could be jeopardised should the media be allowed to report on the details now. They don’t hand out media blackouts without reason.

"Twenty nine people – mostly from Huddersfield – facing a total of more than 170 charges relating to the sexual exploitation of 18 children will go on trial next year in three separate groups, a judge has ruled.

Judge Collier ruled that the cases will be heard in three separate trials starting in January.

The first trial, expected to last 10 weeks, has a provisional start date of January 8, 2018. The second trial, expected to last six weeks, is planned to start on April 16, 2018. The third trial, which is expected to last four weeks, has the provisional start date of September 3, 2018."

There's your reason, there's another court case for the same group later in the year.

 

[skybluetony176]

"Twenty nine people – mostly from Huddersfield – facing a total of more than 170 charges relating to the sexual exploitation of 18 children will go on trial next year in three separate groups, a judge has ruled.

Judge Collier ruled that the cases will be heard in three separate trials starting in January.

The first trial, expected to last 10 weeks, has a provisional start date of January 8, 2018. The second trial, expected to last six weeks, is planned to start on April 16, 2018. The third trial, which is expected to last four weeks, has the provisional start date of September 3, 2018."

There's your reason, there's another court case for the same group later in the year.

There was always going to be a reason...


...other than Tommy Robinson’s drivel for the gullible.

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

A quick look on google and it tells you that the media blackout is still in place and ends later this year. The trial itself might have finished but that doesn’t mean a decision has been handed down, sentences have been passed and crucially this trial isn’t linked to others that could be jeopardised should the media be allowed to report on the details now. They don’t hand out media blackouts without reason.

So why did the media cover Tommy Robinson then? Surely that's more of a case for mistrial than Tommy Robinson just saying their names and charges?

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

"Twenty nine people – mostly from Huddersfield – facing a total of more than 170 charges relating to the sexual exploitation of 18 children will go on trial next year in three separate groups, a judge has ruled.

Judge Collier ruled that the cases will be heard in three separate trials starting in January.

The first trial, expected to last 10 weeks, has a provisional start date of January 8, 2018. The second trial, expected to last six weeks, is planned to start on April 16, 2018. The third trial, which is expected to last four weeks, has the provisional start date of September 3, 2018."

There's your reason, there's another court case for the same group later in the year.

Three separate groups. Exactly.

Group one is done. Group two is done.

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

There was always going to be a reason...


...other than Tommy Robinson’s drivel for the gullible.

Yippee we don't have to discuss Muslims doing anything wrong until at least September.

Keep diverting the attention Tony.

 

[skybluetony176]

Three separate groups. Exactly.

Group one is done. Group two is done.

You do realise that one individual could be in all three groups don’t you? It’s usually the crimes that are grouped not the individuals. If one individual is guilty of more than one crime they could be in two or maybe three of the trials.

 

[chiefdave]

So why did the media cover Tommy Robinson then? Surely that's more of a case for mistrial than Tommy Robinson just saying their names and charges?

Temporary reporting restrictions were put in place until Robinson's trial, and the related trials were completed. After multiple reports by foreign right wing media an application to remove the restrictions was made which the judge approved on the basis that you can't put the genie back in the bottle.

Three separate groups. Exactly.

Group one is done. Group two is done.

Group three yet to go to trail. Therefore public knowledge of the first two trials risks a mistrial in the third.

 

[skybluetony176]

Yippee we don't have to discuss Muslims doing anything wrong until at least September.

Keep diverting the attention Tony.

We can discuss it all you like. If you want a proper discussion though try getting your education from anyone other than Tommy Robinson. You might actually get something right then.

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

We can discuss it all you like. If you want a proper discussion though try getting your education from anyone other than Tommy Robinson. You might actually get something right then.

Hilarious. Just because he makes some valid points regarding Islam I'm suddenly a worshipper of his.

I suppose it's better than being a naive apologist for grooming gangs and the like though.

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

Temporary reporting restrictions were put in place until Robinson's trial, and the related trials were completed. After multiple reports by foreign right wing media an application to remove the restrictions was made which the judge approved on the basis that you can't put the genie back in the bottle.

Group three yet to go to trail. Therefore public knowledge of the first two trials risks a mistrial in the third.

The related trials were not completed though.

Surely if you're saying the media are right not to cover this case because number 3 is still ongoing, then surely restrictions on Tommy Robinson shouldn't have been lifted as number 2 could influence number 3 in a similar manner.

You can't have it both ways.

 

[fernandopartridge]

So why did the media cover Tommy Robinson then? Surely that's more of a case for mistrial than Tommy Robinson just saying their names and charges?

The media didn't cover him, the narcissist made his arrest public himself.

 

[Westendlad]

Everything Tommy Robinson does is about Tommy Robinson. He’s an attention seeking knobhead who’s only concern is exposure for himself. Why else do you think he’s latched onto such a controversial subject?

Why don't you learn about him first ie youtube video at Oxford uni......Then you might understand why he's a 'attention seeking knobhead'..

 

[Westendlad]

Seems to me some people on here would prefer grooming gangs ( which happen to be muslim) walking the streets than someone who has outed them ie TR...I for one never new they were happening never mind so widespread. As i've said before the government were shit scared of him and yes he fcuked it up for himself and were trying everything to shut him up.

 

[ajsccfc]

The tact I don't like is if you criticise 'Tommy', some of his more rabid fans will therefore decide that it means you like Muslim gang rape instead, because those can be the only two options.

Seems to me some people on here would prefer grooming gangs ( which happen to be muslim) walking the streets than someone who has outed them ie TR...

Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeey

 

[NorthernWisdom]

Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeey

Better put than I was going to

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

The media didn't cover him, the narcissist made his arrest public himself.

Yes, and the arrests of the 29 were also public information. The media only chose to disclose one of those though.

Excuses excuses once again.

 

[fernandopartridge]

Yes, and the arrests of the 29 were also public information. The media only chose to disclose one of those though.

Excuses excuses once again.

The court made an order for the media to not cover the trial you idiot. The reason being to not prejudice the outcome. Quite reasonable and usual. TR has breached that now, the trial or subsequent one could well collapse. Well done Tommy, that'll get justice for the victims.
I hate these backwards misogynistic grooming gangs as much as anyone before anybody goes down that road.

 

[clint van damme]

Seems to me some people on here would prefer grooming gangs ( which happen to be muslim) walking the streets than someone who has outed them ie TR...I for one never new they were happening never mind so widespread. As i've said before the government were shit scared of him and yes he fcuked it up for himself and were trying everything to shut him up.

they are going to trial, how did robinson 'out them'? Did he lead the investigation?