This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
dannyboy1978 06 Jul 18 1.33pm | |
---|---|
Are you saying pictures can be taken of the accused in the Stephen Lawrence case but not the grooming gang? Both are out side court and both have a jury?
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
dannyboy1978 06 Jul 18 1.40pm | |
---|---|
Walking into court, nothing done
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
dannyboy1978 06 Jul 18 1.44pm | |
---|---|
Walking into court
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
dannyboy1978 06 Jul 18 1.46pm | |
---|---|
Walking into court
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Beanyboysmd 06 Jul 18 1.50pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by dannyboy1978
Are you saying pictures can be taken of the accused in the Stephen Lawrence case but not the grooming gang? Both are out side court and both have a jury? Judges discretion I think, if I was a judge I would have applied it to the Stephen Lawrence case too. Always seems to be the case with grooming gangs but very little else. Im guessing its something to do with protecting the victims but im not sure. Not a satisfactory answer I admit but I would have media blanked both rather than one and not the other. I dont think there is a conspiracy there though...
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Stirlingsays 06 Jul 18 2.03pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Beanyboysmd
Judges discretion I think, if I was a judge I would have applied it to the Stephen Lawrence case too. Always seems to be the case with grooming gangs but very little else. Im guessing its something to do with protecting the victims but im not sure. Not a satisfactory answer I admit but I would have media blanked both rather than one and not the other. I dont think there is a conspiracy there though... Aren't judges meant to follow the law. In this thread we had people pointing to the law multiple times and justifying Robinson's prosecution. However, this is just one example that shows up the complete hypocrisy of thus situation. Who in the general media is making these points......No one....because it has absolutely nothing to do with justice. I don't know if conspiracy is the right word or maybe it is. However, a political consensus on appeasement to a minority they are scared of which is translated into the institutions and covering up the extent of the problem....I find that hard to argue against. Churchill would spin in his grave at the shower who hold positions of power in this country. Edited by Stirlingsays (06 Jul 2018 2.04pm)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Oliver Bodega Bay 06 Jul 18 3.59pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by dannyboy1978
Does anyone know why the people videoing the suspects of the Stephen Lawrence case were not retramanded for the same thing as TR. They were leaving a Public Enquiry
I have prepared one of my own time capsules. I have placed some rather large samples of dynamite, gunpowder and nitroglycerin. My time capsule is set to go off in the year 3000. It will show them what we are really like. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Stirlingsays 06 Jul 18 4.19pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Oliver
They were leaving a Public Enquiry And the difference to the prejudged nature of the images is? These men later stood trial. How exactly were the public not prejudged by all the press beforehand? Yet the trials took place anyway. Proving that this entire line of argument is pure BS.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
elgrande bedford 06 Jul 18 4.44pm | |
---|---|
So why was there not reporting restrictions in the trial's of Rolf Harris,Stuart Hall.and Max Clifford. The amount of media frenzy surrounding those trial's
always a Norwood boy, where ever I live. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Oliver Bodega Bay 06 Jul 18 5.08pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
And the difference to the prejudged nature of the images is? These men later stood trial. How exactly were the public not prejudged by all the press beforehand? Yet the trials took place anyway. Proving that this entire line of argument is pure BS. Was answering the posters question. Robinson was arrested for a breach of the peace while live streaming outside Leeds Crown Court during a trial on which reporting restrictions had been ordered by the judge. Robinson subsequently admitted contempt of court by publishing information that could prejudice an ongoing trial. Don’t understand the BS bit Regarding Gary Dobson and David Norris were found guilty by a jury. They were arrested and charged without publicity in 2010 following new evidence which was found due to enhanced forensic and DNA techniques. For legal reasons to protect the investigation and ensure a fair hearing reporting restrictions were put in place at the commencement of these proceedings; the arrests and subsequent developments were not publicly reported at the time. Prior to the trial reporting restrictions were partially lifted but the ruling also emphasised that this was to be "a new trial of a defendant who, we repeat, is presumed in law to be innocent," and suggested a cautious and fact-based reporting style to avoid contempt of court or risk of prejudice to the future trial. You can see from the above the press and media fully respected the Law following the arrests of Gary Dobson and David Norris. Shame Tommy Robinson has no respect for the Laws of the Land as this and all his previous convictions show.
I have prepared one of my own time capsules. I have placed some rather large samples of dynamite, gunpowder and nitroglycerin. My time capsule is set to go off in the year 3000. It will show them what we are really like. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Stirlingsays 06 Jul 18 5.21pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Oliver
Was answering the posters question. Robinson was arrested for a breach of the peace while live streaming outside Leeds Crown Court during a trial on which reporting restrictions had been ordered by the judge. Robinson subsequently admitted contempt of court by publishing information that could prejudice an ongoing trial. Don’t understand the BS bit Regarding Gary Dobson and David Norris were found guilty by a jury. They were arrested and charged without publicity in 2010 following new evidence which was found due to enhanced forensic and DNA techniques. For legal reasons to protect the investigation and ensure a fair hearing reporting restrictions were put in place at the commencement of these proceedings; the arrests and subsequent developments were not publicly reported at the time. Prior to the trial reporting restrictions were partially lifted but the ruling also emphasised that this was to be "a new trial of a defendant who, we repeat, is presumed in law to be innocent," and suggested a cautious and fact-based reporting style to avoid contempt of court or risk of prejudice to the future trial. You can see from the above the press and media fully respected the Law following the arrests of Gary Dobson and David Norris. Shame Tommy Robinson has no respect for the Laws of the Land as this and all his previous convictions show. Anyone claiming that the Lawrence suspects could receive a fair trail in the UK after the publicity they had received is a liar......It is proof that the contentions made in this thread about Robinson prejudging any proceedings are BS. They are pure hypocrisy and an agenda driven use of the law...laws that is subjectively enacted. I no longer have faith in the laws of the land anymore. nor its enforcers. Not when the EDL were proven right about criminal rang gang acts years before the so called authorities are forced to act upon it....only after being shamed into it by the press. Rape gangs in over twenty towns, thousands of girls. Edited by Stirlingsays (06 Jul 2018 5.22pm)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Oliver Bodega Bay 06 Jul 18 5.23pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by elgrande
So why was there not reporting restrictions in the trial's of Rolf Harris,Stuart Hall.and Max Clifford. The amount of media frenzy surrounding those trial's The Judge Marson imposed additional reporting restrictions under Section 4 of the Contempt of Court Act, which postponed reporting on the case. Section 4 is used when there are due to be subsequent trials of the same offence and reporting the outcome of the first trial might prejudice the jury in the later ones. Tommy Robinson was broadcasting on Facebook Live outside Leeds Crown Court filming people entering the court in relation to an ongoing trial. He filmed himself as he read out the defendants' names and the charges they face - some of which were wrong - and confronted them as they arrived at court.
I have prepared one of my own time capsules. I have placed some rather large samples of dynamite, gunpowder and nitroglycerin. My time capsule is set to go off in the year 3000. It will show them what we are really like. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Registration is now on our new message board
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.