Why Everything You've Read About Tommy Robinson is Wrong

QUICK QUESTION: if the UK Establishment was desperate to jail Tommy Robinson (pictured above), then why was he free, on a suspended sentence, when he was arrested in May 2018, instead of already in prison?

If you don't know the answer to that question, then read on.

This Steemit post will not be popular.

Don't get me wrong -- I love a good conspiracy theory. Sadly, the stuff about Tommy Robinson being a "political prisoner" isn't a good conspiracy theory -- it's complete nonsense, spread by people who don't know what they are talking about.

Don't be a dupe. Time to wise up.

Just the Facts...

WHEN HE WAS arrested this year, Robinson was already serving a suspended sentence dating from May 2017, for doing exactly the same thing -- filming in the precincts of an English courthouse. This isn't some obscure bit of law that no-one knows about. It's part of journalism 101 in the UK. This law has been in place since 1925 and it is enforced very strictly, no matter who you are.

When he got his suspended sentence in 2017, Robinson (under his real name: Stephen Yaxley-Lennon) was warned very clearly that if he tried filming his speeches within court precincts again, he would be going straight to prison, no "ifs" and no "buts." It was not the Judge's decision, it was a cast-iron legal fact that breaching his suspended sentence would mean imprisonment. These were the Judge's exact words:

"In short, Mr. Yaxley-Lennon, turn up at another court, refer to people as "Muslim paedophiles, Muslim rapists" and so on and so forth while trials are ongoing and before there has been a finding by a jury that that is what they are, and you will find yourself inside. Do you understand?"

If Robinson had any doubts about what the terms of his suspended sentence meant, he only had to ask the Judge to repeat herself slowly and carefully. And if he forgot to do that, he could have asked his lawyers. Or he could have looked it up on Google, seriously this stuff is common knowledge.

If you read the 2017 transcript of the Judge's full sentencing remarks (it's just a few hundred words), you will also see that she gave Robinson a suspended sentence because his lawyers had spoken about the dangers he might face if he was locked up! Again, this doesn't exactly show the legal system trying to silence him, does it?

Cameras Mean "Contempt"

YES, IT'S A BIT ARCHAIC these days, but the US has very similar rules about filming in court. It's at the Judge's discretion whether to allow cameras into a trial. That's why there was no TV footage or newspaper photography of Bill Cosby's recent trial, and the public saw sketches by a professional court artist instead (pictured right). England's rules only allow sketching in courthouses.

In either situation, filming or photography in court would be ruled "Contempt" -- and that's what happened to Robinson in 2017 and then again in 2018.

The other slight difference is that English law includes the "precincts" of the court as being part of the court for legal purposes, meaning that filming on the court's doorstep can also result in prosecution.

Why aren't Media Reporting the Trials Covered by Robinson?

AGAIN, THERE IS a sound reason for this too. When multiple defendants are on trial, for related offences, it can be difficult to get them all done at the same time. Sometimes defendants end up attending different courts to each other, and on different dates.

When this happens (and it happens a lot!), English law allows Judges to impose reporting restrictions until all the trials are over.

The reason for this is that it is believed that if the media report the fact that defendant "A" has been found guilty, it could influence the Jury in the court in another part of town, who are listening to the ongoing trial of his partner-in-crime, defendant "B".

In other words, the reporting restrictions are temporary and designed to ensure that every defendant gets a fair trial. At the end of the last trial, the restrictions are lifted and every case can be reported. That is what is happening in the trials Robinson wanted to "expose".

That's all there is to it. Robinson thought he was busting a cover-up. But what he was doing was completely misunderstanding normal and routine court processes, and then committing contempt of court by standing in court precincts to livestream his misinformation to his fans.

And the Irony is...

... by filming very near to the court, denouncing the defendants inside the court as already guilty before the trial was over, Robinson could have caused a mistrial. The very people who Robinson wants to see get convicted and imprisoned would have walked free! By arresting Robinson, the legal system prevented that from happening.

The Stupidest Thing about All This?

When he was pulled straight back into court and received the prison sentence that he is now serving, Robinson was asked how he pleaded and he only said one word.

^{(Can you guess what it was?)}