>>The contempt of court sentence is based on the idea that Tommy Robinson published information that could prejudice a trial.
He was streaming footage from outside the courthouse.
Was it something he particularly said that would prejudice the trial? Or merely covering it as an observer on the street?
Should the block be closed off so that no one accidentally sees the courthouse during the trial?
Were the jurors watching he stream?
I don’t know much about his history, I’d have figured the contempt of court charge was based on a previous agreement with the court (as when people are prohibited from using facebook, etc.).
Tommy could not have prejudiced the trial because it was over and the perps were found guilty. They were appearing for a sentencing hearing. Small wonder they even showed up. This could as easily have been NYC, Baltimore, Chicago, DC, or Los Angeles. Until anticultural communism is rooted out, branch and root, we will not be able to survive the Muslim hoard.
There’s been plenty of posts and Tommy is all over Youtube.
This was a sentencing, the trial was over. He disclosed nothing more than what was already publicly available. The prior suspended sentence was for the same thing - these are sham charges. He wasn’t even convicted of what they charged him with.
It was a sentencing. The “trial” was over, they were found guilty. So we must assume the sentencing judge that ordered Tommy Robinson arrested was HIMSELF susceptible to prejudice by a FaceTime chat taking place outside?
Yeah, right!