This whole affair has drifted out of Orwellian territory and is now full-blown Kafkaesque.
You have to think, 250,000 views in a n hour means the Brits have a bigger problem than they thought.
Why was the guy actually jailed for 13 months, with no real trial or defense? I have to assume he violated terms of a suspended sentence or probation under a prior conviction. What was he convicted of? By no means do I suggest his sentence was justified for reporting on the public trial of “South Asian” rapist pimp gangsters — I’m just curious to know the whole story.
They arrested him for covering Muslim rape gang trials, sentenced him on the spot denying his request for legal counsel, and threw him in a prison with a large percentage of Muslim criminals.
They gave free legal counsel to Muslim rape gang members after ignoring the issue for years. The Muslim rapists were able to make bond to be free while their trials went on. When in prison, they’re given everything they demand, and known conversion efforts by fundamentalists are ignored.
A few Muslim rapists got light sentences or no sentences, such as the fellow who got off because his wife spoke no English, poor thing, can’t leave her without her husband.
Yet another example of liberals’ misplaced compassion enabling evil. They have to admit to the Muslim rape gangs, but they aggressively prevent discussion of it to protect the reputation of the rapists’ culture. Complain about them on social media, risk arrest and punishment harsher than men who prostituted out 13 year old poor white girls.
There’s one problem raised by this case, but it’s not the one assumed by most on this forum. It’s the right of judges (a long-established common law right) to impose summary convictions with quite severe penalties for contempt of court, without a court hearing. Had the judge merely notified ‘Mr Robinson’ that he would be charged with contempt, and that charge were then pursued in a conventional trial, then the reasons for the penalty, as well as the facts of the case, would be more generally understood. The summary treatment, although entirely legal and a long-established procedure, inevitably invited the widespread misreading of the nature of the offence which duly followed.
It wouldn’t surprise me if, once the dust has settled on this, new legislation is proposed to regularise the traditional common law powers of judges in similar circumstances.