Tommy Robinson was prosecuted for causing ANXIETY To "Alleged" Muslim Child Rapists. Does our judicial system treat Tommy differently?
Selective Prosecutorial Decision Making?
Tommy Robinson was prosecuted and imprisoned for a second time for the same offence back in July last year for contempt of court. The Conservative Attorney General decided it was in the public interest that he prosecute another case against Tommy, probably because Tommy won his appeal and the political and judicial elites needed to save some face.
Dame Victoria Sharp and Mr Justice Warby sent Tommy's legal team the "judgement approved by the court for handing down" which provides a legal context for the decisions and judgements that were made culminating in him being found guilty of contempt of court.
"…the law insists that a defendant and witness, and indeed anyone else who has a duty to perform at court, whether in a criminal trial or in a civil trial, is entitled to go to and from the court, that is between his home and the court, whether on foot or otherwise, without being molested or assaulted or threatened with molestation. There are two reasons for that, it seems to this court. The first is, there must be nothing to create in the minds of such persons any fear such as to make them less likely to wish to come to court to carry out their proper functions. The second reason, which is perhaps more difficult to put adequately into words is this: that the authority of and dignity of the court require that those who attend the court to carry out their duties should be allowed to do so without let or hindrance, and again without fear of molestation."
Pages 7 and 8 of the "judgement approved by the court for handing down"
The "judgement approved by the court for handing down" also noted that defendants should not be "harassed", the legal papers cite several words including "ANXIETY". The reasons for a justifiable prosecution are as plain as the day is light, Tommy Robinson "harassed and distracted" the now-convicted Muslim child rapists.
Page 21 point 68 of the "judgement approved by the court for handing down"
Tommy Robinson caused the now-convicted Muslim child rapists "ANXIETY" making them "fearful". Defendants should be able to travel to and from court without fear of MOLESTATION. That's precisely what the Attorney General levelled against Tommy during the court hearing as is evidenced below.
Attorney General PROSECUTING The Case Uses The Word ANXIETY
According to our sources, the above video relates to yet another predominantly Muslim child-raping gang. The defendants appeared at Bradford Crown Court. One of the "alleged" offenders is Police Constable Amjad Ditta; he is also known as Amjad Hussain. You can read more about him HERE and HERE.
If you want to read a more "in-depth" analysis of the legal reasoning used to protect Muslim child-raping monsters from ANXIETY - click HERE.
In the video at the top of this page you can clearly see and hear some of the "alleged" child rapists facing a barrage of hostile name-calling from an understandably angry crowd of people. Unfortunately, we are in a position where cases like this are all too commonplace, its a justified anger, its a justified hostility.
To be clear, we do not want anyone who vents their frustration and their anger at "alleged" Muslim child-raping monsters to be prosecuted. However, the obvious question remains. If Tommy was prosecuted and found guilty of causing "ANXIETY" to child-raping Muslims for merely asking questions (without shouting abuse or profanities), then there is an evidentiary basis to conclude a "selective" prosecutorial enforcement.
A selective prosecutorial enforcement that only applies to Tommy Robinson.
Please share with #AnxiousMuslimRapists
Posted from TR.News with SteemPress : https://www.tr.news/causing-anxiety-to-alleged-muslim-child-rapists/
Rapists, pedophiles and islamist terrorists roam free in the UK. While people who speaks against it are silenced by the liberals and fake media
"According to our sources, the above video relates to yet another predominantly Muslim child-raping gang. The defendants appeared at Bradford Crown Court. One of the “alleged” offenders is Police Constable Amjad Ditta;"
"Alleged"? So, if someone's Muslim they're not entitled to a fair trial?
This is an ongoing trial and you've just committed Contempt by referring to the defendants as "another predominantly Muslim child-raping gang" when they haven't been found guilty of being such.
No, nothing at all far right about Tommy Robinson. He clearly firmly believes in the principles of a fair trial. Doesn't want people found guilty simply for being Muslim.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: Only a matter of time till TR is sharing a platform with Mark Collett.
- GraemeThompson
Hi Graeme thank you for your comment we do actually welcome opposing views and criticism (not trolling). To answer your points as precisely as we can. The word “alleged” is mentioned 4 times in the article starting with the title, we think the term “alleged” provides sufficient context because yes everyone (including Muslims obviously) are entitled to due process and the “presumption” of “innocence” until proven guilty, that’s how our legal system is “supposed” to work. ”Predominantly Muslim child-raping gang” would also fit considering the charges levelled at the 16 “alleged” offenders. All but one of the men charged in this case have Muslim names which gives credence and validity to the the use of “predominantly”. However due to your criticism we shall ask the writer to add the word “alleged” before “Predominantly Muslim child-raping gang”.
As a matter of interest do you take issue with a local publication stating:
“15 men, who are all from Halifax, have been charged with a range of offences including rape, sexual activity with a child, trafficking and drugs offences. They will all appear at Bradford Magistrates Court on January 6 in 2020.
The men have been accused of committing the offences against three girls, between 2006 and 2009. The girls were between 13 and 16-years-old at the time of the alleged offences.
The Muslim PC has only been charged with “touching” a vulnerable child. We linked to that local report in the article, you can find it here - https://www.leeds-live.co.uk/news/leeds-news/west-yorkshire-police-officer-among-17440266
As for your strawman statement, it’s nothing more than a false equivalence. People can justifiably share legitimate concerns with others; however the ideologies that drive those concerns can and do differ. Shared legitimate concerns are not an absolute indicator of shared “ideology“. Individuals formulate opinions and use a particular type of language based on lived experiences. To throw TR under a bus with such a brazen assertion, one that lacks any basis in reality highlights either ignorance, a lack of cognition and nuance on your part or an ideologically based supposition because TR won’t do it “your way, and by your rules”.
By all means you are entitled to your opinion but you are not entitled to your own facts.
Thanks again.
I used to make fun of them then I learned indeed IGNORING is the best option! & Kept posting:
less 💩 stirred less 🤧😷
no one listened, maybe they will now!
- PiPtar
You have been 🙏 curated by @njord