We proudly welcome a new writer, Chris Heath. Chris is a Press Advocate, and attended the Day For Freedom event in London in May 2018. He says “I was able to witness and understand the growing concerns for Freedom of Speech in the United Kingdom.”
ECHOS of ‘Ohh Tommy Tommy, Tommy Tommy Tommy Robinson’ were heard around the surroundings of the Court of Appeal in London on Wednesday after political prisoner Tommy Robinson was freed.
He was released on bail from Onley Prison, near Rugby after winning his appeal against a ‘Contempt of Court’ prognostication.
He still faces a retrial at the Old Bailey in the foreseeable future, but at least, it will be done within the realms of judicial legality.
Robinson, 35 was sentenced unlawfully to 13 months at her Majesty’s pleasure (ten months for ‘Contempt of Court’ and three months for breaching a previous court order handed down at Canterbury Crown Court on 8th May 2017).
Tommy streamed a 90 minute Facebook Live (watched by over 250,000 entities) discussing a grooming trial, which was subject to blanketing reporting restrictions and a ‘media black-out’ (temporary suspension of all media publications regarding the trial, until the order was successfully appealed), in fear of the on-going trial of 28 men collapsing due to an act of ‘Contempt of Court’.
Robinson’s release after two months of being illegitimately imprisoned is a moral victory for Freedom of Speech in this country amidst the tide of the blatant example of biased ‘winged politics’ within British politics.
I was lucky enough to attend the ‘Day of Freedom’ event on 6th May as a Press Advocate, organised by Tommy and his dedicated production team, and was able to witness and understand the growing concerns for Freedom of Speech in the United Kingdom.
Tommy’s bail conditions restrict him from going within 400 metres (0.2 miles) of Leeds Crown Court. The undue process from arrest to the sentence of 13 months in prison lasted just five hours.
Lord Chief Justice Lord Burnett of Maldon – (the highest appointed judge in England and Wales) reported on the fundamentally flawed and tainted findings of Judge Geoffrey Mardson QC.
“We are satisfied that the findings of contempt made in Leeds following a fundamentally flawed process, in what we recognise were difficult and unusual circumstances, cannot stand. We will direct that the matter will be reheard before a different judge.
The judge should not have carried out contempt proceedings the same day that Tommy was arrested. No particulars of the contempt were formulated or put to the appellant and there was a muddle over the nature of the contempt being considered.
It was unclear what conduct was said to comprise a breach of that order and the appellant was sentenced on the basis of the conduct which fell outside of the scope of that order”.
“The decision at Leeds Crown Court to proceed to committal to prison so promptly and without due regard for the part of the rules that rise from unfairness. The judge might have referred the matter to the Attorney General to consider whether to institute proceedings. That course would have sacrifice fairness on the altar of celerity”.
Tommy’s QC Jeremy Dein and London Law Firm Carson Kaye argued that procedural deficiencies had risen to an aura of prejudice and caused further acts of prejudice during the case at Leeds Crown Court.
Robinson has gained advocative and well thought of political figureheads with ‘deep pockets’ and with an access to unlimited resources, including President of United States Donald Trump’s son, Donald Trump Jr, Trump’s former political strategist Steve Bannon, UKIP Leader Gerard Batten, former Breitbart London Editor and Chief Advisor to ex-UKIP Leader Nigel Farage, Raheem Kassam and powerful political parties across Europe including in France, Germany and the Netherlands.
Contempt of Court Act 1981 Act is defined as being:
1: The strict liability rule.
In this Act “the strict liability rule” means the rule of law whereby conduct may be treated as a contempt of court as tending to interfere with the course of justice in particular legal proceedings regardless of intent to do so.
2 Limitation of scope of strict liability.
(1)The strict liability rule applies only in relation to publications, and for this purpose “publication” includes any speech, writing, [F1programme included in a cable programme service] or other communication in whatever form, which is addressed to the public at large or any section of the public.
(2) The strict liability rule applies only to a publication which creates a substantial risk that the course of justice in the proceedings in question will be seriously impeded or prejudiced.
(3) The strict liability rule applies to a publication only if the proceedings in question are active within the meaning of this section at the time of the publication.
(4) Schedule 1 applies for determining the times at which proceedings are to be treated as active within the meaning of this section.
Tommy understandably refused to give an interview to the mainstream media when he was released from prison on Wednesday, but did make the following comments: “I have a lot to say, but not to you (referring to the mainstream media in England), but to the British public. Why would I have anything to say to you. You’ve lost the faith of the British Public”.
The MSM aren’t strangers to prejudicial reporting and acts of Contempt of Court that has led to the collapse of trials:
Jonathan Woodgate and Lee Bowyer were accused of assaulting a student, but the trial collapsed after Sunday Mirror decided to publish an interview with the victim’s father, whilst the jury was still considering the verdict of the case.
London Evening Standard was fined £40,000 for Contempt of Court after publishing a piece that halted a trial of men who were accused of escaping from Whitemoor Prison in Cambridgeshire whilst the trial was still on-going.
Tommy has been now been reunited with his wife and three children and will fly out on holiday for two weeks after going through a ‘Kangaroo style’ court case.