Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

"The Wheels of Justice."

1356725

Comments

  • If it was Russel Brand doing what Tommy Robinson is doing he would be hailed as a hero by everyone who hates Tommy Robinson. This is what annoys me. It comes down not to what is being said or done but to who is saying it.

    People have made their mind up about him, as EDL, been to jail, looks like a bit of a lad so he is a racist or a bigot.

    From then on in the same people are deaf to what he's actually saying.

    I started too g something years ago that I think is pretty healthy and eye opening.

    I only read autobiographies of people I don't like or don't have a good opinion of. It instantly gives me a sense of perspective and also is me giving the person I have decided I don't like, an opportunity to put themselves across.

    Sometimes doing that makes me believe I was wrong about the person and sometimes it affirms my opinion but it's interesting.

  • Extremely clever to choose a subject where you literally cannot argue against the crime. And if you offer any dissenting view against what he's doing, you're instantly labelled a paedo or paedo sympathiser in a ludicrous strawman argument. He's a fucking louse. As much of a shitstain on the pants of humanity as the filthy turds involved in grooming.

    I have no time for Yaxley-Lennon and am in no way defending him or his misuse of these terrible crimes to further his own "career" but any child abuser, of whatever ethnicity, is worse, far worse.

    Otherwise I agree completely.
  • At that particular trail he was at all the child abusers had been found guilty so he can’t jepodise the trial so cant see why there was still reposting restrictions by then.

    Also at the same trail an elderly Sikh man is asked to leave the court as the defendants said it made them feel threatened. Scum
  • edited May 2018
    SE9 said:

    At that particular trail he was at all the child abusers had been found guilty so he can’t jepodise the trial so cant see why there was still reposting restrictions by then.

    Also at the same trail an elderly Sikh man is asked to leave the court as the defendants said it made them feel threatened. Scum

    Maybe because it was part of a series of trials? Maybe because one of the defendents or witnesses is involved in that future trial?

    Courts do not issue reporting restrictions without good reason.
  • SE9 said:

    At that particular trail he was at all the child abusers had been found guilty so he can’t jepodise the trial so cant see why there was still reposting restrictions by then.

    Also at the same trail an elderly Sikh man is asked to leave the court as the defendants said it made them feel threatened. Scum

    Read the previous comment from Somervileaddick regarding restrictions, explains it well.

    I don't think anyone is not in agreement that the child abusers are scum.
  • Oakster said:

    Ezra Levant seems nice.

    Unfortunately he's from my neck of the woods here in Alberta - he is absolutely hated out here, a really nasty piece of work.
    Makes you wonder why anyone would seek out his "reporting" really. Him and TR seem well suited to each other.
  • Sponsored links:


  • Oakster said:

    Ezra Levant seems nice.

    Unfortunately he's from my neck of the woods here in Alberta - he is absolutely hated out here, a really nasty piece of work.
    Makes you wonder why anyone would seek out his "reporting" really. Him and TR seem well suited to each other.
    Popped up on a friend of mine's Facebook page, she asked me about the story, didn't "seek him out". Never heard of either of them before.
  • No one is denying there is an issue with certain elements of society. The issue is that Robinson is only concerning himself with the ones that Muslims are accused of. If he really gave a shit about justice or the wellbeing of the victims he would be protesting at many more trials of people of all ages, colours and creeds, but that is not his real agenda.
  • Carter said:

    thenewbie said:

    No one is denying there is an issue with certain elements of society. The issue is that Robinson is only concerning himself with the ones that Muslims are accused of. If he really gave a shit about justice or the wellbeing of the victims he would be protesting at many more trials of people of all ages, colours and creeds, but that is not his real agenda.

    He's one person. Again, listen to what he's saying, in fact do or don't it's up to you mate.

    He's highlighting something people feel they can't talk about or Even have a discussion about without someone ignorantly screaming racist at them. My opinion for what it's worth is the vermin responsible for these abhorrent crimes are hiding behind the togetherness and protection a fairy tale gives them. They've taken the word of Mohammed and they are taking child sex slaves of their enemy. Fucking backwards if you ask me but these are the times we live in and the age of tolerance has allowed this sort of thing to flourish.

    Agree - also what @Goonerhater was saying as well regarding the police not wanting to do anything. The fear of offending is a serious issue, and the police of all people need to treat every crime the same irrespective of the perpetrators or the victims. Nothing wrong with tolerating other people's religions, cultures etc, but the law should come first and here it didn't.

    The problem with the likes of Robinson, however much they understand the issue, is that they whip up all kinds of hatred. You only have to see the sort of thing his supporters post, thinking all Muslims are paedos or paedo sympathetisers, which is clearly horseshit. I know a few Pakistani men, all of which are outraged by what's gone on.

    I'd love to see some serious, open dialogue between people of all religions, cultures, find out exactly what they really think. Be good to get some crappy opinions out in the open where they can be tackled.
  • edited May 2018
    limeygent said:

    Oakster said:

    Ezra Levant seems nice.

    Unfortunately he's from my neck of the woods here in Alberta - he is absolutely hated out here, a really nasty piece of work.
    Makes you wonder why anyone would seek out his "reporting" really. Him and TR seem well suited to each other.
    Popped up on a friend of mine's Facebook page, she asked me about the story, didn't "seek him out". Never heard of either of them before.
    Well he's writing this nonsense for someone isn't he?

    Anyway, enough about this alt-right piece of rubbish.
  • edited May 2018

    class="Quote" rel="limeygent">

    Oakster said:

    Ezra Levant seems nice.

    Unfortunately he's from my neck of the woods here in Alberta - he is absolutely hated out here, a really nasty piece of work.
    Makes you wonder why anyone would seek out his "reporting" really. Him and TR seem well suited to each other.
    Popped up on a friend of mine's Facebook page, she asked me about the story, didn't "seek him out". Never heard of either of them before.
    Well he's writing this nonsense for someone isn't he?

    Anyway, enough about this alt-right piece of rubbish.</blockqu



    If you say so.
  • .

    Leaving TR aside, why are most of these trials kept quiet and why could they be jeopardised by reporters outside the courts? I thought that usually the police want as much publicity as possible, just in case there are more victims. You only have to look at other high profile cases like Rolph Harris, Max Clifford and even Cliff Richard, where the BBC went out their way and broke the rules to cover and publicise the investigation (helicopter filming the police going in and reporters, reporting "live" from his doorstep), even though there was no case brought in the end.

    Does anyone know why this is? Just askin...
  • I think that it might be the 'in the public interest' argument, i.e Cliff Richard is a well know individual who lives his life largely in the public domain and therefore the public will want to know about such developments. I think that a judge would need to agree with this interpretation, however.
  • Sponsored links:


  • I think that it might be the 'in the public interest' argument, i.e Cliff Richard is a well know individual who lives his life largely in the public domain and therefore the public will want to know about such developments. I think that a judge would need to agree with this interpretation, however.

    Even if it means jeopardising any potential trial?

    Cheers for the answer mate
  • I think the issue is that there is a significant cultural problem of misogyny which applies to Pakistani men from particular regions e.g Mirpur. I have worked for the last ten years in a town with the largest proportion of muslims in the entire country, and every year it grows larger as the white populations flees a place which feels less like England and more like a Pakistani town with every passing day. The demographics are of such import that it is having a serious effect upon the economy and an even more significant effect upon community cohesiveness and integration, which has demonstrably failed by any measure. When I first began working here, there were a few full face veils, now they have multiplied manifold times....in these parts, the enlightenment is on the retreat and medievalism is back in fashion, it seems.

    So people who are worried about these changes must be racists, right?

    Along with these changes is the increasing imposition of a misogynist culture, although, strangely in the eyes of many is the active role that many females play in enforcing it. We have problems where I work with gangs of Pakistani muslim men who feel that they are able to intimidate and abuse women with impunity - women are constantly complaining about it, but those with power do not want to deal with the issue as they see it as problematic (i.e involving people who are not white, and thus must be held to different standards than those who are; this is the crux of the problem). It is understandable that this sense of 'untouchability' has spread, as the problems that this culture causes in this town have been systematically covered up and excused over years, even becoming, effectively, victim blaming in many cases. It is shocking when you meet people who have even had close family members gang raped, but a Police force that does not want to know and will not pursue an investigation. I think that this is changing now, but, my God, it took a long time.

    Part of the problem is 'Islamophobia'. A westernised muslim is not a problem, but a non-westernised muslim most certainly is. They have, with the support and encouragement of self labelled 'progressives' created a mini version of their homeland right here in the UK, together with its backward attitudes and certain abhorrent practices. It is telling that we have only now had the first successful prosecution for forced marriage, when it has been a pretty much state approved practice of inflicting violence and rape upon powerless women. It is still a significant problem; of the people I know from that background it is shockingly common. I cannot get my head around how a mother will gladly effectively sell their own offspring into a life of misery (and it many cases, it is, unbelievably, for money). It wrecks thousands of lives around here, but it is swept under the carpet and the victims are expected to silently endure a living hell rather than 'bring shame upon the community' by seeking to escape it (can you imagine being forced into being raped by an elderly relative when you are below the age of consent? can you imagine them also being a sadist, yet your family blame you if you complain about it? unfortunately, I have experienced multiple cases like these and I struggle to understand how one human being can inflict this upon another human being, let alone a family member...it really is sick). To be born a Pakistani muslim female really does appear to be one of the worst cards that you could have been dealt in life....there are so many issues and cases which I could relate; it is so sad that they are seen as an unfashionable cause and as 'problematic' but these are real people with real lives and what some of them have endured would be enough to bring anyone to tears. So many lives ruined, so sad.

    Then we have the grooming gangs, which a policeman here admitted had been a problem since the 1970s, but have been ignored, covered up and censored in the name of community cohesion. This is the heart of the issue; the authorities have been covering up, excusing and thereby tacitly endorsing these issues for well over a decade and this has simply emboldened the perpetrators more and more. There is a disgustingly misogynistic strain of backwards Pakistani muslim culture that has been transferred to a modern western democracy and tacitly encouraged and the double standards are appalling. Quite simply, if it were not an ethnic minority behind this mass abuse you would never hear the end of it, but instead the victims here are expected to shut up and put up with it in the interests of multiculturalism Islamophobia is a non concept. Anyone who knows the tenets of this religion with regard to its attitude to women, non-believers, homosexuals and apostates should fear it, it is only natural. But this perfectly legitimate reaction has been labelled as racism, one again excusing and endorsing it. These attitudes should be challenged and expunged from any civilised society, yet they are endorsed and supported by our cowardly authorities who, of course, find it much easier to go after those challenging it rather than the perpetrators. Let's not forget the big picture; there has been an epidemic of the mass rape of tens of thousands of minors over the last couple of decades that has been allowed due to the ethnicity of the perpetrators. The anger at this is understandable, yet the shady way that the authorities have just dealt with someone who has breached a court order will only serve to reinforce the perception that they are, rightly or wrongly firmly on the side of the perpetrators.

    Look at the #metoo issue and how it dominated the media, in some cases with many trivialising the issue by tying it up to perceived slights and discrimination, yet when we have a huge mass of the voiceless and powerless who have had unimaginable ordeals at the hands of truly evil men, the silence is......deafening.

    Until these issues are addressed and challenged and stamped out and the rank hypocrisy of the authorities and media changes, then we can only assume that it is business as usual. Until the next time.....and the next time and the next time......

    Well thought out and expressed. If Yaxley-Lennon tried a bit of that he might be more credible.
  • I think the issue is that there is a significant cultural problem of misogyny which applies to Pakistani men from particular regions e.g Mirpur. I have worked for the last ten years in a town with the largest proportion of muslims in the entire country, and every year it grows larger as the white populations flees a place which feels less like England and more like a Pakistani town with every passing day. The demographics are of such import that it is having a serious effect upon the economy and an even more significant effect upon community cohesiveness and integration, which has demonstrably failed by any measure. When I first began working here, there were a few full face veils, now they have multiplied manifold times....in these parts, the enlightenment is on the retreat and medievalism is back in fashion, it seems.

    So people who are worried about these changes must be racists, right?

    Along with these changes is the increasing imposition of a misogynist culture, although, strangely in the eyes of many is the active role that many females play in enforcing it. We have problems where I work with gangs of Pakistani muslim men who feel that they are able to intimidate and abuse women with impunity - women are constantly complaining about it, but those with power do not want to deal with the issue as they see it as problematic (i.e involving people who are not white, and thus must be held to different standards than those who are; this is the crux of the problem). It is understandable that this sense of 'untouchability' has spread, as the problems that this culture causes in this town have been systematically covered up and excused over years, even becoming, effectively, victim blaming in many cases. It is shocking when you meet people who have even had close family members gang raped, but a Police force that does not want to know and will not pursue an investigation. I think that this is changing now, but, my God, it took a long time.

    Part of the problem is 'Islamophobia'. A westernised muslim is not a problem, but a non-westernised muslim most certainly is. They have, with the support and encouragement of self labelled 'progressives' created a mini version of their homeland right here in the UK, together with its backward attitudes and certain abhorrent practices. It is telling that we have only now had the first successful prosecution for forced marriage, when it has been a pretty much state approved practice of inflicting violence and rape upon powerless women. It is still a significant problem; of the people I know from that background it is shockingly common. I cannot get my head around how a mother will gladly effectively sell their own offspring into a life of misery (and it many cases, it is, unbelievably, for money). It wrecks thousands of lives around here, but it is swept under the carpet and the victims are expected to silently endure a living hell rather than 'bring shame upon the community' by seeking to escape it (can you imagine being forced into being raped by an elderly relative when you are below the age of consent? can you imagine them also being a sadist, yet your family blame you if you complain about it? unfortunately, I have experienced multiple cases like these and I struggle to understand how one human being can inflict this upon another human being, let alone a family member...it really is sick). To be born a Pakistani muslim female really does appear to be one of the worst cards that you could have been dealt in life....there are so many issues and cases which I could relate; it is so sad that they are seen as an unfashionable cause and as 'problematic' but these are real people with real lives and what some of them have endured would be enough to bring anyone to tears. So many lives ruined, so sad.

    Then we have the grooming gangs, which a policeman here admitted had been a problem since the 1970s, but have been ignored, covered up and censored in the name of community cohesion. This is the heart of the issue; the authorities have been covering up, excusing and thereby tacitly endorsing these issues for well over a decade and this has simply emboldened the perpetrators more and more. There is a disgustingly misogynistic strain of backwards Pakistani muslim culture that has been transferred to a modern western democracy and tacitly encouraged and the double standards are appalling. Quite simply, if it were not an ethnic minority behind this mass abuse you would never hear the end of it, but instead the victims here are expected to shut up and put up with it in the interests of multiculturalism Islamophobia is a non concept. Anyone who knows the tenets of this religion with regard to its attitude to women, non-believers, homosexuals and apostates should fear it, it is only natural. But this perfectly legitimate reaction has been labelled as racism, one again excusing and endorsing it. These attitudes should be challenged and expunged from any civilised society, yet they are endorsed and supported by our cowardly authorities who, of course, find it much easier to go after those challenging it rather than the perpetrators. Let's not forget the big picture; there has been an epidemic of the mass rape of tens of thousands of minors over the last couple of decades that has been allowed due to the ethnicity of the perpetrators. The anger at this is understandable, yet the shady way that the authorities have just dealt with someone who has breached a court order will only serve to reinforce the perception that they are, rightly or wrongly firmly on the side of the perpetrators.

    Look at the #metoo issue and how it dominated the media, in some cases with many trivialising the issue by tying it up to perceived slights and discrimination, yet when we have a huge mass of the voiceless and powerless who have had unimaginable ordeals at the hands of truly evil men, the silence is......deafening.

    Until these issues are addressed and challenged and stamped out and the rank hypocrisy of the authorities and media changes, then we can only assume that it is business as usual. Until the next time.....and the next time and the next time......

    Well thought out and expressed. If Yaxley-Lennon tried a bit of that he might be more credible.
    Is that not what he is trying? Listen to him
  • Extremely clever to choose a subject where you literally cannot argue against the crime. And if you offer any dissenting view against what he's doing, you're instantly labelled a paedo or paedo sympathiser in a ludicrous strawman argument. He's a fucking louse. As much of a shitstain on the pants of humanity as the filthy turds involved in grooming.

    Surely that could work both ways?
  • edited May 2018
    top top post Bigstemarra
  • I think that it might be the 'in the public interest' argument, i.e Cliff Richard is a well know individual who lives his life largely in the public domain and therefore the public will want to know about such developments. I think that a judge would need to agree with this interpretation, however.

    Even if it means jeopardising any potential trial?

    Cheers for the answer mate
    I am by no means an expert in legal matters, that was just a possible interpretation that I believe was voiced at the time. So, I'm guessing as much as you!

    As always, there will be expertise in this area on CL; hopefully someone with a legal background will be able to enlighten us all on this matter.....
  • .

    Leaving TR aside, why are most of these trials kept quiet and why could they be jeopardised by reporters outside the courts? I thought that usually the police want as much publicity as possible, just in case there are more victims. You only have to look at other high profile cases like Rolph Harris, Max Clifford and even Cliff Richard, where the BBC went out their way and broke the rules to cover and publicise the investigation (helicopter filming the police going in and reporters, reporting "live" from his doorstep), even though there was no case brought in the end.

    Does anyone know why this is? Just askin...
    As I understand it there are different rules depending on whether someone has been charged yet, after they have been charged, and the judge can rule that there needs to be additional reporting restrictions once the case begins. I suspect part of the issue in these cases compared to the ones you have listed is there are multiple linked defendants, some of whom are being tried in a separate trial. If it has been reported that X's brother has just been found guilty for the offence that X is now being tried for, there's a risk that this will influence the jury. They do a similar thing with terrorism cases too - you'll see "Three men were found guilty of plotting to cause explosions (or whatever the correct wording is) at Woolwich Crown Court today. A further two defendants were convicted last month, but this can only be revealed now due to reporting restrictions on the case".

    In addition, with Harris, Clifford and Cliff Richard, these were all historic allegations, so IIRC the publicity was part of a police strategy to get corroborating evidence as there wouldn't have been any physical evidence to support the case. The helicopter coverage was beyond what was in the public interest though, and I think the BBC are justifiably getting their arsed kicked as a result.
  • During the investigation phase, I believe anyone can cover it, although they need to be careful they don’t star making judgements that are later proven false.

    But once a trail begins, and particularly a series of trails, the judge will want to ensure jurors are not pressured by outside influences, or indeed intimidated. So if there are multiple defendants, and they choose to be tried separately, the judge may issue a gag order to prevent the verdict of one trial impacting another.

    If there’s just a single trial, this is less likely, as the judge will simply order jurors to to discuss/read/watch anything about the trial.

    So it’s not really about who, it’s about how many related trials there are, especially as the evidence may be common to all.

    Personally, I’m not concerned about the trail and gag order, or jailing someone who is deliberately violating a suspended sentence.

    The conversation needs to be about how this gets prevented going forward. @bigstemarra highlights the concerns people have raising this in the context of race. But it’s it’s just the current concerns, previously we didn’t address it because of power (Cyril Smith), fame(Seville) or religion (Catholic church). It’s all the same problem, and society needs to figure out how to have these discussions without demonizing entire sections of society.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out!