The latest attempt by the British government to silence Tommy Robinson has failed: Today a judge threw out a police banning order against Mr. Robinson for his display of a banner at the Euro football tournament in France last June.
Tommy’s “crime” had been to hold up a sign that read “F*** ISIS”, which was said to incite hatred of Muslims. The judge may not realize it, but if he had upheld the police order, he would have been implicitly acknowledging that Islam and ISIS are essentially the same thing.
Thus the banning order might have been upheld if Tommy had displayed a banner with “F*** Islam” or something similar written on it. So today’s decision is hardly an indication that free speech has returned to the UK.
Tommy was able to win this victory because of his ability to hire effective legal counsel. This would not have been possible without the establishment of his legal fund, and the concerted drive for donations to it. Thanks to you, the readers of Gates of Vienna and other “Islamophobic” websites, Tommy had effective representation in court.
Today’s good news is a reminder of the importance of keeping the Tommy Robinson fund topped up. Every time the British establishment has another go at him, Tommy’s trustees are required to draw down the fund to pay his legal fees (a Q.C. in this case, if I’m not mistaken). I doubt HM government has given up on their attempts to suppress him, so this will be an ongoing process.
Donate buttons in several currencies are on our sidebar, for those who would like to help replenish the fund.
Below is an article from Breitbart with the good news from Luton:
Judge Dismisses ‘Vague And Cagey’ Police Case Against Tommy Robinson After ‘F*ck ISIS’ Flag Incident
The leader of Pegida UK, Tommy Robinson, appeared in court today, successfully arguing against the imposition of a ‘Football Banning Order’ by Bedfordshire Police.
The police had sought to argue that an English flag held up by PEGIDA UK leader Robinson with the words “F*** ISIS” printed on it amounted to incitement of hatred against Muslims.
Attending Luton Magistrates Court today with her client, Mr. Robinson’s lawyer Alison Gurden argued that attempts to impose the order amounted to an attempt to breach his right to freedom of speech and assembly.
According to Mr. Robinson, the judge agreed, dismissing the police’s case against him as vague, cagey, and not genuine.
Judge “evidence is vague & cagey & not genuine” case dismissed
— Tommy Robinson (@TRobinsonNewEra) September 19, 2016
Bedfordshire Police tried to serve him with the order in June of this year to ban him from attending the Euro 2016 football tournament, only to find that he had arrived in France days earlier. Upon his return to Britain, he was immediately served with the order and his passport was confiscated, preventing him returning to France to watch further matches.
During his time in France, he was pictured holding an English flag with the words “F*** ISIS” emblazoned upon it. The incident appears to have prompted the police to argue in their application for the banning order that Mr. Robinson posed “a significant risk of both violence and disorder… This is especially so in terms of his established capacity to organise disorder from an anti-Muslim perspective”.
The ban would have prevented him from walking in Muslim areas of Luton, his hometown, for the next three to five years. But Mr. Robinson opted to contest the application, resulting in his successful court appearance today.
Earlier this month, Ms. Gurden argued in a blog that the case was merely a front for the Home Office to restrict Mr. Robinson’s movements in an attempt to thwart his legal political activities.
“This Football Banning Order application aims to prevent Tommy Robinson from entering the town of Luton for 12 hours on a Saturday when Luton Town FC are playing a home match, and from attending events overseas where England is represented,” she wrote.
“Without a Football Banning Order, the Home Office would struggle to find a legal mechanism to restrict Mr Robinson’s movements, as his political protests are not unlawful. While some may not agree with his views, Mr Robinson has just as much right to lawful protest as any other individual or group.
“Hence it is a logical conclusion that this application is made as an abuse of the Bedfordshire Police power as it is actually an attempt by the Home Office to restrict Mr Robinson’s movement and expression of his political beliefs.”
It has been difficult to watch the abuse by the English police establishment as they repeatedly applied their boot to Tommy’s neck.
But even more amazing is the acknowledgement by the judge of the
gaphuge yawning chasm between Bedfordshire Police Power and justice.Wouldn’t you love to be a fly on the wall, listening to the B. Police bitterly opine about this carriage of justice running over them? Bless their hearts.
The judiciary seem to be the beginning of the anti-Gramscis. The institutions need to be retaken by the champions of western civilisation.
http://postcardsfromtraumaville.blogspot.com/2016/05/gulag-20-why-is-british-state-trying-to.html
The poor dude get abused and arrested so many times and in need for a good solicitor, that it might worth getting a law degree for him! It is just more efficient.
The UN will take over the Internet Oct. First unless that is stopped by a law suit from Congress. The FCC dreams of controlling printed matter,
so I wonder when they’ll make criticism of Islam a crime in the USA and we’ll all end up in jail like Tommy?
1. DJ please don’t get your hopes up about “The judiciary seem to be the beginning of the anti-Gramscis”. Writing as a lawyer who for 22 years practised in the courts of a judicial/legal system derived from the British, I can assert and assure that Gramsci’s long march through the institutions has long, thoroughly penetrated the judiciary of Australia – though its Crown Prosecution Service isn’t as far gone as Britain’s. Tommy got lucky and drew a magistrate who retained some adherence to common law traditions of hundreds of years evolution that have played no small part in creating some of the world’s most prosperous, free and stable societies: USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.
To give you one concrete example: in 2005, in the aftermath of the Muslim-behaviour caused “Cronulla riots”, an 18 year old, with no prior criminal charges much less convictions, was charge for wearing a tee-shirt that bore an expression such as “Mohammed was a goat-f***ing, camel-jockey” or very similar. He was given a one year custodial sentence by a local court magistrate. If you knew how lenient these magistrates usually are – they try really hard to not jail “virgins” giving suspended sentences, community service, etc for far worse acts, true crimes – this would have blown your mind away in 2005, almost as much as it did the lad’s defence lawyer, the lad and his family. He appealed to the District Court, where the one year custodial sentence was upheld. The judge’s comments made it crystal clear that if the Crown had cross-appealed on severity of sentence, ie if the prosecutor’s believed that the one year custodial sentence imposed by the magistrate below was too lenient and sought a more severe penalty,
he would have acceded to the prosecution’s application.
At the same time an 18-19 year old Lebanese Muslim who had climbed a flagpole and set fire to an Australian flag was prosecuted for arson. He was not convicted of anything, but ordered to attend once-weekly lectures for a month or two at a local Returned Servicemen’s League club where he could be taught the symbolic importance of the flag to Australia’s culture by veterans. The Muslim youth and his family were, quite understandably, all smiles and chortles as they left the courthouse.
Saddest thing I’ve read in a while, JO’M…if one weren’t able to invoke The Long View, surely we would go mad with despair.
As an example of TLV, look at what merry olde England did once she acquired Australia – good thing those upper-class twits hadn’t any idea of how real blood ‘tells’ or they’d have never slept easy again when the first boatload of starving bread thieves shoved off for the long journey to Down Under…
[the B censors my reading so I’ve never seen Hughes’ work. It’s a job I requested he take on due to my hippocampus & amygdala being so thoroughly snarled in 20 lb monofilament line complete w/ snaggy, broken lures. I know the general outlines of Australia’s beginnings, though. Thus I’ve often wondered who would be paying the karmic debt for all that suffering and when the debt would come due]
‘Football Banning Order’
Good grief, only in Britain I would guess. Draconian.
“Without a Football Banning Order, the Home Office would struggle to find a legal mechanism to restrict Mr Robinson’s movements”
That is a disgraceful abuse of Tommy’s rights to protest. Thank goodness he has access to a good legal team now.
Formerly Great Britain is not what she used to be. Utterly shameful is what she now is. Grossly disgusting.
“F*** British government would have been more appropriate.”
Am I the only one to see this, but is the position of the state now that ISIS represents Islam? How else could the banner be interpreted as fomenting violence against Muslims?
I agree that ISIS is Islamic. I have more than a 8th grade education. But, according the Western political leaders, that is not the case.