Grow up
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Robinson Wins Contempt Of Court Challenge
- Thread starter Bro. Curtis
- Start date
Grow up
Yaxley-Lennon is a danger to himself and to others
Blame the victim, not the fellas and their lovely ladies. Do the Brits need every last penny in the world? Try lower taxes, less government and the free market. Tell Brussels to get a job and a life. It seemed like a good idea but it didn't work. When Obama bombed Libya, it caused the European crisis. Everyone but you thinks Obama is dumb.
No, just you and your echo chamber as represented by some here.
Multiple trials. However, in the American experience lawyers and courts seem to find enough people who don't follow the news to impanel a jury. Also, the American system has a provision for a change of venue. IOW, if a crime is committed in say San Francisco. It becomes sufficiently publicized to endanger the impaneling of a fair jury. The judges can and will move the trial to a different locale outside the local media coverage. In San Francisco's case, say Bakersfield. Mind you I understand the UK's space constraints. Bakersfield is 250 miles\400 Kilometers south of San Francisco. Measuring the same distance according to Google Earth from London puts you close:
- to Le Mans, France to the south.
- to Limburg to the east
- to Connor Downs, Cornwall to the west.
- to the north of Newcastle upon Tyne.
Oh please. Be a man.
In the UK there are reporting restrictions on the press when a matter is sub judice. That is how British justice works and Mr Robinson was very well aware of that. He chose to break British laws. Perhaps you would like to invite him to go and live in the USA where these restrictions apparently do not apply . I for one will be very happy to see him go.
Martin, I was trying to point out the foundational differences between you and your American readers. For me at least. it's not a matter of you Brits are wrong and we Yanks are right or vice versa. This is a matter of profound differences between the two systems.
The term I came up with after ministering to the Russian Baptist emigre community is "cultural train wreck". Many of your American readers were ignorant of the longstanding British statutes concerning press reporting of criminal cases. And it seems to me, some of my British readers assumed the US had the same types of laws in place and had difficulty in understanding the buzzsaw they ran into.
The term I came up with after ministering to the Russian Baptist emigre community is "cultural train wreck". Many of your American readers were ignorant of the longstanding British statutes concerning press reporting of criminal cases. And it seems to me, some of my British readers assumed the US had the same types of laws in place and had difficulty in understanding the buzzsaw they ran into.
No, we got that right off that the UK can shut down all press coverage of courts if they like. What we didn't like was the five-hour time lapse and the trial without the regular lawyer. We also thought that the penalty was excessive and it turns out that the Facebook video was not even in evidence, which seemed strange.
Trump sent one of the American best when he sent Brownback to confer with the UK ambassador. Some Canadians were instrumental in this also in terms of fundraising. I thought the Trump administration handled this very well although you may not like Trump and/or Brownback and might consider Tommy Robinson beneath your consideration.
Brownback's intervention was irrelevant: I can assure you that Theresa May's government had absolutely zero input one way or the other in the initial sentence, appeal or retrial process. Which is as it should be.
We also have a principle here that justice, in so far as is practicable, should be administered as locally as possible. But I still don't see how geographical remoteness can prevent potential miscarriages of justice unless there are some kind of reporting/communicating restrictions: what if there are consecutive trials of XYZ and then ABC who are connected defendants and individuals who turn out to be future jurors for the ABC trial see on the news that XYZ have been convicted, that will surely prejudice their thinking when they are impanelled in the jury for ABC and make it more likely that ABC will be convicted out with the evidence in the ABC trial (or, if ABC have canny lawyers, the lawyers could argue that there is no way ABC can have a fair trial and thus they should be allowed to go free).
How do you address that problem?
The problem is dealt with by changes of venue. It's a matter of media markets. What is "front page news" in one market (where the crime is committed) is more than likely page ten in another (if it's even reported). In the example I gave in my earlier post, Bakersfield is a completely different market than San Francisco. In fact, I'd hazard there are at least three separate markets between the two cities.
So what caused the re-examination of Tommy Robinson?
Could a hapless tourist disappear in a short time like that into the UK prisons? (It sounds like Mexico.)
Did the UK Ambassador Sir Kim just tell Brownback not to bother?
Er...I think you'll find his lawyers appealed the decision, the judge heard the appeal and gave Yaxley-Lennon the benefit of the doubt, CMG
But what if it's higher profile than that? What if people who turn out to be jurors on Trial #2 see that the defendants in Trial #1 are convicted because it makes the national news networks?
Again remember the US is much much larger than the UK. The courts have made changes of venue work. The size of the US population is such that courts have been able to find folks who don't watch the national news. 'Sides there are only a handful of cases each year which would get sufficient coverage in the national news to make it a problem. I think you are underestimating the size and overestimating the density of the US market. What is nationally in end of the world headlines today is quickly buried tomorrow by fresher news. I live in the San Francisco market, what happens in Los Angeles barely makes the news.
Well, you know me, always trying to stay on the non-controversial side of any discussion.
As I have told you before several times, we have about the same political division in this country. The left hates the Jews openly, Harvard University has been caught blocking admission of oriental students to glorious Harvard, Islam is on the march and Indianapolis is a center for it but Trump and the GOP do not want to follow Senator Cruz's suggestion and label the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization, we have an epidemic of black on black crime for which whites are being blamed and attacked including the elderly like me, police and law enforcement officers are being attacked all over the country, and public officials and ordinary people alike are being assaulted in public while going about their daily business at the instigation of the leftist Democrats who promise to impeach an innocent Trump if they can win the off-year elections this November, and homosexual transvestites are conducting story hours for toddlers in our public libraries. I don't know if the West can survive or not. Certainly, the Democrat bombing of Libya by Obama on behalf of Hillary for political purposes caused a lot of migration into Europe, welcomed by the EU, for reasons unknown. Our own borders stand wide open because people like the Koch Brothers want cheap labor at any costs and never mind the drugs that are flowing unchecked from Mexico. ICE found that in the last wave of immigrants, some 85 children claimed to belong to illegals were no relation whatsoever and were the victims of sex trafficking and we have a lot of trafficking of children in this country. In this country it is the rural poor in the heartland that is ignored and left in poverty by the elites of the two coasts. The poor are on their own. Do you think the churches have gone globalist?
The other method is in jury selection. Many years ago I was an alternate juror for a fairly notorious murder trial. The selection process began with the random selection of 50 names from the jury pool. Then each side - prosecution/defense - had the same number of challenges with cause, by which a potential juror could be dismissed for a stated reason. Each also had the same number of challenges without cause, by which dismissal could be made without stating a cause.
By this means, each side can work to assure that an impartial jury is seated. Of course, each side will try to ensure that jurors favorable to their case will be chosen. I'm sure that law schools have courses on jury selection. I see the process as similar to my way to divide a desired treat between two - one cuts, the other gets first choice, so the cutter is motivated to divide equally.
My name was drawn 50th (I assume, as it was last announced) and I was 2nd of 2 alternates, which infers that each side had exercised all of its challenges. I'm sure there are trials for which a 2nd 50 would need to be drawn, or after failing to seat a full jury, a change of venue would be made.
Changing the venue won't stop someone like Yaxley-Lennon though as he seems to think he has a roving commission to commit contempt of court in several locations ranging from Canterbury in the south-east to Leeds (where his current case originates) in the north of England, which is pretty much the 250 miles distance referenced by you earlier. All he has to do is get the verdict on Trial 1 (in my hypothetical example) at Canterbury, jump in his white van with his mates and head up the M2 and M1 to Leeds for Trial 2, stand outside Leeds Crown Court as he did back in May and start shooting his mouth off about how the mates of the defendants in Trial 2 had just been found guilty in Trial 1. Bonus points if he gets a film crew, preferably from one of the nationals (which his notoriety would get), double bonus points if the footage goes viral on social media.
You see the problem if there are no contempt sanctions?
Just a gentle reminder that Yaxley-Lennon's first criminal conviction was for assaulting a policeman who was trying to stop him beating his own girlfriend
If David Horowitz at Frontpage Magazine is correct, the May government tried to murder Tommy Robinson in prison recently--taking a page from the Obama administration in Dallas: