Tommy Robinson libel trial: EDL founder 'can't afford lawyer'

[Correll]

There is a topic here folks - Tommy Robinson Libel Trial. A specific event. Please stop trying to derail it with personal flame sniping.

The op made no mention of the alleged libel.

It did mention general accusations against Tommy RObinson, being a "nazis" because of his history of reporting on the failed policy of multiculturalism.


That fact that the op has made no attempt to discuss the supposed topic, ,shows that my point was correct. The "topic" is just an excuse to smear or destroy a political enemy, both by Tommy Taint and the supporters of the lawsuit.

If anything the thread should be locked because teh op has little comment on the supposed topic.

Discuss the topic then. The topic isn't about the member. Stop trying to derail the thread into a flame fight. If you disagree with the OP - say so. Attack the assertions. That's all I'm going to say about this.

Thank you for this.

Says the man who has said NOTHING about the libel he is supposedly so concerned about.

Perhaps you should read the thread.
Do you think this kid has a case ? Yaxley lied about him. His family has had to move house to escape from the bully boys.
He deserves every penny that he will be awarded.
I also thing that yaxleys rich american backers should get their bolloks squeezed over this. They use their financial muscle to interfere in UK affairs and should be held to account.

I did read the thread. This is the first you mentioned this shit. Bullyboys? In the same country where people like you stood by while thousands of white girls were raped?

I find that unlikely.

So he is ok to spread lies about a child ?

Funny, page two and you haven't mentioned what the "lies" were, how old the "child" is, what danger he supposedly faced, really nothing about your supposed topic at all.


You certainly smeared Tommy Robinson a lot. Which was my point in addressing the thread. Which attracted the ire of the mobs.

Because it was "off topic"....

I really cant read the link for you. What time does your carer come round ? Ask her and stop spamming the thread.

Links are to support points, not make them.


You care so much about this issue, that you have not put it into your thread.

Which was my point, ie you don't give a fuck about this case, this is just about you wanting to destroy someone who dares speak against you and yours.

So...how about you? Do you think it's ok for an adult, like Robinson, to attack a minor?

Depends on the minor and what the "attack" was.

In the context of this thread, the op still has not really talked about either yet.


ALmost like, his real concern isn't the kid, but seeing someone who is critical of lefty policies, destroyed.

 

[Correll]

There is a topic here folks - Tommy Robinson Libel Trial. A specific event. Please stop trying to derail it with personal flame sniping.

The op made no mention of the alleged libel.

It did mention general accusations against Tommy RObinson, being a "nazis" because of his history of reporting on the failed policy of multiculturalism.


That fact that the op has made no attempt to discuss the supposed topic, ,shows that my point was correct. The "topic" is just an excuse to smear or destroy a political enemy, both by Tommy Taint and the supporters of the lawsuit.

If anything the thread should be locked because teh op has little comment on the supposed topic.

Discuss the topic then. The topic isn't about the member. Stop trying to derail the thread into a flame fight. If you disagree with the OP - say so. Attack the assertions. That's all I'm going to say about this.

Thank you for this.

Says the man who has said NOTHING about the libel he is supposedly so concerned about.

Perhaps you should read the thread.
Do you think this kid has a case ? Yaxley lied about him. His family has had to move house to escape from the bully boys.
He deserves every penny that he will be awarded.
I also thing that yaxleys rich american backers should get their bolloks squeezed over this. They use their financial muscle to interfere in UK affairs and should be held to account.

I did read the thread. This is the first you mentioned this shit. Bullyboys? In the same country where people like you stood by while thousands of white girls were raped?

I find that unlikely.

So he is ok to spread lies about a child ?

Funny, page two and you haven't mentioned what the "lies" were, how old the "child" is, what danger he supposedly faced, really nothing about your supposed topic at all.


You certainly smeared Tommy Robinson a lot. Which was my point in addressing the thread. Which attracted the ire of the mobs.

Because it was "off topic"....

I really cant read the link for you. What time does your carer come round ? Ask her and stop spamming the thread.

Links are to support points, not make them.


You care so much about this issue, that you have not put it into your thread.

Which was my point, ie you don't give a fuck about this case, this is just about you wanting to destroy someone who dares speak against you and yours.

So...how about you? Do you think it's ok for an adult, like Robinson, to attack a minor?

He was comfortable with his wife-beating, assaulting a policeman, drug dealing, football hooliganism, contempt of court, passport fraud, illegal immigration and jeopardising an important trial. Have a wild guess.

And again, the man that posted the thread, just doesn't care to discuss the topic, and just wants to punch down at Tommy Robinson.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

There is a topic here folks - Tommy Robinson Libel Trial. A specific event. Please stop trying to derail it with personal flame sniping.

The op made no mention of the alleged libel.

It did mention general accusations against Tommy RObinson, being a "nazis" because of his history of reporting on the failed policy of multiculturalism.


That fact that the op has made no attempt to discuss the supposed topic, ,shows that my point was correct. The "topic" is just an excuse to smear or destroy a political enemy, both by Tommy Taint and the supporters of the lawsuit.

If anything the thread should be locked because teh op has little comment on the supposed topic.

Discuss the topic then. The topic isn't about the member. Stop trying to derail the thread into a flame fight. If you disagree with the OP - say so. Attack the assertions. That's all I'm going to say about this.

Thank you for this.

Says the man who has said NOTHING about the libel he is supposedly so concerned about.

Perhaps you should read the thread.
Do you think this kid has a case ? Yaxley lied about him. His family has had to move house to escape from the bully boys.
He deserves every penny that he will be awarded.
I also thing that yaxleys rich american backers should get their bolloks squeezed over this. They use their financial muscle to interfere in UK affairs and should be held to account.

I did read the thread. This is the first you mentioned this shit. Bullyboys? In the same country where people like you stood by while thousands of white girls were raped?

I find that unlikely.

So he is ok to spread lies about a child ?

Funny, page two and you haven't mentioned what the "lies" were, how old the "child" is, what danger he supposedly faced, really nothing about your supposed topic at all.


You certainly smeared Tommy Robinson a lot. Which was my point in addressing the thread. Which attracted the ire of the mobs.

Because it was "off topic"....

I really cant read the link for you. What time does your carer come round ? Ask her and stop spamming the thread.

Links are to support points, not make them.


You care so much about this issue, that you have not put it into your thread.

Which was my point, ie you don't give a fuck about this case, this is just about you wanting to destroy someone who dares speak against you and yours.

So...how about you? Do you think it's ok for an adult, like Robinson, to attack a minor?

He was comfortable with his wife-beating, assaulting a policeman, drug dealing, football hooliganism, contempt of court, passport fraud, illegal immigration and jeopardising an important trial. Have a wild guess.

And again, the man that posted the thread, just doesn't care to discuss the topic, and just wants to punch down at Tommy Robinson.

This really is your most bizarre pro nazi posting ever.

 

[Coyote]

There is a topic here folks - Tommy Robinson Libel Trial. A specific event. Please stop trying to derail it with personal flame sniping.

The op made no mention of the alleged libel.

It did mention general accusations against Tommy RObinson, being a "nazis" because of his history of reporting on the failed policy of multiculturalism.


That fact that the op has made no attempt to discuss the supposed topic, ,shows that my point was correct. The "topic" is just an excuse to smear or destroy a political enemy, both by Tommy Taint and the supporters of the lawsuit.

If anything the thread should be locked because teh op has little comment on the supposed topic.

Discuss the topic then. The topic isn't about the member. Stop trying to derail the thread into a flame fight. If you disagree with the OP - say so. Attack the assertions. That's all I'm going to say about this.

Thank you for this.

Says the man who has said NOTHING about the libel he is supposedly so concerned about.

Perhaps you should read the thread.
Do you think this kid has a case ? Yaxley lied about him. His family has had to move house to escape from the bully boys.
He deserves every penny that he will be awarded.
I also thing that yaxleys rich american backers should get their bolloks squeezed over this. They use their financial muscle to interfere in UK affairs and should be held to account.

I did read the thread. This is the first you mentioned this shit. Bullyboys? In the same country where people like you stood by while thousands of white girls were raped?

I find that unlikely.

So he is ok to spread lies about a child ?

Funny, page two and you haven't mentioned what the "lies" were, how old the "child" is, what danger he supposedly faced, really nothing about your supposed topic at all.


You certainly smeared Tommy Robinson a lot. Which was my point in addressing the thread. Which attracted the ire of the mobs.

Because it was "off topic"....

I really cant read the link for you. What time does your carer come round ? Ask her and stop spamming the thread.

Links are to support points, not make them.


You care so much about this issue, that you have not put it into your thread.

Which was my point, ie you don't give a fuck about this case, this is just about you wanting to destroy someone who dares speak against you and yours.

So...how about you? Do you think it's ok for an adult, like Robinson, to attack a minor?

Depends on the minor and what the "attack" was.

In the context of this thread, the op still has not really talked about either yet.


ALmost like, his real concern isn't the kid, but seeing someone who is critical of lefty policies, destroyed.

You keep trying to divert the topic here, so stop it.

Talk about Tommy Robinson. NOT the poster. If it bugs you that he tears down Robinson, then feel free to adulate Robinson and sing his praises - but stop trying to turn the topic onto the poster.

Last warning in this thread.

 

[Coyote]

There is a topic here folks - Tommy Robinson Libel Trial. A specific event. Please stop trying to derail it with personal flame sniping.

The op made no mention of the alleged libel.

It did mention general accusations against Tommy RObinson, being a "nazis" because of his history of reporting on the failed policy of multiculturalism.


That fact that the op has made no attempt to discuss the supposed topic, ,shows that my point was correct. The "topic" is just an excuse to smear or destroy a political enemy, both by Tommy Taint and the supporters of the lawsuit.

If anything the thread should be locked because teh op has little comment on the supposed topic.

Discuss the topic then. The topic isn't about the member. Stop trying to derail the thread into a flame fight. If you disagree with the OP - say so. Attack the assertions. That's all I'm going to say about this.

Thank you for this.

Says the man who has said NOTHING about the libel he is supposedly so concerned about.

Perhaps you should read the thread.
Do you think this kid has a case ? Yaxley lied about him. His family has had to move house to escape from the bully boys.
He deserves every penny that he will be awarded.
I also thing that yaxleys rich american backers should get their bolloks squeezed over this. They use their financial muscle to interfere in UK affairs and should be held to account.

I did read the thread. This is the first you mentioned this shit. Bullyboys? In the same country where people like you stood by while thousands of white girls were raped?

I find that unlikely.

So he is ok to spread lies about a child ?

Funny, page two and you haven't mentioned what the "lies" were, how old the "child" is, what danger he supposedly faced, really nothing about your supposed topic at all.


You certainly smeared Tommy Robinson a lot. Which was my point in addressing the thread. Which attracted the ire of the mobs.

Because it was "off topic"....

I really cant read the link for you. What time does your carer come round ? Ask her and stop spamming the thread.

Links are to support points, not make them.


You care so much about this issue, that you have not put it into your thread.

Which was my point, ie you don't give a fuck about this case, this is just about you wanting to destroy someone who dares speak against you and yours.

So...how about you? Do you think it's ok for an adult, like Robinson, to attack a minor?

Depends on the minor and what the "attack" was.

In the context of this thread, the op still has not really talked about either yet.


ALmost like, his real concern isn't the kid, but seeing someone who is critical of lefty policies, destroyed.

Libeling a minor. Like say what happened to this kid. Or what happened to Sandmann over here. Is it "ok" if it's Tommy Robinson doing it?

 

[Coyote]

Here's another article on the incident: Judge rules against Tommy Robinson in case brought by Syrian schoolboy

A video showing Jamal Hijazi, then 16, being pushed to the ground and threatened with drowning at Almondbury School in Huddersfield provoked outrage after it was widely shared in November 2018.

Robinson, 37, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, later commented about the incident in two Facebook videos, claiming Jamal was 'not innocent and he violently attacks young English girls in his school'.


ut in a judgment handed down remotely today, Mr Justice Nicklin rejected Robinson's public interest application.

He said: 'It is clear that (Robinson)'s public interest defence relies principally in his reasonably believing there to be a public interest in setting the record straight, through him allowing B to put forward his answer to the proposition that the viral video demonstrated a racially motivated attack on the claimant.'...

<snip>

...The judge said Robinson's argument had not respected the difference between his 'subjective belief' and objective truth.

Lawyers for Jamal argued the video of the attack was uploaded on November 27, with Robinson's comments published on November 28 and 29 respectively, giving him limited time to conduct his alleged investigations.

The judge said there was a 'complete absence of chronology' in when the interviews occurred, adding Robinson has still failed to provide the names of the people alleging Jamal had been violent to them.

Article concludes with:
The judge accepted amendments to Robinson's existing defence of truth, where the 37-year-old added further details to allegations of violence by Jamal as well as three new incidents, which will be tested at trial.


Kind of sounds like Robinson is winging it ... reminds me a lot of Sandmann.

 

[Correll]

Here's another article on the incident: Judge rules against Tommy Robinson in case brought by Syrian schoolboy

A video showing Jamal Hijazi, then 16, being pushed to the ground and threatened with drowning at Almondbury School in Huddersfield provoked outrage after it was widely shared in November 2018.

Robinson, 37, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, later commented about the incident in two Facebook videos, claiming Jamal was 'not innocent and he violently attacks young English girls in his school'.


ut in a judgment handed down remotely today, Mr Justice Nicklin rejected Robinson's public interest application.

He said: 'It is clear that (Robinson)'s public interest defence relies principally in his reasonably believing there to be a public interest in setting the record straight, through him allowing B to put forward his answer to the proposition that the viral video demonstrated a racially motivated attack on the claimant.'...

<snip>

...The judge said Robinson's argument had not respected the difference between his 'subjective belief' and objective truth.

Lawyers for Jamal argued the video of the attack was uploaded on November 27, with Robinson's comments published on November 28 and 29 respectively, giving him limited time to conduct his alleged investigations.

The judge said there was a 'complete absence of chronology' in when the interviews occurred, adding Robinson has still failed to provide the names of the people alleging Jamal had been violent to them.

Article concludes with:
The judge accepted amendments to Robinson's existing defence of truth, where the 37-year-old added further details to allegations of violence by Jamal as well as three new incidents, which will be tested at trial.


Kind of sounds like Robinson is winging it ... reminds me a lot of Sandmann.

So, finally someone bothers to post what this is supposedly about? Cool.

So, what was the damage to the kid after Tommy Robinson's story?


And why is it that people are constantly mentioning that he changed his name? Lots of writers use pen names or alter their names when they publish.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Here's another article on the incident: Judge rules against Tommy Robinson in case brought by Syrian schoolboy

A video showing Jamal Hijazi, then 16, being pushed to the ground and threatened with drowning at Almondbury School in Huddersfield provoked outrage after it was widely shared in November 2018.

Robinson, 37, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, later commented about the incident in two Facebook videos, claiming Jamal was 'not innocent and he violently attacks young English girls in his school'.


ut in a judgment handed down remotely today, Mr Justice Nicklin rejected Robinson's public interest application.

He said: 'It is clear that (Robinson)'s public interest defence relies principally in his reasonably believing there to be a public interest in setting the record straight, through him allowing B to put forward his answer to the proposition that the viral video demonstrated a racially motivated attack on the claimant.'...

<snip>

...The judge said Robinson's argument had not respected the difference between his 'subjective belief' and objective truth.

Lawyers for Jamal argued the video of the attack was uploaded on November 27, with Robinson's comments published on November 28 and 29 respectively, giving him limited time to conduct his alleged investigations.

The judge said there was a 'complete absence of chronology' in when the interviews occurred, adding Robinson has still failed to provide the names of the people alleging Jamal had been violent to them.

Article concludes with:
The judge accepted amendments to Robinson's existing defence of truth, where the 37-year-old added further details to allegations of violence by Jamal as well as three new incidents, which will be tested at trial.


Kind of sounds like Robinson is winging it ... reminds me a lot of Sandmann.

So, finally someone bothers to post what this is supposedly about? Cool.

So, what was the damage to the kid after Tommy Robinson's story?


And why is it that people are constantly mentioning that he changed his name? Lots of writers use pen names or alter their names when they publish.

He was alleged to be someone who beat up girls. That is a bad thing in a civilised society as yaxley can testify. His family had to move from their town after this.

This is why yaxley is terrified about going to trial.

Loser of Coleen & Becky battle 'faces £1.6m bill if case goes to trial'

THE loser of the infamous Wagatha Christie court battle between Coleen Rooney and Rebekah Vardy will face a legal bill upwards of £1.6million, if the case goes to trial it was reported today. The w…

www.thesun.co.uk

Poor chap will have to go back to drug dealing again.

 

[Correll]

Here's another article on the incident: Judge rules against Tommy Robinson in case brought by Syrian schoolboy

A video showing Jamal Hijazi, then 16, being pushed to the ground and threatened with drowning at Almondbury School in Huddersfield provoked outrage after it was widely shared in November 2018.

Robinson, 37, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, later commented about the incident in two Facebook videos, claiming Jamal was 'not innocent and he violently attacks young English girls in his school'.


ut in a judgment handed down remotely today, Mr Justice Nicklin rejected Robinson's public interest application.

He said: 'It is clear that (Robinson)'s public interest defence relies principally in his reasonably believing there to be a public interest in setting the record straight, through him allowing B to put forward his answer to the proposition that the viral video demonstrated a racially motivated attack on the claimant.'...

<snip>

...The judge said Robinson's argument had not respected the difference between his 'subjective belief' and objective truth.

Lawyers for Jamal argued the video of the attack was uploaded on November 27, with Robinson's comments published on November 28 and 29 respectively, giving him limited time to conduct his alleged investigations.

The judge said there was a 'complete absence of chronology' in when the interviews occurred, adding Robinson has still failed to provide the names of the people alleging Jamal had been violent to them.

Article concludes with:
The judge accepted amendments to Robinson's existing defence of truth, where the 37-year-old added further details to allegations of violence by Jamal as well as three new incidents, which will be tested at trial.


Kind of sounds like Robinson is winging it ... reminds me a lot of Sandmann.

So, finally someone bothers to post what this is supposedly about? Cool.

So, what was the damage to the kid after Tommy Robinson's story?


And why is it that people are constantly mentioning that he changed his name? Lots of writers use pen names or alter their names when they publish.

He was alleged to be someone who beat up girls. That is a bad thing in a civilised society as yaxley can testify. His family had to move from their town after this.

This is why yaxley is terrified about going to trial.

Loser of Coleen & Becky battle 'faces £1.6m bill if case goes to trial'

THE loser of the infamous Wagatha Christie court battle between Coleen Rooney and Rebekah Vardy will face a legal bill upwards of £1.6million, if the case goes to trial it was reported today. The w…

www.thesun.co.uk

Poor chap will have to go back to drug dealing again.

So, your link is about Tommy, not the child and his family?

Better watch it. THe mods don't want this thread derailed.

Meanwhile, you want to support your claims?

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Here's another article on the incident: Judge rules against Tommy Robinson in case brought by Syrian schoolboy

A video showing Jamal Hijazi, then 16, being pushed to the ground and threatened with drowning at Almondbury School in Huddersfield provoked outrage after it was widely shared in November 2018.

Robinson, 37, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, later commented about the incident in two Facebook videos, claiming Jamal was 'not innocent and he violently attacks young English girls in his school'.


ut in a judgment handed down remotely today, Mr Justice Nicklin rejected Robinson's public interest application.

He said: 'It is clear that (Robinson)'s public interest defence relies principally in his reasonably believing there to be a public interest in setting the record straight, through him allowing B to put forward his answer to the proposition that the viral video demonstrated a racially motivated attack on the claimant.'...

<snip>

...The judge said Robinson's argument had not respected the difference between his 'subjective belief' and objective truth.

Lawyers for Jamal argued the video of the attack was uploaded on November 27, with Robinson's comments published on November 28 and 29 respectively, giving him limited time to conduct his alleged investigations.

The judge said there was a 'complete absence of chronology' in when the interviews occurred, adding Robinson has still failed to provide the names of the people alleging Jamal had been violent to them.

Article concludes with:
The judge accepted amendments to Robinson's existing defence of truth, where the 37-year-old added further details to allegations of violence by Jamal as well as three new incidents, which will be tested at trial.


Kind of sounds like Robinson is winging it ... reminds me a lot of Sandmann.

So, finally someone bothers to post what this is supposedly about? Cool.

So, what was the damage to the kid after Tommy Robinson's story?


And why is it that people are constantly mentioning that he changed his name? Lots of writers use pen names or alter their names when they publish.

He was alleged to be someone who beat up girls. That is a bad thing in a civilised society as yaxley can testify. His family had to move from their town after this.

This is why yaxley is terrified about going to trial.

Loser of Coleen & Becky battle 'faces £1.6m bill if case goes to trial'

THE loser of the infamous Wagatha Christie court battle between Coleen Rooney and Rebekah Vardy will face a legal bill upwards of £1.6million, if the case goes to trial it was reported today. The w…

www.thesun.co.uk

Poor chap will have to go back to drug dealing again.

So, your link is about Tommy, not the child and his family?

Better watch it. THe mods don't want this thread derailed.

Meanwhile, you want to support your claims?

People are laughing at you. My post , in response to you, details why the allegations are so disgraceful and the outcomes for the family. Perhaps you would now like to respond to Coyote who asked for your opinion.

What is going on in this case is pretty clear to everybody but you are deflecting like crazy to avoid being critical of the well known felon.

 

[Correll]

Here's another article on the incident: Judge rules against Tommy Robinson in case brought by Syrian schoolboy

A video showing Jamal Hijazi, then 16, being pushed to the ground and threatened with drowning at Almondbury School in Huddersfield provoked outrage after it was widely shared in November 2018.

Robinson, 37, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, later commented about the incident in two Facebook videos, claiming Jamal was 'not innocent and he violently attacks young English girls in his school'.


ut in a judgment handed down remotely today, Mr Justice Nicklin rejected Robinson's public interest application.

He said: 'It is clear that (Robinson)'s public interest defence relies principally in his reasonably believing there to be a public interest in setting the record straight, through him allowing B to put forward his answer to the proposition that the viral video demonstrated a racially motivated attack on the claimant.'...

<snip>

...The judge said Robinson's argument had not respected the difference between his 'subjective belief' and objective truth.

Lawyers for Jamal argued the video of the attack was uploaded on November 27, with Robinson's comments published on November 28 and 29 respectively, giving him limited time to conduct his alleged investigations.

The judge said there was a 'complete absence of chronology' in when the interviews occurred, adding Robinson has still failed to provide the names of the people alleging Jamal had been violent to them.

Article concludes with:
The judge accepted amendments to Robinson's existing defence of truth, where the 37-year-old added further details to allegations of violence by Jamal as well as three new incidents, which will be tested at trial.


Kind of sounds like Robinson is winging it ... reminds me a lot of Sandmann.

So, finally someone bothers to post what this is supposedly about? Cool.

So, what was the damage to the kid after Tommy Robinson's story?


And why is it that people are constantly mentioning that he changed his name? Lots of writers use pen names or alter their names when they publish.

He was alleged to be someone who beat up girls. That is a bad thing in a civilised society as yaxley can testify. His family had to move from their town after this.

This is why yaxley is terrified about going to trial.

Loser of Coleen & Becky battle 'faces £1.6m bill if case goes to trial'

THE loser of the infamous Wagatha Christie court battle between Coleen Rooney and Rebekah Vardy will face a legal bill upwards of £1.6million, if the case goes to trial it was reported today. The w…

www.thesun.co.uk

Poor chap will have to go back to drug dealing again.

So, your link is about Tommy, not the child and his family?

Better watch it. THe mods don't want this thread derailed.

Meanwhile, you want to support your claims?

People are laughing at you. My post , in response to you, details why the allegations are so disgraceful and the outcomes for the family. Perhaps you would now like to respond to Coyote who asked for your opinion.

What is going on in this case is pretty clear to everybody but you are deflecting like crazy to avoid being critical of the well known felon.

YOu barely touched on them and did not support them with anything. Your link was gloating about the possible cost to Tommy Robinson!

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Here's another article on the incident: Judge rules against Tommy Robinson in case brought by Syrian schoolboy

A video showing Jamal Hijazi, then 16, being pushed to the ground and threatened with drowning at Almondbury School in Huddersfield provoked outrage after it was widely shared in November 2018.

Robinson, 37, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, later commented about the incident in two Facebook videos, claiming Jamal was 'not innocent and he violently attacks young English girls in his school'.


ut in a judgment handed down remotely today, Mr Justice Nicklin rejected Robinson's public interest application.

He said: 'It is clear that (Robinson)'s public interest defence relies principally in his reasonably believing there to be a public interest in setting the record straight, through him allowing B to put forward his answer to the proposition that the viral video demonstrated a racially motivated attack on the claimant.'...

<snip>

...The judge said Robinson's argument had not respected the difference between his 'subjective belief' and objective truth.

Lawyers for Jamal argued the video of the attack was uploaded on November 27, with Robinson's comments published on November 28 and 29 respectively, giving him limited time to conduct his alleged investigations.

The judge said there was a 'complete absence of chronology' in when the interviews occurred, adding Robinson has still failed to provide the names of the people alleging Jamal had been violent to them.

Article concludes with:
The judge accepted amendments to Robinson's existing defence of truth, where the 37-year-old added further details to allegations of violence by Jamal as well as three new incidents, which will be tested at trial.


Kind of sounds like Robinson is winging it ... reminds me a lot of Sandmann.

So, finally someone bothers to post what this is supposedly about? Cool.

So, what was the damage to the kid after Tommy Robinson's story?


And why is it that people are constantly mentioning that he changed his name? Lots of writers use pen names or alter their names when they publish.

He was alleged to be someone who beat up girls. That is a bad thing in a civilised society as yaxley can testify. His family had to move from their town after this.

This is why yaxley is terrified about going to trial.

Loser of Coleen & Becky battle 'faces £1.6m bill if case goes to trial'

THE loser of the infamous Wagatha Christie court battle between Coleen Rooney and Rebekah Vardy will face a legal bill upwards of £1.6million, if the case goes to trial it was reported today. The w…

www.thesun.co.uk

Poor chap will have to go back to drug dealing again.

So, your link is about Tommy, not the child and his family?

Better watch it. THe mods don't want this thread derailed.

Meanwhile, you want to support your claims?

People are laughing at you. My post , in response to you, details why the allegations are so disgraceful and the outcomes for the family. Perhaps you would now like to respond to Coyote who asked for your opinion.

What is going on in this case is pretty clear to everybody but you are deflecting like crazy to avoid being critical of the well known felon.

YOu barely touched on them and did not support them with anything. Your link was gloating about the possible cost to Tommy Robinson!

You struggle with reading links so why bother ?

And yes, I am fucking loving it.

 

[Correll]

Here's another article on the incident: Judge rules against Tommy Robinson in case brought by Syrian schoolboy

A video showing Jamal Hijazi, then 16, being pushed to the ground and threatened with drowning at Almondbury School in Huddersfield provoked outrage after it was widely shared in November 2018.

Robinson, 37, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, later commented about the incident in two Facebook videos, claiming Jamal was 'not innocent and he violently attacks young English girls in his school'.


ut in a judgment handed down remotely today, Mr Justice Nicklin rejected Robinson's public interest application.

He said: 'It is clear that (Robinson)'s public interest defence relies principally in his reasonably believing there to be a public interest in setting the record straight, through him allowing B to put forward his answer to the proposition that the viral video demonstrated a racially motivated attack on the claimant.'...

<snip>

...The judge said Robinson's argument had not respected the difference between his 'subjective belief' and objective truth.

Lawyers for Jamal argued the video of the attack was uploaded on November 27, with Robinson's comments published on November 28 and 29 respectively, giving him limited time to conduct his alleged investigations.

The judge said there was a 'complete absence of chronology' in when the interviews occurred, adding Robinson has still failed to provide the names of the people alleging Jamal had been violent to them.

Article concludes with:
The judge accepted amendments to Robinson's existing defence of truth, where the 37-year-old added further details to allegations of violence by Jamal as well as three new incidents, which will be tested at trial.


Kind of sounds like Robinson is winging it ... reminds me a lot of Sandmann.

So, finally someone bothers to post what this is supposedly about? Cool.

So, what was the damage to the kid after Tommy Robinson's story?


And why is it that people are constantly mentioning that he changed his name? Lots of writers use pen names or alter their names when they publish.

He was alleged to be someone who beat up girls. That is a bad thing in a civilised society as yaxley can testify. His family had to move from their town after this.

This is why yaxley is terrified about going to trial.

Loser of Coleen & Becky battle 'faces £1.6m bill if case goes to trial'

THE loser of the infamous Wagatha Christie court battle between Coleen Rooney and Rebekah Vardy will face a legal bill upwards of £1.6million, if the case goes to trial it was reported today. The w…

www.thesun.co.uk

Poor chap will have to go back to drug dealing again.

So, your link is about Tommy, not the child and his family?

Better watch it. THe mods don't want this thread derailed.

Meanwhile, you want to support your claims?

People are laughing at you. My post , in response to you, details why the allegations are so disgraceful and the outcomes for the family. Perhaps you would now like to respond to Coyote who asked for your opinion.

What is going on in this case is pretty clear to everybody but you are deflecting like crazy to avoid being critical of the well known felon.

YOu barely touched on them and did not support them with anything. Your link was gloating about the possible cost to Tommy Robinson!

You struggle with reading links so why bother ?

And yes, I am fucking loving it.

So, to be clear, I ask you to support your claims about the boy and you refuse and attack me personally and then gloat about the possible cost to Tommy Robinson.


Good thing this thread is on topic. And not derailed. Mmmmm.


So, any news on whether what tommy claimed has been proved or not?

 

[Coyote]

Here's another article on the incident: Judge rules against Tommy Robinson in case brought by Syrian schoolboy

A video showing Jamal Hijazi, then 16, being pushed to the ground and threatened with drowning at Almondbury School in Huddersfield provoked outrage after it was widely shared in November 2018.

Robinson, 37, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, later commented about the incident in two Facebook videos, claiming Jamal was 'not innocent and he violently attacks young English girls in his school'.


ut in a judgment handed down remotely today, Mr Justice Nicklin rejected Robinson's public interest application.

He said: 'It is clear that (Robinson)'s public interest defence relies principally in his reasonably believing there to be a public interest in setting the record straight, through him allowing B to put forward his answer to the proposition that the viral video demonstrated a racially motivated attack on the claimant.'...

<snip>

...The judge said Robinson's argument had not respected the difference between his 'subjective belief' and objective truth.

Lawyers for Jamal argued the video of the attack was uploaded on November 27, with Robinson's comments published on November 28 and 29 respectively, giving him limited time to conduct his alleged investigations.

The judge said there was a 'complete absence of chronology' in when the interviews occurred, adding Robinson has still failed to provide the names of the people alleging Jamal had been violent to them.

Article concludes with:
The judge accepted amendments to Robinson's existing defence of truth, where the 37-year-old added further details to allegations of violence by Jamal as well as three new incidents, which will be tested at trial.


Kind of sounds like Robinson is winging it ... reminds me a lot of Sandmann.

So, finally someone bothers to post what this is supposedly about? Cool.

So, what was the damage to the kid after Tommy Robinson's story?


And why is it that people are constantly mentioning that he changed his name? Lots of writers use pen names or alter their names when they publish.

I don't care about the distracting stuff...like name changes and shit

Let's look at what it means to attack a 16 year old and accuse him, baselessly at this point, of "beating up" girls.

How does that sit with you?

Is it any different than how Sandmann was treated?


My personal opinion is this: Robinson is an ADULT. An ADULT with a following and a voice.

He was choosing to attack a minor.


What about it?

 

[Coyote]

Here's another article on the incident: Judge rules against Tommy Robinson in case brought by Syrian schoolboy

A video showing Jamal Hijazi, then 16, being pushed to the ground and threatened with drowning at Almondbury School in Huddersfield provoked outrage after it was widely shared in November 2018.

Robinson, 37, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, later commented about the incident in two Facebook videos, claiming Jamal was 'not innocent and he violently attacks young English girls in his school'.


ut in a judgment handed down remotely today, Mr Justice Nicklin rejected Robinson's public interest application.

He said: 'It is clear that (Robinson)'s public interest defence relies principally in his reasonably believing there to be a public interest in setting the record straight, through him allowing B to put forward his answer to the proposition that the viral video demonstrated a racially motivated attack on the claimant.'...

<snip>

...The judge said Robinson's argument had not respected the difference between his 'subjective belief' and objective truth.

Lawyers for Jamal argued the video of the attack was uploaded on November 27, with Robinson's comments published on November 28 and 29 respectively, giving him limited time to conduct his alleged investigations.

The judge said there was a 'complete absence of chronology' in when the interviews occurred, adding Robinson has still failed to provide the names of the people alleging Jamal had been violent to them.

Article concludes with:
The judge accepted amendments to Robinson's existing defence of truth, where the 37-year-old added further details to allegations of violence by Jamal as well as three new incidents, which will be tested at trial.


Kind of sounds like Robinson is winging it ... reminds me a lot of Sandmann.

So, finally someone bothers to post what this is supposedly about? Cool.

So, what was the damage to the kid after Tommy Robinson's story?


And why is it that people are constantly mentioning that he changed his name? Lots of writers use pen names or alter their names when they publish.

He was alleged to be someone who beat up girls. That is a bad thing in a civilised society as yaxley can testify. His family had to move from their town after this.

This is why yaxley is terrified about going to trial.

Loser of Coleen & Becky battle 'faces £1.6m bill if case goes to trial'

THE loser of the infamous Wagatha Christie court battle between Coleen Rooney and Rebekah Vardy will face a legal bill upwards of £1.6million, if the case goes to trial it was reported today. The w…

www.thesun.co.uk

Poor chap will have to go back to drug dealing again.

So, your link is about Tommy, not the child and his family?

Better watch it. THe mods don't want this thread derailed.

Meanwhile, you want to support your claims?

People are laughing at you. My post , in response to you, details why the allegations are so disgraceful and the outcomes for the family. Perhaps you would now like to respond to Coyote who asked for your opinion.

What is going on in this case is pretty clear to everybody but you are deflecting like crazy to avoid being critical of the well known felon.

YOu barely touched on them and did not support them with anything. Your link was gloating about the possible cost to Tommy Robinson!

Robinson has proved, multiple times, that he is an asshole. Move beyond it and beyond Tommy.

 

[Correll]

Here's another article on the incident: Judge rules against Tommy Robinson in case brought by Syrian schoolboy

A video showing Jamal Hijazi, then 16, being pushed to the ground and threatened with drowning at Almondbury School in Huddersfield provoked outrage after it was widely shared in November 2018.

Robinson, 37, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, later commented about the incident in two Facebook videos, claiming Jamal was 'not innocent and he violently attacks young English girls in his school'.


ut in a judgment handed down remotely today, Mr Justice Nicklin rejected Robinson's public interest application.

He said: 'It is clear that (Robinson)'s public interest defence relies principally in his reasonably believing there to be a public interest in setting the record straight, through him allowing B to put forward his answer to the proposition that the viral video demonstrated a racially motivated attack on the claimant.'...

<snip>

...The judge said Robinson's argument had not respected the difference between his 'subjective belief' and objective truth.

Lawyers for Jamal argued the video of the attack was uploaded on November 27, with Robinson's comments published on November 28 and 29 respectively, giving him limited time to conduct his alleged investigations.

The judge said there was a 'complete absence of chronology' in when the interviews occurred, adding Robinson has still failed to provide the names of the people alleging Jamal had been violent to them.

Article concludes with:
The judge accepted amendments to Robinson's existing defence of truth, where the 37-year-old added further details to allegations of violence by Jamal as well as three new incidents, which will be tested at trial.


Kind of sounds like Robinson is winging it ... reminds me a lot of Sandmann.

So, finally someone bothers to post what this is supposedly about? Cool.

So, what was the damage to the kid after Tommy Robinson's story?


And why is it that people are constantly mentioning that he changed his name? Lots of writers use pen names or alter their names when they publish.

I don't care about the distracting stuff...like name changes and shit

Let's look at what it means to attack a 16 year old and accuse him, baselessly at this point, of "beating up" girls.

How does that sit with you?

Is it any different than how Sandmann was treated?


My personal opinion is this: Robinson is an ADULT. An ADULT with a following and a voice.

He was choosing to attack a minor.


What about it?

Way I see it, there are three possibilities. One, Tommy Robinson, actually did some research and found something to give him the honest belief that that was the case. Two, that he just assumed it based on his personal expectations about muslims. Three he purposefully lied to just smear the kid.


If it is one, then he is in the right.

If two, then he went out on a limb and the question becomes, was he right.

If three than he was wrong to do that, and should be punished.


AND, I think it is telling that between me and you, we both are fine with him choosing his name, but Tommy Taint, and the brit press, seems to think that it means something and constantly mention it, as though they don't respect his right to define himself.

Ignoring the bias against Tommy Robinson is a good way to let them fool you.

 

[Coyote]

Here's another article on the incident: Judge rules against Tommy Robinson in case brought by Syrian schoolboy

A video showing Jamal Hijazi, then 16, being pushed to the ground and threatened with drowning at Almondbury School in Huddersfield provoked outrage after it was widely shared in November 2018.

Robinson, 37, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, later commented about the incident in two Facebook videos, claiming Jamal was 'not innocent and he violently attacks young English girls in his school'.


ut in a judgment handed down remotely today, Mr Justice Nicklin rejected Robinson's public interest application.

He said: 'It is clear that (Robinson)'s public interest defence relies principally in his reasonably believing there to be a public interest in setting the record straight, through him allowing B to put forward his answer to the proposition that the viral video demonstrated a racially motivated attack on the claimant.'...

<snip>

...The judge said Robinson's argument had not respected the difference between his 'subjective belief' and objective truth.

Lawyers for Jamal argued the video of the attack was uploaded on November 27, with Robinson's comments published on November 28 and 29 respectively, giving him limited time to conduct his alleged investigations.

The judge said there was a 'complete absence of chronology' in when the interviews occurred, adding Robinson has still failed to provide the names of the people alleging Jamal had been violent to them.

Article concludes with:
The judge accepted amendments to Robinson's existing defence of truth, where the 37-year-old added further details to allegations of violence by Jamal as well as three new incidents, which will be tested at trial.


Kind of sounds like Robinson is winging it ... reminds me a lot of Sandmann.

So, finally someone bothers to post what this is supposedly about? Cool.

So, what was the damage to the kid after Tommy Robinson's story?


And why is it that people are constantly mentioning that he changed his name? Lots of writers use pen names or alter their names when they publish.

I don't care about the distracting stuff...like name changes and shit

Let's look at what it means to attack a 16 year old and accuse him, baselessly at this point, of "beating up" girls.

How does that sit with you?

Is it any different than how Sandmann was treated?


My personal opinion is this: Robinson is an ADULT. An ADULT with a following and a voice.

He was choosing to attack a minor.


What about it?

Way I see it, there are three possibilities. One, Tommy Robinson, actually did some research and found something to give him the honest belief that that was the case. Two, that he just assumed it based on his personal expectations about muslims. Three he purposefully lied to just smear the kid.


If it is one, then he is in the right.

If two, then he went out on a limb and the question becomes, was he right.

If three than he was wrong to do that, and should be punished.


AND, I think it is telling that between me and you, we both are fine with him choosing his name, but Tommy Taint, and the brit press, seems to think that it means something and constantly mention it, as though they don't respect his right to define himself.

Ignoring the bias against Tommy Robinson is a good way to let them fool you.

If it's one...he wasn't able to provide anything too the judge - in fact he was ripped for it (though he could have since ACTUALLY done some research and found something, there is nothing in the public domain).

Two and Three are no goes, without evidence. He libeled the kid, and he deserves to have the book thrown at him. Adults shouldn't be targeting kids like that don't you think?

I think the name is that his real name is an indicator of his real social class and that he's a pretender to the working class? Either way - no big deal. IMO - it's no different than the way some folks were calling President Obama - Hussain or Barry Soweto.

 

[Correll]

Here's another article on the incident: Judge rules against Tommy Robinson in case brought by Syrian schoolboy

A video showing Jamal Hijazi, then 16, being pushed to the ground and threatened with drowning at Almondbury School in Huddersfield provoked outrage after it was widely shared in November 2018.

Robinson, 37, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, later commented about the incident in two Facebook videos, claiming Jamal was 'not innocent and he violently attacks young English girls in his school'.


ut in a judgment handed down remotely today, Mr Justice Nicklin rejected Robinson's public interest application.

He said: 'It is clear that (Robinson)'s public interest defence relies principally in his reasonably believing there to be a public interest in setting the record straight, through him allowing B to put forward his answer to the proposition that the viral video demonstrated a racially motivated attack on the claimant.'...

<snip>

...The judge said Robinson's argument had not respected the difference between his 'subjective belief' and objective truth.

Lawyers for Jamal argued the video of the attack was uploaded on November 27, with Robinson's comments published on November 28 and 29 respectively, giving him limited time to conduct his alleged investigations.

The judge said there was a 'complete absence of chronology' in when the interviews occurred, adding Robinson has still failed to provide the names of the people alleging Jamal had been violent to them.

Article concludes with:
The judge accepted amendments to Robinson's existing defence of truth, where the 37-year-old added further details to allegations of violence by Jamal as well as three new incidents, which will be tested at trial.


Kind of sounds like Robinson is winging it ... reminds me a lot of Sandmann.

So, finally someone bothers to post what this is supposedly about? Cool.

So, what was the damage to the kid after Tommy Robinson's story?


And why is it that people are constantly mentioning that he changed his name? Lots of writers use pen names or alter their names when they publish.

I don't care about the distracting stuff...like name changes and shit

Let's look at what it means to attack a 16 year old and accuse him, baselessly at this point, of "beating up" girls.

How does that sit with you?

Is it any different than how Sandmann was treated?


My personal opinion is this: Robinson is an ADULT. An ADULT with a following and a voice.

He was choosing to attack a minor.


What about it?

Way I see it, there are three possibilities. One, Tommy Robinson, actually did some research and found something to give him the honest belief that that was the case. Two, that he just assumed it based on his personal expectations about muslims. Three he purposefully lied to just smear the kid.


If it is one, then he is in the right.

If two, then he went out on a limb and the question becomes, was he right.

If three than he was wrong to do that, and should be punished.


AND, I think it is telling that between me and you, we both are fine with him choosing his name, but Tommy Taint, and the brit press, seems to think that it means something and constantly mention it, as though they don't respect his right to define himself.

Ignoring the bias against Tommy Robinson is a good way to let them fool you.

If it's one...he wasn't able to provide anything too the judge - in fact he was ripped for it (though he could have since ACTUALLY done some research and found something, there is nothing in the public domain).

Two and Three are no goes, without evidence. He libeled the kid, and he deserves to have the book thrown at him. Adults shouldn't be targeting kids like that don't you think?

I think the name is that his real name is an indicator of his real social class and that he's a pretender to the working class? Either way - no big deal. IMO - it's no different than the way some folks were calling President Obama - Hussain or Barry Soweto.

1. If the political class and the media in teh uk is as biased against Tommy Robinson as those who called President Obama, Barry Soweto, we can't dismiss the possibility that he did the work and they are just lying about that. OR that such sloppiness is normal for the media and they are just targeting Robinson for partisan reasons.


2. If the situation in UK schools are such that Tommy Robinson felt comfortable just assuming that a random muslim kid had committed violence against white female students, AND HE TURNS OUT TO BE RIGHT, then going after Tommy Robinson, the guy talking about it, takes on a whole new meaning. Wouldn't you say?


3. Agreed.