Update March 12: Ezra Levant is doing a fine job reporting from the trial on Twitter.
Yesterday, March 11th, Ezra Levant got an urgent request from his friend Tommy to hop over from Canada to London and then Peterborough to report on his suit against the police in civil court. It’s probably unnecessary since there are so many fair and impartial UK media people keen to report honestly on anything to do with Tommy Robinson. John Sweeney will most likely be the first one in court, representing that most-trusted broadcaster known as the BBC.
UK media will no doubt be appalled and outraged at the harassment of Tommy and his family by the Cambridgeshire police, and will therefore report on the trial in impeccable and comprehensive detail. But just to be sure, he wanted Ezra Levant with him for his input and support.
I suppose Ezra has already landed and has made his way to Peterborough for the beginning of proceedings at 10am. The exercise is costly and he has appealed for help. Info on developments can be found here and donations made for those able so to do.
Here’s Tommy from yesterday, discussing the issue.
Thanks to StewGreen and G.W.F. for providing links on the Open Thread.
Having followed proceedings fairly closely via Ezra’s tweets and the Cambridgeshire live blog, I feel there are quite a few troubling aspects of this disappointing case:
It seems Tommy Robinson was not well briefed by his lawyer. He should not have said the cops targeted him because of his views on Islam. Though half the planet knows the cops have been abusing him for years mostly for that reason, there was zero evidence of it in the video of this incident. So it just muddied the waters.
Sergeant Street said he thought Tommy was a risk because a drunken supporter had told him so. That was ridiculous. Even slightly less ridiculous was the added ‘evidence’ that ‘Luton spotters’ had also identified Tommy as a risk. If I have this right, those individuals were not identified and asked to testify, so Street’s basis for suspecting Tommy of potential violence was unjustified and untested. Much should have been made of this by Tommy’s lawyer.
Remarkable that the judge made light of the evidence by PC Mason that he’d known Tommy for decades, he was not a risk, and he had told Street that.
It strikes me that demanding that keen football fans leave a venue half an hour before the end of a game is simply petty and vindictive, especially when they had caused no trouble.
Street should have backed down when the landlady of the pub defended Tommy and if not then, certainly when Tommy pointed out he was with his children. Are there any football hooligans who take their young children to a brawl? Dunno if this is true, but I read that Tommy has for some time been been cleared of football hooliganism.
The judge stated that it was OK for the cops to follow Tommy and his friends to make sure they didn’t return to the pub. Cops standing at the entrance wouldn’t have had the same effect? They wouldn’t relent even when an agitated Tommy pointed out that they were frightening his children.
This is a real travesty of justice. If the case fails on appeal then it will give a green light for cops to be abusive on unjustified suspicion of potential misconduct. And Great Britain will edge closer to third-world status.
I thought I was living in a free country but this case raises a myriad of questions,
Can I be charged for something I MIGHT do?
Can I be expelled from a city in the UK based on something someone claims I MIGHT do?
If someone is a risk to ‘public order’ in one town or village how does putting them on a train eliminate the risk factor?
Lucy Pevensey,
If they can expel you for something you might do then I guess they will soon be able to charge, try, convict and jail you for something you might once have thought of doing.
Difficult to prove, of course, but they have ways and means. Or if they don’t yet have them, they will.
Theyr were happy to watch that bastard spewing hate and bile from the Finsbury park mosque for years in the sreet and did nothing
Tough one for the judge. ‘You’re finished if you rule in favour of TR’.
Politics rules the Judiciary. And that will apply to the appeal if one is allowed.
Aaah. Now that he has lost, the BBC are covering it.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-47586480
£20,000 ordered to be paid within 14 days then reverting to over £40,000 if that deadline is not met.
https://www.tr.news/cambridge-costs/
Disgusting.
TR should pay. There is no way that his appeal can succeed, even if he had hard evidence that the cops assaulted his kids. The Appeal Judge will follow his/her political orders and reject the appeal. Pay up Tommy, and reconsider using the law to address wrongs committed against you. You won’t get lawyers to fight tooth and nail to support you. They will have to look after themselves.
GWF
I totally agree – on reflection is was unwise trying to use a subverted legal system . He should have taken their out of court offer and used it against them .
An appeal would be insane .
Those police forces will also want further revenge – not just costs .
The fact that the cops twice offered him money in compensation shows they know they were guilty.
His lawyer should really have pushed to find out how high up the ranks the order came for the abuse against him at the pub. There was most probably a general order to get Tommy whenever and wherever possible whether or not there were grounds for such action.
I half-agree that he should have taken the money offered. But on the plus side, millions more people will now be aware after the trial of the abusive nature of those cops and their total disregard for the rights of (some) British citizens.
I hope he does appeal. His support will only increase and there will almost certainly be enough people willing to fund his costs.