Welcome To Zelo Street!

This is a blog of liberal stance and independent mind

Thursday 21 September 2017

Tommy Robinson’s Pals CHARGED

Another day, another laughable example of the far right playing the victim, as the fallout from a court case where four men were tried and convicted of raping a 16-year-old girl in a room above a Ramsgate takeaway continues. Zelo Street regulars will be familiar with the attempted intervention in proceedings by Stephen Yaxley Lennon, who styles himself Tommy Robinson, which landed him with a suspended prison sentence.
All pals together

Lennon and his then sidekick Caolan Robertson had fetched up at Canterbury Crown Court with the intention of having one of those “polite conversations” with the accused men, only to fall foul of contempt laws by filming in and around the court building, which is expressly forbidden - as in, spelt out on signs displayed prominently. This earned Lennon a dawn raid at his home, and once again, yes, he was the victim.

But that was not all: the court case had also attracted the attention of Lennon’s new pals Paul Golding and Jayda Fransen of Britain First, the organisation which had the most unfortunate distinction of getting itself linked to the murder of Labour MP Jo Cox last year. The pair were nicked in the Tonbridge area on suspicion of inciting religious hatred, and Golding was later detained by the Police. He, too, was a victim.
Now, both these less than totally august individuals have been charged with religiously aggravated harassment. As Sky News has reported, “Kent Police said their investigation into the pair was related to leaflets distributed in Thanet and Canterbury, and videos posted during a trial at Canterbury Crown court … Golding was charged with three count of harassment while Fransen was charged with four … Both have been bailed to appear before Medway magistrates on 17 October 2017”.

One wonders if their pal Tommy, Stephen, or whatever other alias he chooses, will be there to offer support. What is not in dispute is that Lennon (aka Robinson) knows the Britain First pair have been charged - he has already disputed the matter, and more than likely before he bothers himself to find out what for.
After Tweeting a photo of the lucky couple with the straightforward caption “Britain First leader Paul Golding charged with harassment”, Lennon launched into a tirade against, well, anyone not backing the judgment of Himself Personally Now: “This is bollox. The men were on bail for raping an English child [and] were still running the same chicken shop they did it in. Now all convicted”. Which means what, exactly?

Does “English child” (the girl was 16) confer special status in law? Why should the fact that the men got guilty (three of them were given 14 year sentences) make what Golding and Ms Fransen did somehow OK? Has he read up on the law, and been in touch with anyone involved in the case (apart from those charged)? That’ll be more of those Questions To Which The Answer Is No, then.

Unlike Lennon (aka Robinson), Zelo Street understands the contempt laws and will therefore be making no further comment before the court case next month. One of these days, he will form a similar understanding. But, sadly, probably not just yet.


Arnold said...

As Newsthump has pointed out, if they don't like our laws, they are free to leave the country. Well once their current legal problems are over, that is.

The Toffee said...

You seem to make out they've committed a worse crime than the animals what raped the girl...They most certainly is not

So what if she's 16? What's your point about that? our inferring she's old enough to consent but she obviously hadn't consented otherwise there'd be no trial, would there?

Nonces & rapists deserve to be hounded - regardless of race.

I generally agree with your views, but on this one you're as way off the mark as they are.

Anonymous said...

I disagree "The Toffee". For one thing I don't think he does say anywhere that what BF did was "worse" than anything, but, more importantly either you think people are innocent until proven otherwise or you think we should go back to some kind of mob rule where the bloke with the most money/biggest stick decided who was guilty? These idiots could have f***-ed up the trial leading to those charged getting let out. How would that have served justice?