Message from @๐Dougal ๐
Discord ID: 451101779661422593
dankula did not break the law. he committed a social justice crime
no parole breached
The law exists to criminalize being grossly offensive, yes?
no.
If you're going to claim the law doesn't exist, then there's nothing that needs fixing.
Last time he went onto court property
it didn't exist prior to dankula being convicted of such crime
This time he only repeated the allegations
Did they make the law up on the spot?
They use whatever law they can get away with
You two aren't even making sense. Also, this silly argument isn't <#377519739380957184> material.
Deck of cards they play whatever they think they can
the way the british criminal justice system works, via laymans explanation to me, is that british law is determined by precedent, i.e. if there is no prior law regarding a specific crime, it is taken before a court and determined whether or not a crime has indeed occured, and then if it has, it is then judged and precedent is made by which all such crimes in the future will be pursued and treated
What occured is utter nonsense. Politically motivated as Tommy is getting bigger, day of freedom must really pissed them off.
in otherwords, if dankula had gone to jail, then all others commiting grossly offensive comedy would by then be criminalized and put in jail
I thought we were agreeing ๐
dankula was the pillar that fell down in terms of precedent, and now it's fineable for saying something racist
or more specifically antisemetic
The law exists on the books before the precedent. The precedent determines the intricacies of how the law is applied, how it's weighted against other laws.
lol
Especially how quick the courts
i'm not talking about tommy specifically
No precedent for breach of a gag order?
im talking about dankula tbh
no gag order
gag was after tommy was arrested
DKO he was arrested not for that, but for public disturbance
they then used his prior bond to incarcerate him
`Contempt of Court Proceedings`
correct
violation of bond is contempt of court
That means the Court gave an order, he violated it.
Politically motivated arrest, so the court could get him
yes dko
Anyway, none of us know the exact details. Unless you got to look at his case files, and you're actually trained in UK law, your opinion is just that, a layman's opinion. Just like mine.
they ordered him in his prior court case that he'd be able to be out and about in public for a specific reason, the contempt of court was he violated it by going to a court house and presumedly 'disrupting the public order'
Well as family members who are senior police officers they are up in arms about tommy's arrest. So this is not normal at all.
it certainly isn't
it's literally a 'shut up' quit talking incarceration