and i agree. i see it more as a matter of principle that one way or the other both cases (and to be more general, ALL cases) should be afforded the same fundamental protections by law to prevent undue influence, or none at all should. there should be no in-between

How they decide what to blank out and not I have no idea

Dankula's case had no jury.

true, however they had one person judging the case

and one is just as easily influenced as 12 or however many jurors there are in a british trial

what science do they use to determine what, when and who can film what where and when?

Dankula should have had a right to a jury, and receive the same protection against smearing by the media.

To me it seems they just want the rape gangs under wrap

It could be. We still don't know many details of Tommy's case, like whether they refused him to contact is attorney or not.

It doesn't help that the usual suspects were trying to exaggerate/lie by omission to score some PR points. Like the rumor that Tommy was beaten in prison.

i am mostly a centrist by nature, so i have conflicting views on most subjects, however in this case, the principled path would be to choose an 'either, or' option. either both have media blackouts regarding the trial, or they do not

any partiality just shows the inequal method by which people are tried

-shrugs- i know i've got him on the ropes as he's intentionally ignoring the 'or' side of my point

either way i've given him enough of my brain power for the day, moving on

The gag order is to prevent biasing the jury. If there's no jury, the gag order serves no purpose.

The unfairness to Dankula wasn't that he didn't get a gag order to protect him from the media's smear campaign. It was that he wasn't allowed a jury.

Also, having no gag order actually helped make his case more public.

ffs our version of BBC outright lied about the Starbucks incidendt and said the policy(where you dont have to buy before using bathroom or be inside the store for good lengths) was that before the incident
holy shit

i'm aware of that dko

it's one of my arguments that either they should have the same media coverage, or not have any media coverage

as it skews one way or another with or without them

to make the argument more concise i made the point that 'you cannot eliminate all biases in all counts, but you can eliminate the inequity of one trial having more protections than another by affording them the same protections period, it's only a matter of how you might decide which version of protections you use. by making invisible trials from the public, or by making all trials visible to the public

https://youtu.be/QYRjYE4MnAY

Shapiro argued that the whole thing about preventing jury bias is stupid, and shouldn't be a law. Even more so because the UK can't prevent foreign outlets from reporting and commenting on cases.

https://scontent-lht6-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/33714534_2170672106281760_8548834718504714240_n.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=061a9dfe257b357ff3faa7873caf3e0f&oe=5B8D665C

Leftist pro imigration propaganda be like:

"You don't want the wages to be lowered because of immigrants that are willing to work for much cheaper then you? Well let me as a upper middle class brat who never had to lift my finger in my entire life, except for when I am fisting myself, tell you how evil you the working class is and how I am standing up for the unpriveleged and hard working ~~only the non-white part of the~~ working class!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LwkIy0SJzqQ

Watch this scene. This was 1999

https://twitter.com/JulianAssange/status/1001570489532284928

https://twitter.com/TheQuartering/status/1001574779554533377

https://www.dailywire.com/news/31213/watch-rncs-first-ms-13-ad-against-democrats-james-barrett

Nancy just keeps giving them ammunition

@DanielKO @Sin Its beside the point A: he was very careful not to introduce facts and B: It was the final session, he couldn't influence the jury anyway

And of coarse, you couldn't possibly get a report, arrest him, find out he didn't do it, find out he did something else, collect evidence, decide to press charges (pun not intended), find a court booking, hold trial, convict and finally sentence fairly in FOUR FUCKING HOURS

Only a 4000 away from 500k

What is?

The Robinson petition

Ah

@Lion Hamster GMT+999994 1. in totalitarian society, it is easy to come up with excuses to silence people. he gave them the excuse they needed, the issue was not what he did, but that he violated a court order and is now silenced for it. at the very least that's my take on it

2. it's GB, did you expect any less?

He didn't violate the court ordrr