Message from @Sin
Discord ID: 451070537394028574
Dayum
HAIL ELON
also escaped South Africa, the ultimate redpill
You mean new Zimbabwe ?
In Tommy's case, the defense attorney can rightfully argue that the jury didn't evaluate the case on its merits, but on how the media presented it to them, and ask for the sentence to be overturned. So it makes sense the judge wouldn't want media bias interfering. Tommy should not have done that reporting, in both instances.
Now, the gag order about Tommy himself, that was overstepping reason.
firstly, i got into a bit of a debate with a person who claims that (after some reasonable debate) count dankulas case should not be given the same considerations as the trial tommy robinson was attempting to cover. it was my consideration that as a matter of principle, both cases should have been givven the very same considerations one way or the other universally. however they believe i am wrong. what say you well reasoned and not entirely trollish group of pepe's? (post above is reply to this one)
I think both should have been given the same treatment, because both cases ruins reputation
The gag order should relate to the grooming gang case.
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
-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
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.
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!"
Watch this scene. This was 1999
https://www.dailywire.com/news/31213/watch-rncs-first-ms-13-ad-against-democrats-james-barrett
Nancy just keeps giving them ammunition