Tommy Robinson attacked at McDonald’s
Discussion
NoNeed said:
ol nobody has yet explained why a more lenient sentence was passed, nor how a corporation can commit a criminal offence as that is just buildings and a logo, yet at another corporation the individual is arrested.
All pretty clear really
If you were an individual, on a 'regular' income, would you rather receive a suspended sentence or an £80,000 fine?* All pretty clear really
*'None of the above' is not an option.
TTwiggy said:
If you were an individual, on a 'regular' income, would you rather receive a suspended sentence or an £80,000 fine?*
*'None of the above' is not an option.
it is not a choice, the law is applied and should be fair and equal. And it wouldn't have been tommy that had the fine anyway*'None of the above' is not an option.
NoNeed said:
TTwiggy said:
If you were an individual, on a 'regular' income, would you rather receive a suspended sentence or an £80,000 fine?*
*'None of the above' is not an option.
it is not a choice, the law is applied and should be fair and equal.*'None of the above' is not an option.
NoNeed said:
ol nobody has yet explained why a more lenient sentence was passed, nor how a corporation can commit a criminal offence as that is just buildings and a logo, yet at another corporation the individual is arrested.
All pretty clear really
You don't read anything that disagrees with your preconceived notions. It's been explained many times.All pretty clear really
NoNeed said:
ol nobody has yet explained why a more lenient sentence was passed, nor how a corporation can commit a criminal offence as that is just buildings and a logo, yet at another corporation the individual is arrested.
All pretty clear really
But as I have said, you havent presented a summary to show the details of each case in their own right. Whats different from each case as in the eyes of the law (rather than just your opinion of its not fair which is not relevant), and what specific parts of UK legislation have been impacted by biased decision making of the court? Putting up a news paper report and asking a car community to prove one way or the other is not a reasonable request.All pretty clear really
As someone said, you are working backwards. Hunting the internet for something that on the face of it contradicts TRs sentence and asking people to prove to you why. What you should be doing is finding a number of equivalent cases, investigating the detail of each, listing out the consistences in the offence (not just listing out some media report) and showing that under UK law the decision for TR was wrong...then you might get a view.
TTwiggy said:
I wasn't claiming that it was a choice. You seem to think that Tommy has been hard done by. So I'm asking you which option is more 'hard'. Monetary fines and custodial sentences are options for many offences. Some people go to prison for theft, some are fined.
Yes but what company has been charged with theft in comparison with an employee of a different companyNoNeed said:
Yes but what company has been charged with theft in comparison with an employee of a different company
Companies commit fraud and receive huge fines. An individual commits fraud and goes to prison. Has the individual been hard done by? Imagine you're a judge. You have at your disposal two basic options for sentencing. You can give out a fine (setting the amount at your discretion) or you can impose a custodial sentence (with the option to suspend it).
In front of you are two 'people' who may appear to have committed the same offence. One is a private individual of modest means, one is a large corporation. Doesn't it make more sense (from the POV of the public getting restitution) for the individual to receive a suspended sentence and for the corporation to get a big fine?
Many people - banged to rights in terms of guilt - might consider a suspended sentence to be a good result.
NoNeed said:
lol nobody has yet explained why a more lenient sentence was passed, nor how a corporation can commit a criminal offence as that is just buildings and a logo, yet at another corporation the individual is arrested.
All pretty clear really.
How can it be pretty clear if you acknowledge a lack of an explanation? Does that mean that only the 'explanation' you've come up with is true? All pretty clear really.
Tommy wasn't acting within a 'corporation'. He didn't go through any corporate media process i.e. editor / legal department. He was acting as an individual. He even describes himself as an 'independent reporter' on the Facebook page he did the live stream to.
Again, and there's a theme here, you're not comparing like for like.
I'm really struggling to see how a suspended prison sentence could be seen as less lenient than an £80,000 fine.
I know which one of those I would prefer. I'd probably avoid committing the EXACT SAME CRIME during my suspended sentence, and be glad I'd saved the £80,000 at the same time.
I know which one of those I would prefer. I'd probably avoid committing the EXACT SAME CRIME during my suspended sentence, and be glad I'd saved the £80,000 at the same time.
e30m3Mark said:
The problem with the TR fan club is that even when you present them with concrete evidence of things, they simply come back with some bizarre conspiracy theory instead.
The real issue with TR fanbois is that they invariably wouldn't know how to spell coherent argument, let alone be able to make one.The old phrase about arguing with idiots comes to mind. Also, don't give them the platform to have an argument and use their warped view of the world to make up some spurious and nonsensical point that make them think they have a point.
Just insult them and if possible hit them with sticks (real ones if you can) until they retreat under their rocks. You will never change their awful views, so the best thing to do is make it uncomfortable for them to air them. After a while, they'll shut up, which is the best we can hope for.
La Liga said:
ow can it be pretty clear if you acknowledge a lack of an explanation? Does that mean that only the 'explanation' you've come up with is true?
Tommy wasn't acting within a 'corporation'. He didn't go through any corporate media process i.e. editor / legal department. He was acting as an individual. He even describes himself as an 'independent reporter' on the Facebook page he did the live stream to.
Again, and there's a theme here, you're not comparing like for like.
of course its not like for like, that would be too fair for you lot lol. Me I see contempt of court as an act that only a human being can commit, the herald isn't.Tommy wasn't acting within a 'corporation'. He didn't go through any corporate media process i.e. editor / legal department. He was acting as an individual. He even describes himself as an 'independent reporter' on the Facebook page he did the live stream to.
Again, and there's a theme here, you're not comparing like for like.
NoNeed said:
f course its not like for like, that would be too fair for you lot lol. Me I see contempt of court as an act that only a human being can commit, the herald isn't.
SImple question, which would you prefer?- Suspended prison sentence, off you go and be about your business.
- £80,000 fine, payable now
Do you genuinely believe the latter is more lenient?
NoNeed said:
f course its not like for like, that would be too fair for you lot lol. Me I see contempt of court as an act that only a human being can commit, the herald isn't.
Meanwhile in the real world the legal system doesn't, but no doubt when Tommy is Prime Minister he can appoint you Lord Chief Justice.Edited by berlintaxi on Wednesday 20th June 12:53
_dobbo_ said:
SImple question, which would you prefer?
- Suspended prison sentence, off you go and be about your business.
- £80,000 fine, payable now
Do you genuinely believe the latter is more lenient?
Does it matter which is worse? They should be the same, the reporter at the herald should have had the fine not the paper.- Suspended prison sentence, off you go and be about your business.
- £80,000 fine, payable now
Do you genuinely believe the latter is more lenient?
NoNeed said:
_dobbo_ said:
SImple question, which would you prefer?
- Suspended prison sentence, off you go and be about your business.
- £80,000 fine, payable now
Do you genuinely believe the latter is more lenient?
Does it matter which is worse? They should be the same, the reporter at the herald should have had the fine not the paper.- Suspended prison sentence, off you go and be about your business.
- £80,000 fine, payable now
Do you genuinely believe the latter is more lenient?
rscott said:
NoNeed said:
_dobbo_ said:
SImple question, which would you prefer?
- Suspended prison sentence, off you go and be about your business.
- £80,000 fine, payable now
Do you genuinely believe the latter is more lenient?
Does it matter which is worse? They should be the same, the reporter at the herald should have had the fine not the paper.- Suspended prison sentence, off you go and be about your business.
- £80,000 fine, payable now
Do you genuinely believe the latter is more lenient?
It's almost as if giving them a big fine is the most prudent way to proceed.
NoNeed said:
Does it matter which is worse? They should be the same, the reporter at the herald should have had the fine not the paper.
Now you are trying to pivot your argument onto safer ground. You made your original comparison on the basis TR was being treated unfairly. Just in the same way you tried to make a false comparison that the prison sentences were unfair in the debunked meme you posted. I'm afraid when it comes to debating, you are the weakest link
.TTwiggy said:
And the sub editors who subbed it, and the chief sub who signed it off, and the legal dept (if they saw it) and the publisher, who is pretty much guaranteed to have final say on the lead story...
It's almost as if giving them a big fine is the most prudent way to proceed.
That would be a conspiracy that nobody has been charged with, I wonder why.It's almost as if giving them a big fine is the most prudent way to proceed.
NoNeed said:
rscott said:
Why the reporter? Why not the editor ?
Why not facebook for aiding and abetting for providing the live stream platform.At some point in this debate you may compare an Apple to an Apple.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff