This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/aug/01/tommy-robinson-freed-on-bail-after-court-quashes-conviction

The article has changed 8 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 2 Version 3
Tommy Robinson freed on bail as court orders retrial Tommy Robinson freed on bail as court orders retrial
(about 2 hours later)
Tommy Robinson, the founder of the English Defence League, is to be freed from prison after the court of appeal ordered that he should be retried on a contempt of court charge.Tommy Robinson, the founder of the English Defence League, is to be freed from prison after the court of appeal ordered that he should be retried on a contempt of court charge.
He has been held at Onley prison near Rugby after being jailed for 13 months following convictions in Leeds and Canterbury for breaching reporting restrictions. He has been held at Onley jail near Rugby after receiving a 13-month sentence for breaches of reporting restrictions at Leeds and Canterbury crown courts.
At the court of appeal on Wednesday, the lord chief justice, Lord Burnett of Maldon, upheld the Canterbury conviction but said there should be a retrial for the Leeds case. At the court of appeal on Wednesday, the lord chief justice, Lord Burnett of Maldon, upheld the Canterbury conviction but said the ruling in Leeds was “flawed” and there should be a retrial.
Robinson, the appeal court said, would be released on bail on condition that he attended the retrial before the recorder of London at a date to be fixed. Robinson, the appeal court said, would be released on bail on condition that he attended the retrial before the recorder of London at a date to be fixed and keep a distance of at least 400 metres from Leeds crown court.
In the ruling, the lord chief justice said the Leeds finding of contempt had been “flawed”. That court should not have proceeded immediately but waited to hear the case on a “fully informed basis”, he said. In the ruling, the lord chief justice quashed the Leeds finding of contempt. That court hearing should not have proceeded immediately but waited to hear the case on a “fully informed basis”, he said.
The judgment added: “It was unclear what conduct was said to comprise a breach of that order and the appellant was sentenced on the basis of conduct which fell outside the scope of that order.” The judgment added: “It was unclear what conduct was said to comprise a breach of that order and the appellant was sentenced on the basis of conduct which fell outside the scope of that order.
Robinson was also ordered to stay at least 400 metres away from Leeds crown court while on bail. “... The decision at Leeds crown court to proceed to committal to prison so promptly and without due regard for [part] of the rules gave rise to unfairness.
“.... The judge might have referred the matter to the attorney general to consider whether to institute proceedings. That course would have avoided the risk of sacrificing fairness on the altar of celerity.”
Robinson’s supporters in the packed courtroom broke into applause as Burnett announced the decision. The judge called for silence while he read a summary of the judgment.
Outside the Royal Courts of Justice, supporters of Robinson and anti-racism protesters chanted rival slogans at each other separated by crowd barriers and police.Outside the Royal Courts of Justice, supporters of Robinson and anti-racism protesters chanted rival slogans at each other separated by crowd barriers and police.
Members of Stand Up To Racism shouted: “Say it loud, say it clear, refugees are welcome here,” and “Nazi scum”. Members of Stand Up To Racism yelled: “Say it loud, say it clear, refugees are welcome here,” and “Nazi scum”. Supporters of Robinson called back: “You’re the racists”,and “He’s coming home, he’s coming home, Tommy’s coming home” to the tune of the England World Cup football song.
Supporters of Robinson shouted back: “You’re the racists”, and “Tommy is free”. The judges had been urged to overturn contempt of court findings against Robinson, 35, whose real name is Stephen Christopher Yaxley-Lennon. At a hearing in July, his QC, Jeremy Dein, argued that procedural deficiencies had given rise to prejudice.
The judges had been urged to overturn contempt of court findings against Robinson, 35, whose real name is Stephen Christopher Yaxley-Lennon.
At a hearing in July, his QC, Jeremy Dein, argued that procedural “deficiencies” had given rise to “prejudice”.
Dein also submitted that the sentence was “manifestly excessive” and that insufficient regard had been given to personal mitigation.Dein also submitted that the sentence was “manifestly excessive” and that insufficient regard had been given to personal mitigation.
Robinson was jailed in May after he filmed people involved in a criminal trial and broadcast the footage on social media. The footage, lasting about an hour, was watched 250,000 times within hours of being posted on Facebook.Robinson was jailed in May after he filmed people involved in a criminal trial and broadcast the footage on social media. The footage, lasting about an hour, was watched 250,000 times within hours of being posted on Facebook.
The far-right activist was sentenced to 10 months in prison for contempt of court, which he admitted, and a further three months for breaching a previous suspended sentence. The far-right activist was sentenced to 10 months in prison for contempt of court, which he admitted, and given a further three months for breaching the previously suspended sentence imposed by Canterbury crown court last year.
Robinson was detained outside Leeds crown court after using social media to broadcast details of a trial that was subject to blanket reporting restrictions.
Jailing him, Judge Geoffrey Marson told Robinson it was a “serious aggravating feature” that he was encouraging others to share it and it had been shared widely.Jailing him, Judge Geoffrey Marson told Robinson it was a “serious aggravating feature” that he was encouraging others to share it and it had been shared widely.
He added: “Everyone understands the right to freedom of speech but there are responsibilities and obligations. I am not sure you appreciate the potential consequence of what you have done. People have to understand that if they breach court orders there will be very real consequences.”He added: “Everyone understands the right to freedom of speech but there are responsibilities and obligations. I am not sure you appreciate the potential consequence of what you have done. People have to understand that if they breach court orders there will be very real consequences.”
It was the second time Robinson had breached court orders, having narrowly avoided jail in May last year over footage he filmed during the trial of four men who were later convicted of gang-raping a teenage girl. The London law firm Carson Kaye, which represented Robinson, thanked the court of appeal for its “detailed judgment”.
Its statement issued after the ruling on Wednesday, added: “The rule of law and the right to a fair hearing are fundamental to every individual and this ruling [is] an example of the procedural safeguards of the system. ... What makes the British system so unique is the ability to set aside personal feelings and deal with the law and each case on its merits.”
Outside the Royal Courts of Justice, Weyman Bennett, the joint national secretary of Stand Up To Racism, described the judgment as “mistaken”.
“We believe that it will encourage racists and Islamophobes to build and organise,” he said. “I believe if he was a black kid from Tottenham, where I’m from, he would still be in jail.”
Vince Crawthron, 70, a Royal Navy veteran, had travelled from Cwmbran in Wales to support Robinson. “Tommy has been unjustly imprisoned,” he said. “They want to silence him because he challenges the status quo.”
The Ukip leader, Gerard Batten – who spoke at a rally in support of Robinson in July – tweeted: “A word of appreciation for the appeal court today. They held up the best traditions of English law. Fair and impartial. But the conduct of the judge in the Leeds case needs looking at. That wasn’t fair or impartial.”
UK newsUK news
Share on FacebookShare on Facebook
Share on TwitterShare on Twitter
Share via EmailShare via Email
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn
Share on PinterestShare on Pinterest
Share on Google+Share on Google+
Share on WhatsAppShare on WhatsApp
Share on MessengerShare on Messenger
Reuse this contentReuse this content