Major Britain First figure JAILED

BREAKING!! BRITAIN FIRST LEADER PAUL GOLDING SENT TO PRISON!
The High Court has sent Paul to prison for confronting a hate preacher in Cardiff who said it's okay for Muslims to keep sex slaves! More updates shortly.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/britain-first-paul-golding-jailed_uk_585286fde4b0b725bacfa66c

Always something to cheer you up!

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

Ziz, Ziz, Ziz!!!!!!   You forgot the hyphens!

Major  - Britain First figure - JAILED

Good!

Ziz wrote:

Well gosh!!!

Yeah... if only we could jail everyone who opposed Muslim hate preachers saying it's ok for Muslims to have sex slaves...!?

Tommy Monk wrote:

Yeah... if only we could jail everyone who opposed Muslim hate preachers saying it's ok for Muslims to have sex slaves...!?

Wasn't he actually jailed for violating an injunction?

"...Generally, attempting, conspiring, inciting, aiding, abetting, causing or permitting a crime is classified under the heading of the crime itself..."


UK Govt




If this is to apply to one... then it must apply to all...!

Tommy Monk wrote:

"...Generally, attempting, conspiring, inciting, aiding, abetting, causing or permitting a crime is classified under the heading of the crime itself..."


UK Govt




If this is to apply to one... then it must apply to all...!

Wasn't he actually arrested for violating an injunction?

This will reduce Flop's membership by 10%

Fuck off handy and get a life, you have a fixation with Flap and it's boring as fuck.

nicko wrote:Fuck off handy and get a life, you have a fixation with Flap and it's boring as fuck.

I went fishing, and you took the bait.
Whoooosh!

HAS ANYBODY seen Stormee today ???

Maybe he's digging a tunnel into the jail, to try and free his mentor ?

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

HAS ANYBODY seen Stormee today  ???

Maybe he's digging a tunnel into the jail,  to try and free his mentor  ?

Or figuring a way to escape?

I took no bait Handy, just trying to save you looking foolish----again.

Handy Andy wrote:

nicko wrote:Fuck off handy and get a life, you have a fixation with Flap and it's boring as fuck.

I went fishing, and you took the bait.
Whoooosh!

May I remind you HA

"Posters that repeatedly post in such a manner that admins deem it deliberately disruptive of threads will be warned, and action will taken against repeat offenders"

And

"You are expected to avoid flooding the forum with material that is on the same subject or group of subjects. This has actually been a rule since the day I made this site, but nobody wants to see every thread turn into a discussion of politics, religion, tacos (mea culpa), etc."

What you have just admitted to is trolling...

we dont value trolls....

I am not sure 1 piss taking post is" repeatedly flooding".
But you are prone to over zealous modding.

Handy Andy wrote:This will reduce Flop's membership by 10%

More like reduce it to 10%, Britain first, SA patriots, BNP and BNP propagandists, along with some far right Turkish outlet and an obscure Muslim hating Zionist faction are represented on Monkey boys forum, Fatbob the last surviving lefty where private piles would appear to be deemed a moderate.

It's hard not to mention his place when all his minions and servants post there and here, indeed IMO they go over there for a fix of hatred and then come back over here to spout it!,,,,at the end of the day that's where they're coming from! the fact that this enrages TC is all part of the entertainment, as any mention of monkey boy is considered "trollery" its hardly surprising considering the context and the construct of the matter, and TCs wriggling and squirming about the stage gives some firm indication to the direction of travel, this was exposed in the scene where on the day his pet returned he basemented me, just to show her how powerful he is, the fact that his pet has recently been banned has left him "a prey to melancholy and anxious thoughts".

However, the fact that special Eds has rushed in to rescue this pet in distress, should alleviate his symptoms, her defence of far right extremists has always been her given role, her chance to excel, at something!

The far right are defended because they're the ones being supplied an agenda, indeed some are even being paid for it.

To point this out is risky, but the truth is the only weapon we have!

Ben Reilly wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:

"...Generally, attempting, conspiring, inciting, aiding, abetting, causing or permitting a crime is classified under the heading of the crime itself..."


UK Govt




If this is to apply to one... then it must apply to all...!

Wasn't he actually arrested for violating an injunction?

From what I read in the article, he hadn't actually broken the conditions of the injunction...

Regardless, he is a very bad man.

For confronting a Muslim hate preachers who says it is ok for Muslims to have sex slaves...?

Handy Andy wrote:Regardless, he is a very bad man.

Sounds like they are both' very bad men'....for different reasons.

Had fuck all to do with 'sex slaves'.

Britain First: Former leader Paul Golding jailed for breaching mosque ban

The former leader of Britain First has been jailed for eight weeks after breaching a court order not to enter a mosque.

Paul Golding, 34, who recently stepped down as head of the controversial nationalist party for family reasons, admitted contempt of court.

London's High Court heard that nine days after an injunction was imposed in August this year, Golding drove four Britain First members to the Al-Manar Centre in Cardiff for a "mosque invasion".

The injunction prohibited him entering any mosque in England and Wales without prior invitation.

Golding stayed outside and there was no violence but there was a verbal confrontation between his four colleagues and a mosque trustee.

James Weston, counsel for the Chief Constable of Bedfordshire Police who brought the application, said that members of the mosque found the conduct provocative and unnerving.

They were also concerned that it could have escalated if prayers had not been over.

Sentencing Golding on Thursday, Judge Moloney said the breach was a "deliberate and cynical defiance" of the court's order.

He said Golding, who was leader at the time, played an active part in the incident, taking photos as well as driving the others.

"There can be no doubt that he thereby broke the injunction by instructing or encouraging those men to enter the mosque."

He said it was not true that Golding, who made an unreserved apology, did not understand the terms of the order - and his assertion that there would be no repetition would have more force it he had not made a similar promise in 2015.

The judge added: "Such an injunction is granted to prevent serious anti-social behaviour. This particular injunction was granted not merely to protect certain individuals but to preserve public order in the widest sense and throughout the country.

"The conduct restrained was by its nature of an extreme kind, calculated to increase tensions between different members of the community of this country, particularly to affront the Muslim community in relation to their religion.

"Such conduct was plainly calculated to give rise to the risk of provocation and violence and further extremism and tension on all sides of the community.
"These are most serious matters at the present time." 
Golding will serve four weeks of the sentence.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/former-britain-first-leader-paul-golding-jailed-for-breaching-mosque-ban-a3421401.html

I remember someone scattering tin tacks or something similar in a mosque, doest thee??

Clearly they believe in direct action, whereby they invade places of worship, shops, abattoirs, etc.  (see next post)

If there is suspected wrongdoing in a mosque, abattoir or whatever, the police should be notified and they will use their powers, to investigate.  People taking the law into their own hands cheeses off the police. No one is above the law.

Unauthorised invasion of this butcher's shop resulted in a mini scuffle next to animal carcasses, knives, blades, cleavers.   >
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/britain-first-invade-halal-slaughterhouse_uk_572780ede4b0a1e971cb9e89

Stupid bastards.

sassy wrote:Had fuck all to do with 'sex slaves'.

Britain First: Former leader Paul Golding jailed for breaching mosque ban

The former leader of Britain First has been jailed for eight weeks after breaching a court order not to enter a mosque.

Paul Golding, 34, who recently stepped down as head of the controversial nationalist party for family reasons, admitted contempt of court.

London's High Court heard that nine days after an injunction was imposed in August this year, Golding drove four Britain First members to the Al-Manar Centre in Cardiff for a "mosque invasion".

The injunction prohibited him entering any mosque in England and Wales without prior invitation.

Golding stayed outside and there was no violence but there was a verbal confrontation between his four colleagues and a mosque trustee.

James Weston, counsel for the Chief Constable of Bedfordshire Police who brought the application, said that members of the mosque found the conduct provocative and unnerving.

They were also concerned that it could have escalated if prayers had not been over.

Sentencing Golding on Thursday, Judge Moloney said the breach was a "deliberate and cynical defiance" of the court's order.

He said Golding, who was leader at the time, played an active part in the incident, taking photos as well as driving the others.

"There can be no doubt that he thereby broke the injunction by instructing or encouraging those men to enter the mosque."

He said it was not true that Golding, who made an unreserved apology, did not understand the terms of the order - and his assertion that there would be no repetition would have more force it he had not made a similar promise in 2015.

The judge added: "Such an injunction is granted to prevent serious anti-social behaviour. This particular injunction was granted not merely to protect certain individuals but to preserve public order in the widest sense and throughout the country.

"The conduct restrained was by its nature of an extreme kind, calculated to increase tensions between different members of the community of this country, particularly to affront the Muslim community in relation to their religion.

"Such conduct was plainly calculated to give rise to the risk of provocation and violence and further extremism and tension on all sides of the community.
"These are most serious matters at the present time." 
Golding will serve four weeks of the sentence.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/former-britain-first-leader-paul-golding-jailed-for-breaching-mosque-ban-a3421401.html

From the op...


"...The High Court has sent Paul to prison for confronting a hate preacher in Cardiff who said it's okay for Muslims to keep sex slaves!..."


And sassy... where in the article you just posted does it say that HE entered any premises that his injunction prohibited him from doing so...?

Jules wrote:Clearly they believe in direct action, whereby they invade places of worship, shops, abattoirs, etc.  (see next post)

If there is suspected wrongdoing in a mosque, abattoir or whatever, the police should be notified and they will use their  powers, to investigate.  People taking the law into their own hands cheeses off the police. No one is above the law.

Really...!?


"...But when heads and teachers told the authorities, they were ignored, it is claimed. The report said a third of the victims were known to police.

And they were “treated with contempt” by officers asked to ­investigate their accusations. Fathers who tried to rescue them from their abusers’ homes were arrested..."

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/rotherham-child-abuse-scandal-paedophile-4113152




If this Muslim hate preacher is openly advocating that it is ok for Muslims to have sex slaves... why wasn't he already arrested and prosecuted for the incitement of this crime?

Tommy ...you forgot THIS bit of the injunction


(c) Causing, permitting, encouraging or inciting any person to enter or remain in designated exclusion zone in the Bury Park area save unless that person remains at all times within a railway carriage travelling along the railroad adjoining Luton railway station.

(d) Publishing, broadcasting, distributing or displaying, or causing or encouraging to be published, broadcast, distributed or displayed, any images or films showing any person or event, on a date after the making of this order, within designated exclusion zones in the Bury Park and Town Centre areas.

(e) Entering a designated exclusion zone in the Town Centre area save in accordance with paragraph 1 (g) below.

(f) Causing, permitting, encouraging or inciting any person to enter or remain in the designated exclusion zone in the Town Centre area save in accordance with paragraph 1 (g) below.

(g) The Respondents are permitted to enter a designated area in the Town Centre for the purposes of, and only for the purposes of, attending hearings at Luton Magistrates Court and Luton Crown Court at which they are required to attend as defendants in criminal proceedings. They are also permitted to instruct legal representatives to attend such hearings. The Respondents must give the Chief Constable of Bedfordshire Police advanced written notice of all such attendances by 5pm on the working day before the relevant hearing.

Tommy Monk wrote:

Jules wrote:Clearly they believe in direct action, whereby they invade places of worship, shops, abattoirs, etc.  (see next post)

If there is suspected wrongdoing in a mosque, abattoir or whatever, the police should be notified and they will use their  powers, to investigate.  People taking the law into their own hands cheeses off the police. No one is above the law.

Really...!?


"...But when heads and teachers told the authorities, they were ignored, it is claimed. The report said a third of the victims were known to police.

And they were “treated with contempt” by officers asked to ­investigate their accusations. Fathers who tried to rescue them from their abusers’ homes were arrested..."

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/rotherham-child-abuse-scandal-paedophile-4113152




If this Muslim hate preacher is openly advocating that it is ok for Muslims to have sex slaves... why wasn't he already arrested and prosecuted for the incitement of this crime?

because in law the two are not related, or at least cannot be proven to be related.

Lord Foul wrote:Tommy ...you forgot THIS bit of the injunction


(c)  Causing, permitting, encouraging or inciting any person to enter or remain in designated exclusion zone in the Bury Park area save unless that person remains at all times within a railway carriage travelling along the railroad adjoining Luton railway station.

(d) Publishing, broadcasting, distributing or displaying, or causing or encouraging to be published, broadcast, distributed or displayed, any images or films showing any person or event, on a date after the making of this order, within designated exclusion zones in the Bury Park and Town Centre areas.

(e) Entering a designated exclusion zone in the Town Centre area save in accordance with paragraph 1 (g) below.

(f) Causing, permitting, encouraging or inciting any person to enter or remain in the designated exclusion zone in the Town Centre area save in accordance with paragraph 1 (g) below.

(g) The Respondents are permitted to enter a designated area in the Town Centre for the purposes of, and only for the purposes of, attending hearings at Luton Magistrates Court and Luton Crown Court at which they are required to attend as defendants in criminal proceedings. They are also permitted to instruct legal representatives to attend such hearings. The Respondents must give the Chief Constable of Bedfordshire Police advanced written notice of all such attendances by 5pm on the working day before the relevant hearing.

No I didn't miss that bit... but you obviously missed the bit that designated the area where this injunction was applicable...!!!


They were in Cardiff... and last time I checked... that is nowhere near Luton or the park area that the injunction is related to...!

the injunction mentioned in te link is an EXTENSION of (not a replacement for) an interim injunction granted earlier (26th june)

which amongst other things

"

Bedfordshire Police has obtained an interim civil injunction against Britain First organisers Paul Golding and Jayda Fransen.

The ruling was made at the High Court in London earlier today.

However the court has ruled that both organisers will be able to attend Luton for the planned demonstration tomorrow.

The injunction bans either Paul Golding or Jayda Fransen (either by themselves or by instructing or encouraging or giving permission to any other person) from:

Entering any mosque or Islamic Cultural Centre or its private grounds within England or Wales without prior written invitation. "

http://www.itv.com/news/anglia/update/2015-06-26/injunction-obtained-against-britain-first/


so he DID breach the terms of the original injunction wich was still in place and merely extended by the one mentioned in the O/P

sloppy reporting...but then its the mirror....

Lord Foul wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:


Really...!?


"...But when heads and teachers told the authorities, they were ignored, it is claimed. The report said a third of the victims were known to police.

And they were “treated with contempt” by officers asked to ­investigate their accusations. Fathers who tried to rescue them from their abusers’ homes were arrested..."

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/rotherham-child-abuse-scandal-paedophile-4113152




If this Muslim hate preacher is openly advocating that it is ok for Muslims to have sex slaves... why wasn't he already arrested and prosecuted for the incitement of this crime?

because in law the two are not related, or at least cannot be proven to be related.

"...Generally, attempting, conspiring, inciting, aiding, abetting, causing or permitting a crime is classified under the heading of the crime itself..."


UK Govt




If this Muslim hate preacher is advocating Muslims to have sex slaves... isn't this 'incitement' of crime and thus punishable as of the law shown above...?

One does often wonder why our far right extremists are so determined to defend such criminals.

Lord Foul wrote:the injunction mentioned in te link is an EXTENSION of (not a replacement for) an interim injunction granted earlier (26th june)

which amongst other things

"

Bedfordshire Police has obtained an interim civil injunction against Britain First organisers Paul Golding and Jayda Fransen.

The ruling was made at the High Court in London earlier today.

However the court has ruled that both organisers will be able to attend Luton for the planned demonstration tomorrow.

The injunction bans either Paul Golding or Jayda Fransen (either by themselves or by instructing or encouraging or giving permission to any other person) from:

   Entering any mosque or Islamic Cultural Centre or its private grounds within England or Wales without prior written invitation. "

http://www.itv.com/news/anglia/update/2015-06-26/injunction-obtained-against-britain-first/


so he DID breach the terms of the original injunction wich was still in place and merely extended by the one mentioned in the O/P

sloppy reporting...but then its the mirror....

The previous 'interim' injunction had specific requirements laid out...


The current injunction also had specific requirements laid out...


Did the current injunction lay out any specific restrictions regarding this man being in Cardiff...!?

is it "illegal" to have sex slaves??? there will be a LOT of very upset dominatix's (dominatria??) about........

however my point was to break the link you were trying to make between the peadophile cases in rotherham and what this "preacher" was saying.

oh ...and "incitement" requires something rather more than mere "advocation"

Tommy Monk wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:the injunction mentioned in te link is an EXTENSION of (not a replacement for) an interim injunction granted earlier (26th june)

which amongst other things

"

Bedfordshire Police has obtained an interim civil injunction against Britain First organisers Paul Golding and Jayda Fransen.

The ruling was made at the High Court in London earlier today.

However the court has ruled that both organisers will be able to attend Luton for the planned demonstration tomorrow.

The injunction bans either Paul Golding or Jayda Fransen (either by themselves or by instructing or encouraging or giving permission to any other person) from:

   Entering any mosque or Islamic Cultural Centre or its private grounds within England or Wales without prior written invitation. "

http://www.itv.com/news/anglia/update/2015-06-26/injunction-obtained-against-britain-first/


so he DID breach the terms of the original injunction wich was still in place and merely extended by the one mentioned in the O/P

sloppy reporting...but then its the mirror....

The previous 'interim' injunction had specific requirements laid out...


The current injunction also had specific requirements laid out...


Did the current injunction lay out any specific restrictions regarding this man being in Cardiff...!?

THAT doesnt matter....the injunction mentioned in the O/P is an EXTENSION TO not a replacement for the original one, and so the terms of the original are still in force IN ADDITION TO the extension

BOTH injunctions are "current"

scrat wrote:One does often wonder why our far right extremists are so determined to defend such criminals.

I will not defend the law being misapplied upon one person in a punitive way, when all they are really doing is highlighting an example of where the authorities are failing to act against another person WHO IS breaking the law!



And this is completely related to the Pakistani Muslim child rape gangs article I posted... whereby the real criminals were allowed to operate with impunity by the authorities... the people who voiced concerns and reported the crimes were vilified/ignored by the authorities... the parents who went to the places their children were being raped/abused were themselves arrested...!!!



If the authorities were doing their duty properly in the first place... then there wouldn't be other people taking action in protest!!!

Lord Foul wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:


The previous 'interim' injunction had specific requirements laid out...


The current injunction also had specific requirements laid out...


Did the current injunction lay out any specific restrictions regarding this man being in Cardiff...!?

THAT doesnt matter....the injunction mentioned in the O/P is an EXTENSION TO not a replacement for the original one, and so the terms of the original are still in force IN ADDITION TO the extension

BOTH injunctions are "current"

No... an interim injunction is one thing, a hastily made temporary thing, and with certain specific criteria set out...


If a court then decides to create a subsequent fuller injunction... then this will supercede any previous interim injunction, and will only be applicable for the set criteria set out within it...


The current injunction was limited to the Luton/bury park area.

Tommy Monk wrote:

scrat wrote:One does often wonder why our far right extremists are so determined to defend such criminals.

I will not defend the law being misapplied upon one person in a punitive way, when all they are really doing is highlighting an example of where the authorities are failing to act against another person WHO IS breaking the law!



And this is completely related to the Pakistani Muslim child rape gangs article I posted... whereby the real criminals were allowed to operate with impunity by the authorities... the people who voiced concerns and reported the crimes were vilified/ignored by the authorities... the parents who went to the places their children were being raped/abused were themselves arrested...!!!



If the authorities were doing their duty properly in the first place... then there wouldn't be other people taking action in protest!!!

Rubbish, you are fixated with hatred, you worship hatred and you're obsessed with defending those who ply their hatred.

This is why so many of your responses are so twisted and warped, you like many of your ilk are blinkered by the media, you take it in without ever seeking to corroborate their evidence.

You need to reference your sources.

NO it wasnt...you know nothing of law

(obviously)

It is made clear in the O/P that what YOU call (and no one else) the "current injunction" was, AN EXTENSION TO, NOT A REPLACEMENT FOR, the original injunction. He had NOT been released from the conditions of the original injunction

Scrat... the op is clear... and the details in the article I posted are indisputable too...

Lord Foul wrote:NO it wasnt...you know nothing of law

(obviously)

It is made clear in the O/P that what YOU call (and no one else) the "current injunction" was, AN EXTENSION TO, NOT A REPLACEMENT FOR, the original injunction. He had NOT been released from the conditions of the original injunction

No... you are wrong...


The conditions of the injunction are clearly set out...


As a result, in August the High Court extended an interim civil injunction against Golding and Fransen, and forbids them from:

(a) Entering any Mosque or Islamic Cultural Centre or its private grounds within England and Wales without prior written invitation.

(b) Being within a designated exclusion zone in the Bury Park area save unless that person remains at all times within a railway carriage travelling along the railroad adjoining Luton railway station.

(c) Causing, permitting, encouraging or inciting any person to enter or remain in designated exclusion zone in the Bury Park area save unless that person remains at all times within a railway carriage travelling along the railroad adjoining Luton railway station.

(d) Publishing, broadcasting, distributing or displaying, or causing or encouraging to be published, broadcast, distributed or displayed, any images or films showing any person or event, on a date after the making of this order, within designated exclusion zones in the Bury Park and Town Centre areas.

(e) Entering a designated exclusion zone in the Town Centre area save in accordance with paragraph 1 (g) below.

(f) Causing, permitting, encouraging or inciting any person to enter or remain in the designated exclusion zone in the Town Centre area save in accordance with paragraph 1 (g) below.

(g) The Respondents are permitted to enter a designated area in the Town Centre for the purposes of, and only for the purposes of, attending hearings at Luton Magistrates Court and Luton Crown Court at which they are required to attend as defendants in criminal proceedings. They are also permitted to instruct legal representatives to attend such hearings. The Respondents must give the Chief Constable of Bedfordshire Police advanced written notice of all such attendances by 5pm on the working day before the relevant hearing.




He didn't enter any mosque or Islamic Cultural Centre in Cardiff...

And the only bit in injunction about;

"...Causing, permitting, encouraging or inciting any person to enter or remain..."

... in anywhere at all, only relates to luton/bury park area!



The law in this prosecution against him has been misapplied in that he has been prosecuted for inciting others to enter the Cardiff Islamic Cultural Centre against the restrictions laid out in the injunction... but the specific rules of injunction do not apply to his possible incitement of others outside luton/bury park area!!!


The injunction only states that HE must not enter any mosque or Islamic Cultural Centre in England/Wales... which he didn't do...


And the injunction only states that he must not incite/encourage anyone to certain behaviour in the luton/bury park area... which he also didn't do...



Therefore the law has been misapplied and the prosecution is malicious and unfounded!



But question still remains... if the Muslim preacher is known to be inciting Muslims to imprison women as sex slaves... why have the authorities failed to act against him and arrest/prosecute him...?

Tommy Monk wrote:

Lord Foul wrote:NO it wasnt...you know nothing of law

(obviously)

It is made clear in the O/P that what YOU call (and no one else) the "current injunction" was, AN EXTENSION TO, NOT A REPLACEMENT FOR, the original injunction. He had NOT been released from the conditions of the original injunction

No... you are wrong...


The conditions of the injunction are clearly set out...


As a result, in August the High Court extended an interim civil injunction against Golding and Fransen, and forbids them from:

(a) Entering any Mosque or Islamic Cultural Centre or its private grounds within England and Wales without prior written invitation.

(b) Being within a designated exclusion zone in the Bury Park area save unless that person remains at all times within a railway carriage travelling along the railroad adjoining Luton railway station.

(c)  Causing, permitting, encouraging or inciting any person to enter or remain in designated exclusion zone in the Bury Park area save unless that person remains at all times within a railway carriage travelling along the railroad adjoining Luton railway station.

(d) Publishing, broadcasting, distributing or displaying, or causing or encouraging to be published, broadcast, distributed or displayed, any images or films showing any person or event, on a date after the making of this order, within designated exclusion zones in the Bury Park and Town Centre areas.

(e) Entering a designated exclusion zone in the Town Centre area save in accordance with paragraph 1 (g) below.

(f) Causing, permitting, encouraging or inciting any person to enter or remain in the designated exclusion zone in the Town Centre area save in accordance with paragraph 1 (g) below.

(g) The Respondents are permitted to enter a designated area in the Town Centre for the purposes of, and only for the purposes of, attending hearings at Luton Magistrates Court and Luton Crown Court at which they are required to attend as defendants in criminal proceedings. They are also permitted to instruct legal representatives to attend such hearings. The Respondents must give the Chief Constable of Bedfordshire Police advanced written notice of all such attendances by 5pm on the working day before the relevant hearing.




He didn't enter any mosque or Islamic Cultural Centre in Cardiff...

And the only bit in injunction about;

"...Causing, permitting, encouraging or inciting any person to enter or remain..."

... in anywhere at all, only relates to luton/bury park area!



The law in this prosecution against him has been misapplied in that he has been prosecuted for inciting others to enter the Cardiff Islamic Cultural Centre against the restrictions laid out in the injunction... but the specific rules of injunction do not apply to his possible incitement of others outside luton/bury park area!!!


The injunction only states that HE must not enter any mosque or Islamic Cultural Centre in England/Wales... which he didn't do...


And the injunction only states that he must not incite/encourage anyone to certain behaviour in the luton/bury park area... which he also didn't do...



Therefore the law has been misapplied and the prosecution is malicious and unfounded!



But question still remains... if the Muslim preacher is known to be inciting Muslims to imprison women as sex slaves... why have the authorities failed to act against him and arrest/prosecute him...?

bull shit Tommy

The injunction bans either Paul Golding or Jayda Fransen (either by themselves or by instructing or encouraging or giving permission to any other person) from:

Entering any mosque or Islamic Cultural Centre or its private grounds within England or Wales without prior written invitation.

Tommy again demonstrating his genius knowledge of law is greater than high court judges.
Pillock.

I am not wrong... I am quoting what was reported in article...


If you can provide a full legal copy transcript of injunction and of restrictions set out within it, then we will all know for sure what the legal requirements were!


But from what I have seen so far... it is as I said.

I am not even bothering to enter your arguement against thd judiciary Monkey brain.
The judges ruled against him - he was guilty and was banged up.
I can see why you aren't a defence lawyer.
At least you would be cheap.
My budgie has more brains.