Mair shouted "Britain First" in the attack, but the judge said the true "patriot" was Mrs Cox, not Mair.

by scrat Wed Nov 23, 2016 3:02 pm

First topic message reminder :

Judge Mr Justice Wilkie said the murder was carried out to advance a political cause of violent white supremacism, associated with Nazism.

He said the aggravating feature was the premeditation and planning over weeks, in which he researched his intended victim, the past assassination of a serving MP and matricide, knowing Mrs Cox was the mother of young children.

The judge sentenced Mair to life imprisonment, with a whole life term.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38079594

This should serve as a warning to the far right extremists on here, no doubt some will try and defend his actions.

by Victorismyhero Wed Nov 23, 2016 8:53 pm

worse?? he got every thing he asked for....

by Victorismyhero Wed Nov 23, 2016 8:53 pm

and less than he deserved

by Guest Wed Nov 23, 2016 9:15 pm

I'm sorry, Tommy, I'm with LF on this one - due process has been followed and I see nothing that suggests injustice.

by Guest Wed Nov 23, 2016 9:35 pm

What Tommy doesn't seem to realise is that if a case was not presented, it must have been Mair's choice, the same as he chose not to plead guilty or not guilty. And the reason for that to me is obvious, he doesn't think what he did was wrong. He sees himself as a patriot, ridding the UK of someone who cared about what happened to everyone, whatever their race, which he sees as treason. That's the trouble with real evil, real evil is convinced it's doing the correct thing. In other words, he's as much of an extremist as a member of ISIS.

by Spindleshanks Wed Nov 23, 2016 9:35 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:
Spindleshanks wrote:

Such as?

You'll have to search for the thread to read full details of what was pointed out and considered highly dubious at the time...

Or just have a good look yourself... think a couple of the biggest/funniest give aways was that there was an extra leg or two with no bodies above and a missing hand where it was supposed to be holding top of banner... and if I remember rightly, I think some of the background road signs and shop signs suggested was a location outside of uk...

Like customer service centre and Baptist Church you mean?

by Guest Wed Nov 23, 2016 9:38 pm

Tommy decided, no one else, that this was photoshopped and not in the UK, that's because Tommy doesn't want to admit the Mair is a terrorist and part of Britain First:

Mair shouted "Britain First" in the attack, but the judge said the true "patriot" was Mrs Cox, not Mair. - Page 2 Murraybritfirst1

Mair shouted "Britain First" in the attack, but the judge said the true "patriot" was Mrs Cox, not Mair. - Page 2 Murraybritfirst1

by Spindleshanks Wed Nov 23, 2016 9:46 pm

sassy wrote:Tommy decided, no one else, that this was photoshopped and not in the UK, that's because Tommy doesn't want to admit the Mair is a terrorist and part of Britain First:

It's pretty clear that is in the uk. It's also clear that there are people who you can't fully see stood behind a couple of the men.

Doesn't look photoshopped to me.

by Miffs2 Wed Nov 23, 2016 9:51 pm

Mair's mental health will have been thoroughly and comprehensively evaluated whilst in custody. Mair would have had no choice, if his mental health was a factor it would have been brought up at trial. At least the sentence is sensible for once.

by Guest Wed Nov 23, 2016 9:56 pm

sassy wrote:Tommy decided, no one else, that this was photoshopped and not in the UK, that's because Tommy doesn't want to admit the Mair is a terrorist and part of Britain First:

Why would Britain First be harassing Muslims abroad? scratch

by Irn Bru Wed Nov 23, 2016 10:10 pm

A jury found him guilty and he got the sentence he deserved.

by Guest Wed Nov 23, 2016 10:14 pm

The Judge's words are spot on:

Mair shouted "Britain First" in the attack, but the judge said the true "patriot" was Mrs Cox, not Mair. - Page 2 Cx9n7fGW8AA3Trm

Mair shouted "Britain First" in the attack, but the judge said the true "patriot" was Mrs Cox, not Mair. - Page 2 Cx9n7fGW8AA3Trm

by Tommy Monk Wed Nov 23, 2016 10:21 pm

Lord Foul wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:

The only reason it was not a consideration in this trial was because his defence team failed to bring it up...

It would not have changed the outcome of this dangerous individual being incarcerated for a very long time... of which I am glad of... but may have determined a place more appropriate.

No you are wrong...

he is NOT "criminally insane"

as proven by his planning etc...

he knew the wrong of it

the only time a mental health plea is relevant is if it diminished "capacity"

There has been many an insane person who has planned their criminal acts.

Planning does not equate to sanity.

Did he really know 'the wrong of it'...?

Or was his mental state in such disarray as to only believe in the right of what he did?

It was said that he pleaded not guilty all the way through until today when it was then said that he didn't enter any plea at all.

It was also said that his defence team didn't offer anything at all by way of defence throughout...

From a legal standpoint... the behaviour of the defence team is beyond comprehension!

by scrat Wed Nov 23, 2016 10:28 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:

No you are wrong...

he is NOT "criminally insane"

as proven by his planning etc...

he knew the wrong of it

the only time a mental health plea is relevant is if it diminished "capacity"

There has been many an insane person who has planned their criminal acts.

Planning does not equate to sanity.

Did he really know 'the wrong of it'...?

Or was his mental state in such disarray as to only believe in the right of what he did?

It was said that he pleaded not guilty all the way through until today when it was then said that he didn't enter any plea at all.

It was also said that his defence team didn't offer anything at all by way of defence throughout...

From a legal standpoint... the behaviour of the defence team is beyond comprehension!

Are you now trying to suggest that Mair was not guilty?

by Spindleshanks Wed Nov 23, 2016 10:29 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:

No you are wrong...

he is NOT "criminally insane"

as proven by his planning etc...

he knew the wrong of it

the only time a mental health plea is relevant is if it diminished "capacity"

There has been many an insane person who has planned their criminal acts.

Planning does not equate to sanity.

Did he really know 'the wrong of it'...?

Or was his mental state in such disarray as to only believe in the right of what he did?

It was said that he pleaded not guilty all the way through until today when it was then said that he didn't enter any plea at all.

It was also said that his defence team didn't offer anything at all by way of defence throughout...

From a legal standpoint... the behaviour of the defence team is beyond comprehension!

why would he enter a plea today, he did that months ago. As far as I know, unless they decide to change their initial plea, they only make it once.

by Tommy Monk Wed Nov 23, 2016 10:41 pm

I'm not saying he didn't do it.

And I read that he had pleaded not guilty up until today when I read that he had not entered a plea at all.

It appears reported that he remained silent when asked for a plea and a plea of not guilty was entered on his behalf.

by Spindleshanks Wed Nov 23, 2016 10:47 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

I'm not saying he didn't do it.

And I read that he had pleaded not guilty up until today when I read that he had not entered a plea at all.

It appears reported that he remained silent when asked for a plea and a plea of not guilty was entered on his behalf.

Just read that, he refused to enter a plea at all and the not guilty plea was entered on his behalf.

He also refused to give evidence.

by Tommy Monk Wed Nov 23, 2016 10:53 pm

sassy wrote:Tommy decided, no one else, that this was photoshopped and not in the UK, that's because Tommy doesn't want to admit the Mair is a terrorist and part of Britain First:

You posted up another alleged picture of Mair doing a Nazi salute with loads of tattoos on his arms... man arrested in pictures of cox killer didn't have any tattoos on his arms...

Plus the face on that Nazi salute pic didn't look anything like the face of Mair on pics released of him...

Although Nazi salute man face looked the same as banner pic man face... and neither looked like released pics of Mair.

by Victorismyhero Wed Nov 23, 2016 10:55 pm

There has been many an insane person who has planned their criminal acts.

Planning does not equate to sanity.

yes it does....at least in law....It is taken to show evidence of "capacity"

Did he really know 'the wrong of it'...?

In light of the fact he took great pains in the planning etc....and tried to flee.....he knew he was wrong ....

Or was his mental state in such disarray as to only believe in the right of what he did?

It was said that he pleaded not guilty all the way through until today when it was then said that he didn't enter any plea at all.

he didnt enter a plea EVER.....the not guilty plea was therfore automatically entered in order to protect his rights and ensure a proper trial....It is the same for everyone taken to court...if you refuse to plead then a not guilty plea is assumed

It was also said that his defence team didn't offer anything at all by way of defence throughout...

since there can be NO defence for what he did how could they...the best they could do was plead some sort of mitigation...the court appointed psych guys said he wasnt insane...so no mileage there... Mair shouted "Britain First" in the attack, but the judge said the true "patriot" was Mrs Cox, not Mair. - Page 2 2190311264

Mair shouted "Britain First" in the attack, but the judge said the true "patriot" was Mrs Cox, not Mair. - Page 2 2190311264

From a legal standpoint... the behaviour of the defence team is beyond comprehension!

[/quote]

not entering a plea, or refusing to acknowledge the authority of a court is a typical tactic of these kind of creatures...brevik did the same.

by Tommy Monk Wed Nov 23, 2016 10:58 pm

Spindleshanks wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:

I'm not saying he didn't do it.

And I read that he had pleaded not guilty up until today when I read that he had not entered a plea at all.

It appears reported that he remained silent when asked for a plea and a plea of not guilty was entered on his behalf.

Just read that, he refused to enter a plea at all and the not guilty plea was entered on his behalf.

He also refused to give evidence.

He may have refused to speak or give plea or evidence... but surely it is the job of defence team to provide some sort of defence for him on his behalf...?

And the only possible one would be guilty plea but mitigating with angle of mental health issues.

Why they did not do this is beyond me...

by Guest Wed Nov 23, 2016 11:00 pm

It is the job of his defence team to do as he instructs.

by Victorismyhero Wed Nov 23, 2016 11:03 pm

mmm thats true too...

by Tommy Monk Wed Nov 23, 2016 11:11 pm

If they were able to offer a not guilty plea on his behalf then they were also able to offer mental health issues as his defence.

by Spindleshanks Wed Nov 23, 2016 11:13 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:
Spindleshanks wrote:

Just read that, he refused to enter a plea at all and the not guilty plea was entered on his behalf.

He also refused to give evidence.

He may have refused to speak or give plea or evidence... but surely it is the job of defence team to provide some sort of defence for him on his behalf...?

And the only possible one would be guilty plea but mitigating with angle of mental health issues.

Why they did not do this is beyond me...

What defence could they provide if he refused to plea.

He was absolutely guilty of killing her, if he refused to plea due to insanity or mental health or whatever then that is his lookout and the defense team would have had their hands tied.

by Tommy Monk Wed Nov 23, 2016 11:14 pm

No... if his mental health was so obviously in question then it was the duty of the defence team to make that known.

by Spindleshanks Wed Nov 23, 2016 11:17 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:No... if his mental health was so obviously in question then it was the duty of the defence team to make that known.

Unless Mair instructed them to use that angle, then their hands were tied.

by Victorismyhero Wed Nov 23, 2016 11:20 pm

His defence team DID NOT enter the "not guilty plea"

the COURT did, as it always does in such cases
and If he told his defence tem to STFU then there is nothing they can do...

his mental health was NOT an issue...since the court appointed psycs found him "fit to plead" I.e NOT insane

by Victorismyhero Wed Nov 23, 2016 11:21 pm

Its really very simple...mair wanted to get the max possible sentence...in order to become yet another martyr for the cause.

insanity is a mitigation...stupidity isnt

by Tommy Monk Wed Nov 23, 2016 11:21 pm

It is the job of defence to offer some defence... only a mad man would try to instruct defence to not offer any...

Which is why the defence should have offered a defence of mental health issues... especially as he was known to have a history of mental health issues...

by Victorismyhero Wed Nov 23, 2016 11:26 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:
It is the job of defence to offer some defence... only a mad man would try to instruct defence you not offer any...

which just goes to show that in reality you know nothing of these sort of people......and amplifies what i said about "understanding" them...try visiting that dark place sometime tommy....or...actually dont......you may not return ......

Which is why the defence should have offered a defence of mental health issues... especially as he was known to have a history of mental health issues...

by Guest Wed Nov 23, 2016 11:29 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:
It is the job of defence to offer some defence... only a mad man would try to instruct defence you not offer any...

Which is why the defence should have offered a defence of mental health issues... especially as he was known to have a history of mental health issues...

Do you imagine for a moment that judge and jury did not know he had a history of mental health issues? The far-right have been beating their gums about it for months in a vain attempt to distance themselves from this shocking act of political terrorism.

The court wasn't buying it - he's been banged-up for an appropriate period in an appropriate institution - get over it.

by nicko Thu Nov 24, 2016 6:29 am

He should have been took out and shot, end off !

by Tommy Monk Thu Nov 24, 2016 7:00 am

The defence offered nothing so his mental health was not a consideration of the judge or jury for his defence.

by Miffs2 Thu Nov 24, 2016 8:46 am

Tommy Monk wrote:
Spindleshanks wrote:

Just read that, he refused to enter a plea at all and the not guilty plea was entered on his behalf.

He also refused to give evidence.

He may have refused to speak or give plea or evidence... but surely it is the job of defence team to provide some sort of defence for him on his behalf...?

And the only possible one would be guilty plea but mitigating with angle of mental health issues.

Why they did not do this is beyond me...

They didn't do it because he had already been assessed and found to have capacity, be sane and be fit to stand trial. How could his defence argue mental health ?

by 'Wolfie Thu Nov 24, 2016 8:49 am

MAIR decided to be a political assassin...

Mair was quite sane, cold and calculating..

Mair decided not to plead either innocent or guilty, talk in his own defence, nor offer any kind of defence --presumably because he considers himself above and outside of British law ?

Mair is obviously Tommy's hero; for this week, at least..
I don't even see Tommy's usual defenders on here today --Tommy seems to be pretty well alone on this issue at this time ?

Mair was no 'patriot'..
Neither is Tommy...

Tommy is a genius..
Tommy has been telling everybody so, for some weeks now...

Would Tommy lie ??? scratch

by Miffs2 Thu Nov 24, 2016 8:54 am

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:MAIR decided to be a political assassin...

Mair was quite sane, cold and calculating..

Mair decided not to plead, talk in his own defence, nor offer any kind of defence --presumably because he considers himself above and outside of British law ?

Mair is Tommy's hero..
I don't even see Tommy's usual defenders on here today --Tommy seem to be alone on this issue at this time ?

Tommy is a genius..
Tommy has been telling everybody so, for some weeks now...

Would Tommy lie ???

Shame. You spoiled some excellent points there by being a big girls blouse again.

by Tommy Monk Thu Nov 24, 2016 11:42 am

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/17/jo-cox-murder-thomas-mair-asked-for-mental-health-treatment-day/

by scrat Thu Nov 24, 2016 11:43 am

nicko wrote:He should have been took out and shot, end off !

A waste of good lead and your fellow far right extremists would have only martyred him, made it St Mair day, built a shrine, worshipped at that altar and eulogised his greatness, Tommy is already trying his best to exonerate him and blame the victim, such are the depths of detritus far right folk wallow in.

ISIS far right folk, same shit different religion.

by Andy Thu Nov 24, 2016 11:58 am

The 4th Reich are on the rise Scrat.

Be worried.

by scrat Thu Nov 24, 2016 12:01 pm

Handy Andy wrote:The 4th Reich are on the rise Scrat.

Be worried.

Hardly surprising when 5 folk own the media!

Hope for the best but prepare for the worst!

by Tommy Monk Thu Nov 24, 2016 12:02 pm

You 5th column traitors selling us out to Germany and the eu dictatorship are seen clearly now!

by scrat Thu Nov 24, 2016 12:04 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:You 5th column traitors selling us out to Germany and the eu dictatorship are seen clearly now!

So now you're even starting to sound like Mair, obviously you connected with him!

by Tommy Monk Thu Nov 24, 2016 12:06 pm

Well if you idiots are going to call me far right and Nazi and 4th Reich and all that then I will call you 5th column traitors selling us out to Germany and the eu dictatorship.

by Andy Thu Nov 24, 2016 12:10 pm

What really is scary s that Mair had nazi memorabilia in his house. He inhabited rw and extremist forums. He spouted far right rants.
He followed far right doctrines. Shouted to all how he was a British patriot. Had weapons. And butchered an innocent mum and MP.
Apart from the weapons , that description could be applied to several posters here.
And some have weapons.
Its a fine line between turning fantasy and a dream into reality.
Be worried.

by Tommy Monk Thu Nov 24, 2016 12:22 pm

The Nazis were nationalist socialists... far left..

by Andy Thu Nov 24, 2016 12:25 pm

Been through ths before .
You lost then by popular vote and every factual website on earth.
The far right are......far right.
There is a clue there.
Fucking idiot.

by nicko Thu Nov 24, 2016 12:28 pm

"Several posters here have weapons" meaning Vic and myself.

For fuck sake andy go and do one, your a raving idiot !

by Andy Thu Nov 24, 2016 12:35 pm

I never said you. You mentioned you.
Guilt by association?

by nicko Thu Nov 24, 2016 12:49 pm

YOU DIDN'T HAVE TO MENTION NAMES,WE KNOW WHO YOU MENT!
Get a life you socialist moron.

by Victorismyhero Thu Nov 24, 2016 2:53 pm

I dont know if i was clear enough in my PM to you HA....

STOP the goading...however clever you think you are being....

my patience with you is exhausted...

I meant what I said......

by Victorismyhero Thu Nov 24, 2016 2:56 pm

you may also consider the fact that the weapons he had were illegal weapons...illegal to have and illegally obtained....

by Sponsored content