There’s right and there’s wrong and it happened in front of my children.
After attending the trial on day one I left in little doubt that this action was doomed to fail. I’ve been to EDL marches, I’ve seen him in the press.”PC Hills says he was not aware of Robinson, and was more focused on a group of Luton risk supporters being escorted back to the train station. That means they have to speak to an individual. She says it has to be necessary to prevent aggressive behaviour.Mr Clemens: “I’m sorry to cut across you. I know that day I was zero risk, and the police know I make every effort to be zero risk.”He asks: “Where is that footage?”Insp Johnson: “Probably the day before.”Insp Johnson: “Yes because he was still part of [the group of] risk supporters.”The inspector was the bronze commander on the day, so his job was to deliver what the silver commander says has to be delivered.Robinson: “I was upset, and I still am.HHJ Walden-Smith: “You are starting to use this as a platform but I’m not going to allow it.
You are ill-informed and this book should fix that.
I will take it as an error of judgement.”Ms Gurden: Did you discuss the Luton supporters before the briefing meeting? This wasn’t about Mr Robinson, I mean Mr Yaxley-Lennon.”Ms Gurden: “So why was he classed as a risk supporter by yourself on that day?”Ms Gurden: “Now section 35.1 says a constable in uniform may direct a person. You are fighting on the facts and evidence specific to the case, not on your vague right to be respected as basically a decent bloke and never treated badly. TOMMY Robinson is suing cops after he was left “humiliated and degraded” when he was booted out of a pub in Cambridgeshire.
Firstly that he is told to leave the pub and the city of Cambridge, and that he was followed.
Why didn’t you ask if he was with children?”That’s the end of the video.Ms Gurden also points out there are some feet in the flipflops in the footage. There are three men and seven kids. So I am disappointed in you and I am not going to accept it. 'Tommy Robinson has taken Cambridgeshire Police to Peterborough County Court over harassment claims. Tommy Robinson, also known as Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, was at the Cambridge pub with his children on August 27, 2016. The officer says there was disorder at the match involving assault and involved the group.The officer explains to Robinson that he has been identified as being a part of violence.She continues: “As well as the slides, is anything told to the officers?”Robinson is told to answer the questions.Mr Clemens: “Can I imagine you were trying to console, as you’re saying it, the youngest one who almost ran out into traffic? What happened on this day was the complete opposite.”Ms Gurden: “So your officers had to be aware they were being proportionate, legal and necessary. Insp Johnson: “It was mine at 17:13.”Mr Clemens: “If somebody is told and is required to disperse and becomes argumentative and won’t be dispersed, should you issue a dispersal order?”PC Hills: “Yes, walking over the bridge.”Robinson: “It’s trying to understand why it happened and the way it happened and for me to presume the way it happened.
He added that Mr Yaxley-Lennon kept 'trying to interview me on his mobile phone'.The 36-year-old was at a pub after the match when Sgt Street told him he would be issued with a dispersal order unless he left.PC Ruddy also said that from what he saw Robinson was 'arguing and having an incoherent argument with PC Street'.Judge Karen Walden-Smith warned Canadian Ezra Levant, a reporter for the right-wing Rebel Media Organisation, that tweets he had sent from Peterborough County Court today contained 'pejorative, inaccurate and inflammatory language' - and told him to stop sending such tweets.Mr Yaxley-Lennon said he had taken his three children, aged from five to nine at the time, on a day out to see Luton Town play away at Cambridge United in August 2016.Robinson had been on a day out to see Luton Town play away at Cambridge United in 2016Ms Gurden asked the officer: 'If I was to tell you Mr Lennon wasn't drunk and there wasn't any evidence of that, what would you say? Now, on top of his own legal team’s costs, Robinson is liable for the £38,000 costs of Cambridgeshire police’s defence team. So what that means [is] you can feed information to that officer but he has to take into account what’s going on around him.”Ms Gurden: “But he says that he wasn’t a risk because he was with the children.”He continues: “I used to post a lot but I don’t now as I’ve now been removed from all social media.”HHJ Walden-Smith cuts in saying: “Let me cut through this.
He was with a load of men drinking beer. Tommy Robinson, 36, claims he was 'targeted by police because of my beliefs' He was moved on from a Cambridge pub after a football match and … Producing The Tommy Robinson Show isn’t free for us.
The allegation that Cambridgeshire police deliberately targeted him in my judgement must necessarily fail.“In my judgement there is no evidence that Mr Lennon was being treated differently because of his beliefs on fundamental Islam.Tommy Robinson has lost his harassment case against Cambridgeshire police.It matters not one jot if some of us believe – as I do – that Robinson probably was a victim of harassment.Robinson’s allegation against Cambridgeshire police was this: that in 2016, while on a lovely, sunny day out with his kids to see his home team Luton Town play Cambridge United, he was unfairly targeted as a football hooligan by the local police and forced to leave town.