Tommy LOSES court case. __Thread Moved to GD__

It isn't a false conclusion.
Do you believe that someone who represents themselves in court has the same chance of acquittal as someone who has professional advice and representation.
If you do believe the above, then why do people pay lawyers to fight their case.
I believe that Yaxley knew he was doomed the moment the Syrian fella made his decision to sue him. He knew he could not win, but equally knew he could not back down either. Representing himself was probably the cheaper option.
 
Sponsored Links
I think I heard that he had hidden or divested all his assets, so he could go bankrupt when sued or fined.


"The official receiver will now search for concealed assets under other people's names, after Robinson, 38, used the name Stephen Lennon for his bankruptcy, The Times reported."

"Paul Rouse, of the financial advisory firm Mazars, told the paper: “Mr Lennon will now be required to disclose his assets and liabilities to the bankruptcy trustee. The bankruptcy trustee will also conduct a thorough investigation into the circumstances leading to Mr Lennon’s bankruptcy.”

The bankruptcy states his address as a house in Silsoe, which is owned by his mother and step-father.

This is despite reports that he lives in a £950,000 detached house with his wife. Robinson said in court earlier this week that his marriage had broken down and his mental health had suffered due to "matters to do with [the libel] case".

He was first imprisoned for assaulting a plainclothes policeman in 2003 and has since had multiple stints in jail. He pleaded guilty to mortgage fraud and spent 18 months in jail in 2014. He had made money as a property developer and owned seven homes and a tanning business by the age of 25.


https://www.bedfordshirelive.co.uk/...ns-tommy-robinson-declares-bankruptcy-5082655



"A hunt for the assets of Tommy Robinson has begun after he declared himself bankrupt this week.

The founder of the English Defence League, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon and who was one of Britain’s best-funded activists, filed for bankruptcy before a trial in which he is being sued for libel by a Syrian refugee."


"Robinson once had more than a million social media followers and was able to raise huge amounts with regular appeals for donations. He drove expensive cars, was pictured wearing clothes and watches worth thousands of pounds and had cosmetic dentistry"

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...ter-edl-founder-declares-bankruptcy-nbtk7v356
 
Again you are conflating issues. He did get a fair hearing
The 2 issues are related, how can the hearing be considered fair if the defendant doesn't have proper legal representation to put his case to the court.
Do poor black people in America get a fair hearing in American courts compared to their rich white counterparts.
Although i do agree Tommy is probably trying to pull a fast one.
Maybe he will catch himself on and get a new career as a mortgage advisor or summat.
 
Sponsored Links
. . . how can the hearing be considered fair if the defendant doesn't have proper legal representation to put his case to the court.

Tommy chose to represent himself, as is his right.

How can a hearing be considered fair if legal representation is forced upon you???

In your own words please.
 
The 2 issues are related, how can the hearing be considered fair if the defendant doesn't have proper legal representation to put his case to the court.
Do poor black people in America get a fair hearing in American courts compared to their rich white counterparts.
Although i do agree Tommy is probably trying to pull a fast one.
Maybe he will catch himself on and get a new career as a mortgage advisor or summat.
Of course it is fair, if that is the style of hearing he chose.

However, if you are asking if the outcome of the court would have been different with legal representation, then I'd say no, but with caveats. He may have been able to lessen his financial liabilities but only at great cost elsewhere.
 
Back
Top