Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Wed Dec 11 10:10:52 PST 2019

Utopia Talk / Politics / Seb's Protester Hits Cop @ Tommy Protest
Fri Jul 19 13:37:27
lulz. Film with a phone? Jail. Hit a cop with a stick? Probation.


A Muslim activist who hit a police officer with his walking stick at a Tommy Robinson rally in Hyde Park has escaped with a suspended sentence.

Omar Mohamad, 62, scuffled with Sergeant Guy Rooney and left him with a severely bruised face at a counter protest in Hyde Park in March 2018.

The officer suffered from post traumatic stress and his injury was so bad his children refused to walk to school with him.

Passing a 26-week suspended sentence, District Judge Richard Blake said the rally was held ‘to express views that were adverse to the Muslim community in the United Kingdom.’

‘We live in a democracy – people should feel free, within limits, to express their opinions,’ the judge said.

You were with a group of other men. It is fair to say that immediately in front of you there was a fracas.

‘You joined into the melee that happened and you joined in with your stick.

‘While you do need that stick to walk with, you very much used it by wielding it around as a weapon. You brought the stick round and struck the officer in the face.

‘There is no doubt that this was a very significant injury that you caused with your stick.’

Before his sentencing, Mohamad had written an apology letter to Mr Rooney which the judge took into consideration.
Fri Jul 19 15:13:03
They put a man in jail because of a joke. There is no where else to go but down the shitter from there.
Fri Jul 19 16:50:20
As Hr would say "good grief"
Fri Jul 19 17:01:12
”his injury was so bad his children refused to walk to school with him”

Sounds like he has lousy children.
Fri Jul 19 17:19:54

And I'm sure it is just coincidence you stumbled across this obscure story about a muslim?

Assault a copper and yes, you'll get a conviction. But a non-custodial sentence is appropriate if the risk of re-offence is low and there are other considerations (ill health etc.), the convicted has displayed genuine remorse, and there are other extenuating circumstances. Sounds like he was caught up in a brawl.

What is this case about filming with a phone that you are on about forwyn?

Is it going to be one of those hilarious Sam like comments where yes, they were filming, but that was fairly incidental to the crime: e.g. they were filming up a woman's skirt with a phone and you are neglecting the actual criminal bit?
Fri Jul 19 17:27:45
The actual relevant one, where you whined like a bitch that a person with a phone outside the courthouse was going to influence the trial. Because media has never camped outside a courthouse.
the wanderer
Fri Jul 19 23:23:08
how is there no video of a public brawl in this day & age? was he swinging at the cop or just swinging wildly?
Sat Jul 20 00:21:57
Cuckservatives decide on a conclusion and then look for selective "facts" to support what they already believe.

It happens over and over and over again. It's fucking stupid and it is unique to modern conservatism.
Sat Jul 20 01:54:41
Maybe the old man was just parrying and fending off himself, and the cop ran into the stick, and that is why they could not send the man to jail.
Sat Jul 20 02:13:24
An article from 2018? UP is getting slow because people here are getting old?
Sat Jul 20 02:50:29
Dukhat you spelled liberal wrong. Doesn't start with a "C".

Sat Jul 20 03:26:38

Predictable. You did a Sam.

No, conventional media are not permitted and do not camp outside the jury with a mob demanding vigilante action, filming and intimidating the jurors, prejudicing the trial. And if they are told by the judge they must stop filming, they do.

Saying he was sent to jail for "taking pictures on his phone" is like saying that the Tsanrnev brothers were shot and jailed for impromptu street cooking.

Sat Jul 20 03:32:03

No, he was found guilty of assault with aggravating factors.

So it definitely wasn't an accident in the jury or judges mind.

A non custodial sentence is appropriate for an ill, old man caught up in events in extenuating circumstances who has shown remorse and where the judge thinks there is no chance of reoffence. Note suspended sentence means if he does anything else that breaks the law during the term he can be imprisoned for the full length of the sentence.

It's funny though, the right wing loons here are often the first to demand that young men who rape women should be let off because it "would ruin their lives", despite them clearly showing no remorse and having a high probability of reoffence.

Sat Jul 20 09:38:48
Rofl @ Seb. Filming and photographing with a phone is intimidating the jurors, rioting and fighting with cops is okay.

You're a fucking retard. Incredible. Comparing it to violent terrorism with weapons. rofl.
Sat Jul 20 09:41:29
"Cuckservatives decide on a conclusion and then look for selective "facts" to support what they already believe."

There was no conclusion here, other than the British judicial system is a fucking joke with kangaroo courts that send people to jail for innocuous offenses, including being mean on social media.

The conclusion that they're also letting off certain minorities for violent assaults was hitherto unknown, but not entirely surprising. Lulz @ United Cuckdom and fucking retards like Seb that defend it
Mon Jul 22 02:06:39

Do you often give someone a criminal conviction for things that are "OK"?

Tommy Robbins got a custodial sentence because it was his third offence.

There is nothing innocuous about seeking to influence a jury.
Mon Jul 22 02:07:07
The courts were lenient. He could have been convicted for perverting the course of justice.
show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message:
Bookmark and Share