He probably had to plead guilty, having already spent all the money on his holiday in Cyprus.
Off Topic NETFLIX and Box Set series Thread.
- Thread starter Edelman
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
He probably had to plead guilty, having already spent all the money on his holiday in Cyprus.
They’re more likely not to be wrong than someone who has only heard one side of the story from someone on the internet though.
He might have pleaded guilty knowing a prison sentence would make him a martyr and nothing like that for attracting publicity and increasing your following. AH knew that and did the same when in court after the 1923 Beer Hall Putsch.
Not getting involved one way or another,my thoughts shall remain with me,probably for the best.
But just to clarify on one point..
This £87k you mention however might just cover the costs of the contempt application's that he was ordered to pay by said judge,which are estimated in excess of £80k.
Probably nearer the mark here.
It was a civil case,he could've disappeared into the ether with no fear of extradition.
It was a civil case, until he ignored the outcome and made it into a contempt case, its a situation of entirely his own making (and other peoples funding).
Entirely possible
Shame he forgot he was going to do that when he asked his supporters to chuck him a few tens of thousands of quid to help him not do it though
AH lived the high life, including having a Mercedes, which cost an absolute fortune in those times, despite having no official source of income.
I've watched it. It all depends on who you believe - his version or the courts'. He interviews teachers/school governors who have been paid off by the council/tax payer and signed NDAs not to discuss the matter and also school children who were involved. Their version differs from the judge's.
Hard to not have sympathy for both boys and their families involved who have been dragged into the media/social media and politics. The whole matter was handled terribly.
About him pleading guilty.
It really isn't difficult! Of course he pleaded guilty, as the (so called contempt of court) charge was that he'd continued to air the documentary! He could hardly plead not guilty. And if he took it down, they'd won.
I find it hard to believe some are commenting so authoratively on something they've not seen and refuse to see. Incredible, and closed minded. A (the?) main point is that you can't take at their word what msm, the legal system, the authorities are saying; he's exposing that you can't and why you can't!!
Agree with Heimdallr's diplomatic post. At least watch it, then decide.
But as I said, don't want to prolong this 'thread'.
It really isn't difficult! Of course he pleaded guilty, as the (so called contempt of court) charge was that he'd continued to air the documentary! He could hardly plead not guilty. And if he took it down, they'd won.
I find it hard to believe some are commenting so authoratively on something they've not seen and refuse to see. Incredible, and closed minded. A (the?) main point is that you can't take at their word what msm, the legal system, the authorities are saying; he's exposing that you can't and why you can't!!
Agree with Heimdallr's diplomatic post. At least watch it, then decide.
But as I said, don't want to prolong this 'thread'.
About him pleading guilty.
It really isn't difficult! Of course he pleaded guilty, as the (so called contempt of court) charge was that he'd continued to air the documentary! He could hardly plead not guilty. And if he took it down, they'd won.
I find it hard to believe some are commenting so authoratively on something they've not seen and refuse to see. Incredible, and closed minded. A (the?) main point is that you can't take at their word what msm, the legal system, the authorities are saying; he's exposing that you can't and why you can't!!
Agree with Heimdallr's diplomatic post. At least watch it, then decide.
But as I said, don't want to prolong this 'thread'.
Funny, people who say they take no notice of the MSM and prefer to get their information from other sources quote what they have read in the MSM and do not look at alternatives when it suits their agenda.
You don't need an IQ in the Brady bracket to realise that you only need scratch the surface to uncover the real news...
On which, interesting, perhaps unsurprising who helped fund the film in question.
But if you watch it you'll only get on very skewed view on what happened. I'd rather trust a judge who has watched it and seen evidence from the other side and decided Stephen Yaxley Lennon to be a lying racist **** spot.
But if I feel his history is such that I don’t trust him to be credible or factual or honest then why would I waste time watching it?About him pleading guilty.
It really isn't difficult! Of course he pleaded guilty, as the (so called contempt of court) charge was that he'd continued to air the documentary! He could hardly plead not guilty. And if he took it down, they'd won.
I find it hard to believe some are commenting so authoratively on something they've not seen and refuse to see. Incredible, and closed minded. A (the?) main point is that you can't take at their word what msm, the legal system, the authorities are saying; he's exposing that you can't and why you can't!!
Agree with Heimdallr's diplomatic post. At least watch it, then decide.
But as I said, don't want to prolong this 'thread'.
It would be irrelevant if I thought some of it sounded interesting because I wouldn’t believe it anyway.
If him pleading guilty was always what he was going to do then why did he ask for tens of thousands of pounds to defend himself?
The same reason oh so hard done by Alex Belfield fleeced tens of thousands from his supporters? Grifters gonna grift.
The views expressed in my posts are not necessarily mine.
Because he had legal costs to pay and, although he obviously had to plead guilty to the actual charge (airing and refusing to take down the documentary), he wanted to defend himself by showing again what was in the documentary, him sharing collected evidence (loads of footage and documents of what those involved said, not what he was saying). He was refused. You really can't comment sensibly if you haven't watched it!
As I keep saying, I really don't want to extend the thread or the debate. It was simply a suggestion for something for people on here to watch, just like so many others have put forward - meaning some things are for you, some others aren't. Whether you like it or not is your choice, but please don't keep commenting on TR, it's not meant as a debate about him, especially if you haven't and won't watch it. Ta
As I keep saying, I really don't want to extend the thread or the debate. It was simply a suggestion for something for people on here to watch, just like so many others have put forward - meaning some things are for you, some others aren't. Whether you like it or not is your choice, but please don't keep commenting on TR, it's not meant as a debate about him, especially if you haven't and won't watch it. Ta