Censorship and Social Media

[Spiderman]

Where have you heard this?

The only place I read any speculation like this is here. So where are people getting their “information”. Please inform so its reliability can be assessed.

Injunctions are issued by courts. They aren’t given for no reason, so there must be something that convinced a judge one was necessary. Why is this questioned?

Terrorism has been ruled out so why has an arson attack on the property of the serving PM received so little MSM attention? If not because of an injunction then what? Biggest question is why did the attack take place, terrorism ruled out, political motive ruled out, mmm 🤔

 

[Badger11]

Terrorism has been ruled out so why has an arson attack on the property of the serving PM received so little MSM attention? If not because of an injunction then what? Biggest question is why did the attack take place, terrorism ruled out, political motive ruled out, mmm 🤔

Secret trials? Nothing to see here 😀

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

If a judge has told the media not to report during the trial as it might be prejudicial I can see an argument for that although I don't agree. We have had many high profile trials over the years and I have never heard of a judge stopping the reporting of what is a public trial.

However the real issue is what happens after the verdict. Will the media be allowed to then report what was said during the trial? If not then that is shameful.

As we don’t actually know anything, although some seem to think they do, how can we even speculate what lies behind it?

Why do you seem to think you have a right to know what has been said? I can think of circumstances when it would be highly inappropriate for disproven allegations to be made public.

Just because some members of the public are interested doesn’t make anything in the public interest.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Secret trials? Nothing to see here 😀

Nothing for you or anyone to see.

It’s no different to trawling through dustbins.

If there is evidence of wrongdoing we will find out. If there isn’t why should we?

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Terrorism has been ruled out so why has an arson attack on the property of the serving PM received so little MSM attention? If not because of an injunction then what? Biggest question is why did the attack take place, terrorism ruled out, political motive ruled out, mmm 🤔

Was there an arson attack? How do you know? I don’t!

It’s a matter for the police and the courts. Not us, unless there is an overriding issue of public importance.

 

[Teddy Eagle]

Where have you heard this?

The only place I read any speculation like this is here. So where are people getting their “information”. Please inform so its reliability can be assessed.

Injunctions are issued by courts. They aren’t given for no reason, so there must be something that convinced a judge one was necessary. Why is this questioned?

Assessed by whom?

The Silence At The Old Bailey: Why Is The Starmer Arson Trial Being Buried? - Labour Heartlands

Three men are in the dock at the Old Bailey. The trial opened this morning. Most of Britain's press cannot find the space to tell you.

labourheartlands.com

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Assessed by whom?

The Silence At The Old Bailey: Why Is The Starmer Arson Trial Being Buried? - Labour Heartlands

Three men are in the dock at the Old Bailey. The trial opened this morning. Most of Britain's press cannot find the space to tell you.

labourheartlands.com

By anyone wishing to have confidence in it.

 

[ASCPFC]

Assessed by whom?

The Silence At The Old Bailey: Why Is The Starmer Arson Trial Being Buried? - Labour Heartlands

Three men are in the dock at the Old Bailey. The trial opened this morning. Most of Britain's press cannot find the space to tell you.

labourheartlands.com

I have to think that the press think that, ethically speaking, outing anyone before they're ready is a stretch even for the most gutter press these days. It could easily back fire in many ways too - being cancelled commercially for example.

Just an idea.

 

[Teddy Eagle]

By anyone wishing to have confidence in it.

Any confidence in the link posted?

 

[Spiderman]

Was there an arson attack? How do you know? I don’t!

It’s a matter for the police and the courts. Not us, unless there is an overriding issue of public importance.

This is a joke right? “ a car was set alight” police investigating an arson attack! Maybe the car self combusted! Perhaps BBC have not reported it properly

Police make fifth arrest over arson attacks on properties linked to Keir Starmer

Three men, already charged in connection with attacks on two properties and car, are due to stand trial in April.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Spiderman]

Nothing for you or anyone to see.

It’s no different to trawling through dustbins.

If there is evidence of wrongdoing we will find out. If there isn’t why should we?

You don’t think an attack on a residence of the serving PM is not worthy of press coverage? First class trolling

 

[georgenorman]

Looking at the three, arseon does look likely.

 

[Spiderman]

Looking at the three, arseon does look likely.

Bottoms up!

 

[Teddy Eagle]

This is a joke right?

And the mighty BBC are in on it.

Police make fifth arrest over arson attacks on properties linked to Keir Starmer

Three men, already charged in connection with attacks on two properties and car, are due to stand trial in April.

www.bbc.com

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Any confidence in the link posted?

Having never heard of the writer (it seems this is a one man band) how can any judgement be made? That said he writes well and with conviction.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

This is a joke right? “ a car was set alight” police investigating an arson attack! Maybe the car self combusted! Perhaps BBC have not reported it properly

Police make fifth arrest over arson attacks on properties linked to Keir Starmer

Three men, already charged in connection with attacks on two properties and car, are due to stand trial in April.

www.bbc.co.uk

I wasn’t aware of anything to do with the story. Unlike some here I don’t pay much attention to such things.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

You don’t think an attack on a residence of the serving PM is not worthy of press coverage? First class trolling

I realise some people would be interested in knowing what lay behind it, but as soon as terrorism or political motives were ruled out, then that interest ought to have evaporated. What else could be of legitimate public interest?

As no DMSA has apparently been issued the conclusion must be that the media have decided not to cover the trial of the accused men voluntarily. I guess that’s because of legal advice that they could run foul of being accused of perverting the course of justice if they published details whilst the trial is being held. I don’t know anymore than anyone else but that seems logical to me.

I have read a lot of conspiracy theories trying to smear Starmer and suggesting he has obtained some kind of super injunction but not seen a shred of actual evidence. If there was any it would have leaked! There are ways.

 

[Teddy Eagle]

I realise some people would be interested in knowing what lay behind it, but as soon as terrorism or political motives were ruled out, then that interest ought to have evaporated. What else could be of legitimate public interest?

As no DMSA has apparently been issued the conclusion must be that the media have decided not to cover the trial of the accused men voluntarily. I guess that’s because of legal advice that they could run foul of being accused of perverting the course of justice if they published details whilst the trial is being held. I don’t know anymore than anyone else but that seems logical to me.

I have read a lot of conspiracy theories trying to smear Starmer and suggesting he has obtained some kind of super injunction but not seen a shred of actual evidence. If there was any it would have leaked! There are ways.

Even if a DSMA had been issued the decision would still be voluntary; they are not legally binding.

 

[cryrst]

I wasn’t aware of anything to do with the story. Unlike some here I don’t pay much attention to such things.

But a baker refused to write on a cake and you were all over it!

 

[PalazioVecchio]

Looking at the three, arseon does look likely.

Mr Wenger would be too old for any incendiary nonsense ?