Daniel “Tommo” Thomas charged, no bail.

He's also been charged with failing to give his pin number for his phone good grief you couldn't make it up could you. Yet Labour are letting out violent criminals early.

Is a Syrian migrant the only man who has been given bail just now?
Why did you chose this particular example, Sago?

Incitement Peacelilydilly. Did you not read that there was a black clad mob outside the police station where he was being held. Another serious offence if he is found guilty.

Exactly, Casdon.

Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) is a UK law that regulates how public bodies and law enforcement agencies carry out surveillance, intercept communications, and access encrypted digital data. The act is about the state's need to investigate crime and protect national security.

Thomas is organising his Patriot Platform to engage in mass civil disruption which is leading to criminal offences. The police have a right to investigate what he is doing by examining his phone data.

And offence under Section 53 of RIPA can lead to five years in jail.

Mass civil disruption? How patriotic.

Maremia

Is a Syrian migrant the only man who has been given bail just now?
Why did you chose this particular example, Sago?

I chose it because it seemed a good example.

A man of whom very little is known, potentially a serious flight risk and a possibly a rapist and paedophile versus a bit of a patriotic nutter who slashed a rubber dinghy so it couldn’t be used again.

The O/P clearly says:

Daniel “Tommo” Thomas charged, no bail

Then it attempts to draw attention away from it with another crime that has no relationship with the first:

Tommo charged, no bail: Graphite explained the law:

Every bit of his actions were for one end only: the action itself, self filming, the danger to life he caused, spreading the film around, the in context of networks of people who have already broken the law (if one started examining social media again)

Of whom almost certainly some who are under the beady eye of the Secret Services as in far right actions (not to mention the crimes some of the followers have been known to commit against women and so on)

He sought to rabble rouse, he set out to encourage others to take direct and illegal actions as he did

and any government administration* - right left centre would needfully take action and set a boundary.

We are a democracy.

I suggest if we are to engage in the extensive discussions needed around sexual offences - which I am very much favour of throwing under the spotlight given the personal experience some here know I had - and the current problems with adequate specialised policing and the rise in domestic violence as well as the complexity alluded to above

Then that's great - go for it - start a thread on it.

Or alternatively people can talk about what they like where they like as long as it is within GN guidelines.

Fallingstar

Thanks for the info Graphite.
So am imagining the pedophile I mentioned in my post had no priors, but this doesn’t take away from the very real risk to children upon his release. I just think that sex offences are often a compulsion which the offender cannot control so rules around releasing them because there are no priors should be reviewed.

👏👏👏👏

Daniel said he was of no fixed abode, so probably couldn’t fulfil a bail condition.

Sarnia

I frequently struggle with decisions made by courts.
Daniel Thorpe has been refused bail while in London, a paedophile who lived in a flat overlooking a school playground and took thousands of photos of young women and girls to 'nudify' them on his phone was allowed bail and returned to the same flat and area where he committed his crimes. One affected family moved so their daughter would not bump into him.
If I had a choice I would far rather have Tommo walking my streets than a paedophile.

There should be no bail for someone who committed sexual offences let alone a rape.
If anyone thinks the Syrian will stay around for a court hearing in two years they should think again.Bet he couldn’t believe his luck.
Quite often the law is an ass.

Sago

Maremia

Is a Syrian migrant the only man who has been given bail just now?
Why did you chose this particular example, Sago?

I chose it because it seemed a good example.

A man of whom very little is known, potentially a serious flight risk and a possibly a rapist and paedophile versus a bit of a patriotic nutter who slashed a rubber dinghy so it couldn’t be used again.

Exactly!

Jaxjacky

Daniel said he was of no fixed abode, so probably couldn’t fulfil a bail condition.

🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂 Which is hilarious? Because when he was stopped in a car not two ago, he filmed the entire thing, as he’s so fond of doing, and then was heard giving his name and address, his address would also have been in his driving licence, which he would have had to produce.

He’s simply a grifting thug with previous and the boat he destroyed still had a rescue worker on board, which he told his “followers” was a trafficker trying to remove the motor.

Absolutely agree that no one whoever they are from, should be given bail for any sexual or violent offence.

However, the title of this thread is VERY misleading.

He has been 'accused', he has not been found 'guilty'.
Do some GNs think that we should dispense with due process?
Trial by GN?

Plevey08

Cossy

I neither understand nor condone either of these men.

Both have broken the law.

I don’t think the rapist should have bail.

Completely agree

Me too.

Wasn't Thomas already on bail for a previous offence?
Did he fail to give an address?

But you must see that the bail conditions/differences in crimes is peculiar to say the least Cossy.
There are now men charged with rape and sexual attacks being able to roam about for years without a hearing!
If only they could fast track all sexual miscreants in the fast way they do for rioters who chuck a plastic bottle and swear at police.Or slash at a rubber dinghy in the sea.

According to Google around 1600 men accused of rape are out on bail just now.
Accused with 'previous' are unlike to be granted bail.

Yes, Oreo, speed up the process but accused is not the same as guilty.

Maremia

According to Google around 1600 men accused of rape are out on bail just now.
Accused with 'previous' are unlike to be granted bail.

Yes, and it’s shocking in many cases.

Maremia

Wasn't Thomas already on bail for a previous offence?
Did he fail to give an address?

Yes, he was already on bail for something (I think, and could be wrong) to do with protests?

But it’s an unrelated crime to the charges against Thomas.

Oreo

But you must see that the bail conditions/differences in crimes is peculiar to say the least Cossy.
There are now men charged with rape and sexual attacks being able to roam about for years without a hearing!
If only they could fast track all sexual miscreants in the fast way they do for rioters who chuck a plastic bottle and swear at police.Or slash at a rubber dinghy in the sea.

Yes I agree.

However, whilst neither man has been found guilty as yet, but one has pre ious for violence, and the other doesn’t, and one is already on bail (& might well be breaking his bail conditions), and the other one not.

I don’t (only my view) believe the two people or alleged crimes, are in any way comparable.