{"id":2322,"date":"2018-05-15T03:10:14","date_gmt":"2018-05-15T07:10:14","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/?p=2322"},"modified":"2018-05-15T03:10:14","modified_gmt":"2018-05-15T07:10:14","slug":"british-white-nationalist-leader-jez-turner-jailed-for-criticizing-jewish-power","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cafe.nfshost.com\/?p=2322","title":{"rendered":"British White Nationalist Leader Jez Turner Jailed for Criticizing Jewish Power"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n
\n
\n
British White Nationalist Leader Jez Turner Jailed for Criticizing Jewish Power<\/b><\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Yesterday Jeremy Bedford-Turner\u00a0 known as Jez Turner was convicted at Southwark Crown Court in London of inciting racial hatred during a speech he gave in 2015 outside Downing Street . In this speech\u00a0 he attacked Jewish influence, most particularly, the\u00a0 Met Police’s support for and enablement of\u00a0 a\u00a0 Jewish security organisation\u00a0 known as the Shomrim .\u00a0 \u00a0<\/span>He was sentenced to 12 months, six of which will be served in prison and the rest on licence.\u00a0<\/span><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
Did Jez have a chance of acquittal? Well, he had a jury trial so\u00a0 \u00a0that gave him some chance of an acquittal. Had it been a trial without a jury he would have had none. But even with a jury the odds were heavily against a not guilty verdict. In the minds of jurors must be the fear of being called a racist which has been so successfully inculcated in the general population that\u00a0 it produces an automated reflex of panic and terror when faced with the possibility of the label being put on them. Any juror faced with a case such as this must have it in the back of their minds at least that to return a not guilty verdict would be to risk being called a racist. There is also the sheer shock factor of hearing politically incorrect views being unashamedly spoken. As it was the jury was out for less than two hours and returned a unanimous verdict of\u00a0 guilty.\u00a0<\/span><\/div>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\u00a0<\/span><\/div>\n
The case was originally turned down by the Crown Prosecution Service\u00a0 (CPS) as not meting their evidential standard for a prosecution.\u00a0 The Campaign Against Anti-Semitism\u00a0 threatened the CPS with a judicial review of their decision not to prosecute. Faced with that the CPS caved in and prosecuted. It is worth noting that running a judicial review is very expensive.\u00a0 The fact that\u00a0 the CAA managed to get the CPS\u00a0 prosecute effectively creates two tiers of justice, that for the rich and that for the poor.<\/span><\/span><\/div>\n
\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
I\u00a0 shall be writing a fuller account of the trial later but I can say unequivocally that the judge showed his bias against Jezz from the word go in both his actions and manner.\u00a0 He began by refusing a request by Jezz’s barrister to put\u00a0 questions to prospective jurors to discover if any off them were members of the CAA or the\u00a0 Community Security Trust,\u00a0 a charity which has surprising support from the Met Police for a quasi-police group\u00a0 known as the Shomrim\u00a0 – see below.\u00a0 \u00a0During this passage of the hearing the judge said with great distaste that it was shocking that such an organisation as the CAA needed to exist but that was the way of the world.\u00a0<\/span><\/div>\n
\u00a0<\/span><\/div>\n
The judge also intervened on a number of occasions when Jezz was being cross-examined to dispute what Jezz was saying.This was not his job,\u00a0 it was the job of the prosecutor to challenge what Jezz was saying.\u00a0<\/span><\/div>\n
\u00a0<\/span><\/div>\n
The\u00a0 other thing to note was the way both judge and prosecuting counsel accepted opinion as fact and were seemingly oblivious to what they were doing which in short was enforcing the politically correct\u00a0 view of the world. For example, prosecuting counsel thought nothing of quoting a senior judge that freedom of expression had to be compatible with the “standards of a just and fair multiracial society”.\u00a0<\/span><\/div>\n
\u00a0<\/span><\/div>\n
What has been made very clear in this trial (and that of the trial of Alison Chabloz) is that we have an elite\u00a0 which is hell bent on squeezing the range of permitted opinion ever more tightly into a politically correct shape.\u00a0<\/span><\/div>\n
\u00a0<\/span><\/div>\n
The other striking thing about this trial is the paucity of media comment.\u00a0 One might have thought the mainstream media would have jumped all over the matter\u00a0 but t<\/span>he only mainstream press attending the trial was the Press Association. Why? Well, I suspect it was because although the politically correct wanted the prosecution and a guilty verdict they did not want the politically incorrect nature of much of the evidence to come before the public’s eyes.\u00a0<\/span><\/div>\n
\u00a0<\/span><\/div>\n
Where does all this leave us? Free expression is essential to democracy and political freedom. Take it away and oppression soon fills the void. It also has a general cultural value.\u00a0 Its importance is examined in detail in my essay Freedom or permitted opinion below. . Beneath that\u00a0 you will find a number of reports of Jez’ trial and a couple on the truly amazing powers granted to the Shomrim both here and abroad.\u00a0\u00a0<\/span><\/div>\n
\u00a0<\/span><\/div>\n
Robert Henderson<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n



<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n

<\/h1>\n

<\/h1>\n

Free expression or permitted opinion: that is the choice – UKIP Daily | UKIP News | UKIP Debate<\/a><\/h1>\n

<\/h1>\n

Free expression or permitted opinion: that is the choice<\/h1>\n
\n
Posted by\u00a0Robert Henderson<\/a>\u00a0|\u00a0Nov 20, 2015<\/span>\u00a0|\u00a0Views & Letters<\/a>\u00a0|\u00a00\u00a0<\/span><\/a>\u00a0|\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span>\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n