Tommy Robinson appeal latest updates: Judges retire to consider judgement on whether to free EDL founder from prison
For free real time breaking news alerts sent straight to your inbox sign up to our breaking news emails
Sign up to our free breaking news emails
Sign up to our free breaking news emails
Judges are considering an attempt by English Defence League (EDL) founder Tommy Robinson to be freed from prison.
The far-right leader, who is appearing under his real name of Stephen Christopher Yaxley-Lennon, was jailed in May after he broke blanket reporting restrictions on an ongoing set of trials by discussing them in a Facebook Live video.
A judge at Leeds Crown Court said Robinson admitted contempt of court and jailed him for a total of 13 months.
But his barrister told the Court of Appeal Robinson should be freed from prison and have his sentence "quashed" after arguing that criminal procedure rules had been broken.
Jeremy Dein QC argued that a judge at Leeds Crown Court should have adjourned the case to give Robinson further time with lawyers, and to respond to each allegation in detail, rather than jailing him within hours of the video being broadcast.
He also argued that the 13-month sentence handed down was "manifestly excessive" and may have been lower if a barrister was able to properly mitigate on his behalf.
The Lord Chief Justice said he and two other judges would consider the submissions and hope to come to a judgement by the end of July.
Please allow a moment for the live blog to load
Robinson was previously spared jail after committing contempt in another case in Canterbury in 2017, on the condition he committed no further crimes.
Judge Geoffrey Marson QC activated that three-month term and added 10 months for the new offence, telling Robinson that he risked causing a trial to collapse.
Protesters gathered outside the Royal Courts of Justice in London ahead of the hearing on Wednesday, which was before the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales, the Rt Hon Sir Ian Burnett, Mr Justice Turner and Mrs Justice McGowan DBE.
They may choose to reserve judgement to a later date after hearing evidence.
It comes a day after reports that lobbying by the far-right Breitbart news website caused the US ambassador for international religious freedom to raise Robinson's case with the British government.
US Senator Sam Brownback reportedly told British ambassador Sir Kim Darroch the UK should be more “sympathetic” to the former leader of the EDL and warned Sir Kim that the Trump administration might publicly criticise its handling of the case.
Robinson has been forming links with the American alt-right, who characterise him as a “citizen journalist” and see imprisonment as a violation of freedom of speech.
Steve Bannon, the former Breitbart chairman who served as the White House chief strategist, has given his personal support to Robinson and former Breitbart London editor Raheem Kassam has coordinated two “Free Tommy” rallies.
A neoconservative US think-tank said it was funding both Robinson's legal costs and two protests in London on 9 June and 14 July.
The June protest saw Robinson supporters perform Nazi salutes and attack police, while Saturday's event - which merged with a pro-Trump march - saw demonstrators blockade a bus driven by a Muslim woman and several arrests.
MPs and campaigners warned that far-right extremists were rallying around his imprisonment to develop a new “racist street movement” with international support.
It comes as statistics show more extreme right-wing terrorists are being arrested and jailed than ever before, with the head of MI5 warning that their brand of extremism was “rearing its ugly head” once more.
Prosecutors and police said Robinson’s posts radicalised Darren Osborne, the terrorist who ploughed a van into a group of Muslim worshippers in Finsbury Park last year.
Mr Dein says the court must look at the overriding objectives of the criminal procedure rules, which he argues are of even greater importance in contempt proceedings.
Robinson appears to be listening closely via a live video link to the jail where he is currently imprisoned.
He is citing rule 48.5, about a defendant being given the opportunity to apologise.
"It is our submission in a number of respects, most importantly due to aspects of mitigation that were not put forward by [barrister] Matthew Harding...proceedings were unnecessarily and unjustly rushed and that amounts to a breach of rule 4.5, subsection 2b."
Mr Dein says Robinson's barriser in Leeds, Mr Harding, "made a number of concessions" and said Robinson was sorry, and that the judge said he had admitted contempt in his sentencing remarks.
"But we do submit that the matter wasn't properly addressed."
He says Robinson was not directly asked if he accepted the particular brand of contempt.
Mr Dein says the trial Robinson discussed was suspended pending the outcome of his contempt proceedings and that jury deliberations, which were due to end that afternoon, had to be stopped.
He says the deliberations were suspended as a consequence.
Mr Dein: "For the defendant to be sentenced to a term of imprisonment, rather than being committed for a term in prison, has significant practical implications."
The Lord Chief Justice says there is a view that "if the wrong label is attached to what is otherwise a correct period of detention that can be tidied up in an appeal."
Mr Dein says an "error" in the way proceedings in Leeds were labelled meant Robinson was treated as a criminal rather than a civil prisoner, who are allowed more access to visitors and other privileges.
Mr Dein says he accepts there was a breach of a Section 4 (2) reporting restriction by Robinson.
The Lord Chief Justice says Robinson's representatives want the specific aspects of the breach to be put to Robinson so he can state what he does and doesn't admit within that, then any other aspects of contempt can be argued about.
Lord Chief Justice says that unless any breach of the criminal proceedings rules are sufficient to undermine the finding of contempt then "what happened in Canterbury was fair...it does seem to me there was a great deal of difference between Canterbury on the one hand which was taken at a very leisurely pace and Leeds on the other."
Mr Dein accepts that analysis.
Mr Dein says the "sentence was manifestly excessive" in Leeds and that the activation of Robinson's suspended sentence from Canterbury was "wrong".
Mr Dein says "there was no impact on the ongoing trial, whatever attempts were or are being made by those representing defendants on the trial"
The Lord Chief Justice says it provoked an application to discharge the jury, which did not succeed but "it's important to at least acknowledge that it had an impact".
There is an ongoing legal application relating to a trial in Leeds, which is subject to reporting restrictions, on that basis.