Tommy Robinson case: Supporters hurl beer cans as protests erupt after former EDL leader found in contempt of court

The hearing resumes, with Robinson's barrister saying that the activist was "unclear" and "uncertain" about the reporting restrictions.

"He had in his own mind that material in the public domain could not be in contempt," says Richard Furlong.

(During the livestream video Robinson says that he might not be able to report the verdicts in the grooming trial because of the reporting restrictions. He refers to a judge or a court clerk looking out a window at him and adds: "This isn't contempt of court is it? No it definitely isn't, we haven't said anything.")

Mr Furlong accepts that the attorney general's case is based on seriously impeding the course of justice rather than prejudicing a fair trial, but tries to argue that it could only be a contempt of court if Robinson's filming gave rise to serious grounds for appeal by the defendants in grooming trial.

He claims that Robinson's questioning of the defendants in the grooming trial (while the jury was still considering verdicts) was "fairly anodyne" and that he was not intending to be hostile.

(Robinson asks them: "How are you feeling about the verdicts? Got your prison bag?")

"He receives very robust responses indeed," adds Mr Furlong. 

"He should not be judged by a different standard of behaviour because of who he is," says Mr Furlong. "The court needs to look at the exact nature of the questions he asks and the way he approached the criminal defendants which is not outwith the robust nature of the traditional media."

He says Robinson's behaviour on the video would have to amount to "molestation, assault or the threat of molestation" to be contempt of court, rather than being "merely offensive, rude, uncivilised and wholly reprehensible".

Robinson's barrister is now playing a video which he claims shows the "robust behaviour of the media" outside court.

It shows Robinson being questioned by a BBC reporter. Robinson responds that the contempt hearing is a "politically motivated prosecution".

"The point is not to criticise the journalist concerned but to highlight what is a perfectly legitimate approach by a respected journalist," says Mr Furlong, seeking to draw comparisons with Robinson's questioning of the defendants in a criminal trial.

"There is a large crowd there, they are hostile to Mr Yaxley-Lennon."

Robinson's barrister says the proceedings have been brought "because of who he is, because of his reputation and his political opinions".

Mr Furlong adds that his conduct in the video is "not materially different to the behaviour we see outside courts day in and day out and Mr Yaxley-Lennon should not be singled out."

That brings an end to his submissions to the court.

The judges have risen to consider their decision. "We will notify the parties when we are ready to come back into court," says Dame Victoria Sharp.

Judges are to return with their decision shortly.

The two High Court judges say Robinson committed a contempt of court in three respects, first by breaching a reporting restriction, secondly by filming a video of the defendants as they entered the court building and thirdly by "aggressively" confronting defendants outside court, thereby directly interfering with the course of justice.

"In our judgement his conduct amounted to a serious interference with the administration of justice," said Dame Victoria Sharp.