Charitable Donation



Chimes Media Editor, James Williams, submitted a letter of complaint about the psychological torture of Tommy Robinson whilst being supposedly under the care of Her Majesty’s prison service.

Tommy looked like someone who had been intercepted while being transported to Stalin’s Gulag. This is a shameful disgrace and not a proud day for Britain. That being said, but the howling toadies of the ‘Humanitarian’ Left and Media, eager to smear him as much as possible while showing no interest in his obviously gaunt physical state speaks volumes.

This is a copy of the letter sent to Right Honourable Penny Mordaunt MP for Portsmouth North:

Dear Penny,


Having seen film of political prisoner Tommy Robinson following his release from prison, my first impression of him was how thin he looked. Apparently, he lost 40lbs in weight during his illegal incarceration and torture. I am genuinely shocked and outraged with the manner of his treatment. He looked like a POW from Vietnam.

The concerns listed here are not exhaustive and I appreciate it will take some time to answer as it is not you who is personally responsible.

• The British establishment are supposed to have a duty of care, so why was this not provided for Tommy Robinson?
• Did any doctor examine him during his imprisonment? If they did they should be fired for gross negligence. Prisoners held in solitary are supposed to be reviewed by the Governor and Health care specialists and an independent monitor. Did this happen at all?
• Did a Governor visit Tommy on a daily basis?
• It is known that men held in solitary confinement for more than a week suffer mental deterioration. Why was nothing done to alter this state such as moving Tommy to a safer prison?
• After 42 days in solitary the case is supposed to be reviewed by a regional director. Did that happen?
• Tommy was improperly arrested, convicted, tried, sentenced and tortured in prison. Every step of the way he was improperly treated. Why was this allowed to happen and why did nobody intervene? Where were the checks and balances?
• Did Leeds (judge, police, anyone) consult with London over Tommy Robinson’s presence outside the court? It took 1.5 hours before he was arrested. This is sufficient time for someone in Whitehall or wherever to arrive in their office, process the information and give instructions on what to do.

I and, I suspect, many thousands of people across the world have copies of the Appeal Court’s ruling. It is a revelation of appalling failures, outright dereliction of duties, law and human rights abuse. There should be an independent public enquiry into the way Tommy was treated.

• It is global public knowledge that the US Ambassador spoke with the UK Ambassador about Tommy Robinson’s predicament with the threat that if the UK Government did not take action then the US would denounce the May Government. Can you confirm this is the case?
• The 13 month sentence was shocking. There has never been a journalist thrown in prison since the 1940s. A sense of proportion should have been retained. It should not have been given in such a short time to allow the court to reflect soberly. Is Judge Jeffrey Marsden acted negligently in his duties? Was personal prejudice a factor?
• In the private sector, there would be a consideration of criminal negligence as the sentence and subsequent treatment put a man’s life and health at considerable risk. The impression that decisions over his life came from a senior authority. Were national security elements involved? Whose decision was it to move Tommy from a relatively safe prison (Hull) to one where he was under daily threats and held in conditions that even prisoners at Guantanamo Bay are not subjected to?
• Was the transfer an excuse to place him in solitary confinement for over 23 hours per day so that he could be tortured?
• On Tommy’s medical record, it was recorded that after his previous incarceration he had suffered Post Traumatic Stress. Why was this not taken into consideration when he was being locked up or, was it because of this he was moved to Onley?
• Shortly after his arrest for alleged breach of the peace (even though there was nobody else around to offend), Tommy’s lawyer was advised that he was due to be released. Subsequent to that advice, Tommy was spirited out the back door and charged for a different offence i.e. contempt of court. Was this a deliberate deception to deny him proper legal counsel?
• Tommy’s cell door was left unlocked by his jailers “accidentally” on three occasions, putting him at a real risk of violence. Why did this happen? Has the prison governor explained why his staff did this?
• Other prisoners regularly went to Tommy’s ground floor cell, and shouted at him through the flap of his door. This was permitted by the prison authorities. This is psychological torture. Why did the prison authorities allow this?
• The window in Tommy’s cell opened opposite the prison mosque, so other prisoners would file passed it. He was unable to leave this open during the stifling heat of a hot summer because other prisoners would throw faeces and spit through it. This is psychological torture. Why was this permitted by the prison authorities?
• His meals were apparently prepared by other prisoners. He could not see if anything had been put in them. Another prisoner would present him with a plate of ‘food’ at his door and say “Hope you enjoy your meal, Tommy.” Consequently, he could not eat it. Why were meals being prepared for an at-risk prisoner by the very people who wanted to kill him?
• Why was Tommy denied more than £12 allowance per week which he had to spend on food?
• Tommy was living out of tins of tuna (1 per day). That is why he lost so much weight. If he had not been release when he had, he would have suffered severe physical problems from malnutrion. Why did nobody in the prison report this as a matter of concern? Where was the medical care?
• His ‘exercise time’ consisted of walking around a wire cage alone and with no one to talk to. Being in solitary confinement for extended periods is completely inhuman and against basic human rights especially for prisoners who have not caused any disturbance. Was this due to a deliberate program of psychological torture being actioned?
• Tommy was only allowed to phone home during the lunch hour, so he was unable to speak with his children as they were at school. This appears to be an arbitrary and punitive decision by the prison. Why?
• Tommy saw his family for two one hour periods in two months. As a former sailor, I know what it feels like to be separated from family. Does this point need a question?
• He would receive ‘intelligence’ information that his wife and children were being threatened with acid attacks and that the police were in attendance at his home address. This poured more psychological anxiety into his already dire conditions as he was powerless to do anything. There is also no way of knowing that the ‘intelligence’ was genuine.

The Leeds Crown Court proceedings were lacerated by the Appeal Court:

• The court agrees that the judge should not have commenced the hearing of contempt proceedings that day.
• Once the appellant had removed the video from Facebook, there was no longer sufficient urgency to justify immediate proceedings. In those circumstances it would have been preferable to adjourn, as had happened in the Canterbury proceedings.
• No particulars of the contempt were formulated or put to the appellant. There was a muddle over the nature of the contempt being considered. In both the short explanation given by the judge of the general nature of the alleged contempt and the sentencing remarks, there was reference to matters that could not been a breach of the section 4(2) order.
• The failure to follow Part 48 Crim PR was more than technical [66]. There was no clarity about what the appellant was admitting or on what basis he was being sentenced.
• Finally, further difficulties arose from the limited opportunity that counsel had to investigate mitigation. There was little else which counsel could have done within the constraints under which he was working. The level of detail which could be provided to the court was very limited and there was no opportunity to obtain character references. A sense of proportion must be retained. Where a custodial term of considerable length is being imposed, it should not usually occur so quickly after the conduct which is complained of; a sentence of committal to immediate custody had been pronounced within five hours of the conduct taking place.
• The order at Leeds Crown Court was also erroneously drawn up to suggest the appellant had been convicted of a criminal offence rather than having been committed for contempt of court. Errors like this have serious consequences upon the classification of prisoners, resulting in the deprivation of privileges and release on licence. In this case, it also resulted in the erroneous imposition of a victim surcharge.

I have to ask who was responsible for this travesty? Did Judge Jeffrey Marsden act unilaterally or was he under the guidance from higher authority such as the Home Secretary, MI5, or even the Prime Minister herself? Given that Mrs. May has treated her fellow ministers with contempt over Brexit, she has a record of undue interference and underhanded tactics.

I am disturbed by the paltry number of politicians who have taken up Tommy Robinson’s case. Does this current batch of politicians truly represent the interests of the working class or have they become so detached and corrupt of mind that they have no idea what ordinary people want and are concerned with? Labour, in particular, used to acclaim themselves as the party for the working classes. It seems not anymore.

Tommy Robinson, to many I have met and spoken with, symbolizes the image of a working class hero. By contrast, the elites (political cohort, upper classes, main stream media) look down their nose at him while turning away from the atrocities of child rape in their own communities. What utter scoundrels!

There is a sustained and orchestrated attack on free speech supported by the elites using highly dubious, subjective and contentious hate speech laws; the persecution of those who dare to speak up and the attempt to shut down and control the free exchange of data on the internet.

Do you realize that if you kill off free speech, then you drive away investment? I have seen predictions that the UK’s economic position in the world will slip to below 20th in a few years time. This is not because of Brexit, but because of red tape and the image of an oppressive government. It is astonishing to see that what Tony Blair started a Conservative administration will complete. I have seen a rating of 16% for May’s version of Brexit. She has to go. This Government (and the Opposition) have brought the UK into disrepute by the abuse of Tommy Robinson in front of the whole world.

Gag orders and attacks on internet information only make things worse. Please notethat Facebook and Twitter values have been plummeting recently because there are alternatives now available and people are switching. You people do not seem to understand. You have lost control and you are not getting it back while you continue to act like fascists.

By the way, I am sure you know, that fascism and the Nazis came from the Left. Both the Conservatives and the Republican Parties have endured being wrongly labelled as these odious types for generations. Is it not time the education establishments taught the truth?

Benito Mussolini called the Italian army: “a criminal organization designed to protect capitalism and bourgeois society.” That is the language of a Communist not a Conservative.

Yours sincerely

James Williams

Zip Neck Sweat shirt (inc VAT + P&P)

Royal Blue colour, Principal material - 80% cotton, 20% polyester, Short (Hip), Long Sleeve, Elastic cuff, No pockets, Zipper fastener, no hood, Raglan Sleeves