Report comment

It seems to me that the judge probably "acted too hastily" because of the unusual spectacle that Robinson presented.

Most of us have seen reporters on TV standing outside courthouses during live trials; they do not goad defendants who are on their way in to the building, nor do they offer mocking commentary about their demeanour. Neither do they refer to defendants' religious heritage as being suggestive of guilt.

Media professionals have understood for decades that this is not how it is done, and while they had a virtual monopoly on creating video reports for instant public circulation this kind of contempt of court was never likely to arise.

As such, it not surprising that the judge dealt with Robinson's antics in a summary manner, which under the close scrutiny of the High Court has turned out to have been inadequate. Presumably the next time this kind of thing happens (if it does), the judge involved will have a clearer grasp of what is required to avoid legal challenge.