Report comment

With respect JR, you've provided some rather laboured answers on this thread.

You were asked if Robinson actually pleaded guilty. Your response was that the CA acknowledged "the judge proceeded on the basis that the appellant had admitted his contempt."

Yes, we all know the judge proceeded on that basis. The point is the judge was plainly wrong. [64] of the CA judgment confirms that no proper particulars of the contempt were ever formulated. Clearly, you cannot plead guilty when you do not know what you're pleading guilty to.

Similarly, you were also asked if, with regard to the charges, Robinson was (as he claims) merely reading from a publicly available news source made before restrictions were made (that claim is recorded at [23] of the judgment). Your answer - that Robinson referred to charges not proceeded with - doesn't address that specific question.