A fifth, yes that’s fifth, date for the start of Emma West’s trial on criminal charges arising from her complaint about mass immigration and its effects made on a Croydon tram in November 2011 has been set for 9th April (
). Assuming it actually takes place it will have taken over sixteen months since being charged with racially aggravated public order offences. (
Justice delayed is justice denied. The delay here is unconscionable because her comments on the tram were recorded by a fellow passenger and the only points at issue are (1) whether the recording has been doctored; (2) whether what was said or happened before the recording began have relevance to the context of the remarks, for example, was there any provocation offered to Miss West; (3) whether the remarks were racist or fair comment and (4) the condition of Miss West at the time. None of this should take such an age to determine.
The delay is plausibly not down to any practical or legal reason, but the fact that Miss West has done something very unusual by maintaining a plea of Not Guilty throughout her ordeal, despite being imprisoned for two weeks in the nearest there is to a Category A prison in England for women HMP Bronzefield after being refused bail on the bogus grounds that it was “for her own safety” and having the threat of her child being taken away hanging over her.
The powers-that-be cannot be doing with people designated as having committed politically correct crimes not coming quietly by pleading guilty and making a Maoist-style public confession of fault . That is especially the case where the accusation is one of racism. Emma West represents real danger to the authorities because a not guilty plea raises the possibility of that being discussed in public which the politically correct most dread: the policy of mass immigration of the UK, overtly and covertly practised by ever government since the war, and its effects. The ridiculous delay has been in all probability simply a cynical ploy to wear Miss West down and get her to plead guilty.
During the time since the original charges, Miss West has been further charged with assaulting two police officers at her home. These charges were due to be heard in a magistrates court on 3rd March but have been delayed until after her trial on the racial harassment charges. Presuming she did not attack them with a deadly weapon or seriously harm them – something suggested by the cases being dealt with in a magistrates court – is it really in the public interest to prosecute her considering the stress she has been placed under by the oppressive action of the state in charging her for what is an illegitimate crime in a free society, her imprisonment, the threat of taking her child away and great the delay? If this alleged assault merely consisted of, say, Miss West pushing the officers, or resisting when she was physically held by the officers, a prosecution would be wholly unreasonable in the circumstances.
The authorities may simply have decided they can no longer string things out and have to bring the case to trial or drop the charges. However things could be rather more sinister. The delaying of the assault charges could be used as a carrot to get her to plead guilty (you plead guilty and we will drop the charges) or, if she is found not guilty of the racial harassment charges, a means of punishing her by convicting her of assault which could be a lever for the social services to take her son into care.
If the case is delayed again it will be impossible to offer any plausible explanation but deliberate interference with justice by those with power and influence.