Thread by @jamesdoleman

Proceedings resume in the libel case Jamal Hijazi v Stephen Yaxley-Lennon (AKA Tommy Robinson)

Barrister, for the claimant, Catrin Evans QC resumes her cross-examination of a defence witness who was involved in the violent incident, a video of which led to these proceedings.

Evans challenges the witness account that he was not present at a previous incident that left Jamal Hijazi ended up with a broken arm.
He says he was not present.

The witness says that Jamal was a bully, but accepts he personally didn't personally see the incidents he mentions in his statement but heard about them from others.

On an alleged threat against him he says was made by Jamal, the witness says he didn't report it because he didn't believe the school taking any action.

The witness agrees that in another confrontation with Jamal, he did grab him by the throat, and was restrained by a teacher.
He denies he said he would "kill him," of that he would "stab him with a knife."

The barrister produces a school "incident report," written by the teacher who saw it and wrote that the witness said "I will kill you, I will headbutt you," and then whispered, "I will stab you with a knife."

Evans suggests the witness that he is not telling the truth about this incident and about his testimony that another pupil "An Asian lad," had told him Jamal was threatening to stab him.

Evans asks the witness about his involvement with the English Defence League and quotes a school incident report which says he and his friends were listening to an EDL video and when a teacher told them to stop they had a discussion.

The teacher later reported the discussion, which said the witness "spoke passionately about his support for the EDL. She asks if he had spoken to Tommy Robinson in 2017, he replies "I couldn't say."

The witness says that the issue of "grooming gangs," was a huge issue.
Asked again if he talked to Tommy Robinson at this time he replies, "I couldn't say, I'm not sure."

Evans shows a "Prevent" referral form," (a government scheme to stop young people radicalised by extremists. It shows the witness was referred to them by his school.

The referral says the witness had displayed violence towards people in school, he has right-wing posts on his video page and had been filmed abusing a group of socialists.

Counsel asks again if a name blanked out on the document that he was in contact with was Mr Robinson?
The witness says he can't remember.

Evans suggests that the witness was very interested in Tommy Robinson's views.
He says he was not a member of the EDL and had never communicated with him before the incident that was caught on video.

He says a family member contacted Robinson on his behalf. He denies he went on to live with him for 4 months but did move to Luton.

The barrister quotes a speech Robinson made in London in 2018 where he said the witness was had been living with him and his wife for four months.
The witness says, "I had contact with him, but I wasn't living with him."

The judge asks about the family member who contacted Mr Robinson, the witness says he won't say due to the media.
Cross-examination ends, Tommy Robinson rises to re-examine.

The witness agrees with Robinson that he lives in a house the defendant owns. (or owned, couldn't quite hear the answer)

Robinson notes that a report of a previous incident contains two different sets of handwriting, and suggests that the "I'll stab you," remark was added later by someone other than the teacher.

Re-examination ends witness steps down.

As there are no other witnesses court adjourns for the day.
Back at 10am tomorrow.