Danny Tommo’s Judge And The Question Of Judicial Impartiality

When a judge with a less-than-stellar record makes a consequential decision concerning one of Britain’s most controversial pro-borders advocates, what safeguards ensure that justice is not only impartial, but demonstrably impartial?

James Conway | September 30, 2026

Daniel Thomas, known as Danny Tommo, a British subject, has been refused bail after poking a small hole in the side of an abandoned invasion RIB (Rigid Inflatable Boat) in the English Channel using his penknife. Yet if the pro-borders advocate is guilty of anything, it is arguably of doing what the British Army, Navy, and Border Force have failed to do: defending English waters.

Britain’s security forces operate little more than a maritime taxi service for illegals, with HMC Vigilant collecting them at sea and whisking them off to free English hotels, breakfast included.

It was during one such encounter that Thomas’s legal predicament arose.

A crewmember of the French coastguard vessel Abeille Liberté boarded a disabled RIB vessel, possibly to claim salvage rights. As this all unfolded, Thomas hailed the Frenchman the following:

Right, you are on English territory. This is England. This is not France anymore. Get off—get off, you’ve got time to get off the boat!Advertisement if (window.publir_show_ads) { document.write(''); }

Right, you are on English territory. This is England. This is not France anymore. Get off—get off, you’ve got time to get off the boat!

Thomas was subsequently arrested by Hampshire Police on September 23 for this act, and was detained for “destroying or endangering the safety of ships” under the Aviation and Maritime Security Act 1990 and Merchant Shipping Act 1995.

Judge Tanweer Ikram later refused bail after Thomas pleaded not guilty to criminal damage,

The contrast with another recent bail decision is........

© American Thinker