Judge Dame Victoria Sharp said when explaining the decision, that Mr Robinson encouraged "vigilante action" in his Facebook Live. She also said that the video could have "seriously impeded" justice over a sexual grooming gang's trial.
Robinson was originally jailed for 13 months for the offence in May 2018.
But the Court of Appeal said his case hadn't been handled fairly.
Then, the Attorney General Geoffrey Cox - the government's top legal adviser - announced that new proceedings could be brought against him.
So they released him from jail because he had not been treated fairly.
Then he questioned defendants
who had already been convicted which gave rise to the new proceedings.
In that case my understanding is that the Court did not post the Reporting Ban and that there wasn't one in effect.
He can't be responsible for violating a ban that doesn't exist or influencing a case that has already been adjudicated.
His questioning of those convicted was no different than the BBC questioning him.
Following the Court's logic shouldn't the BBC reporters be in jail too?
It is also my understanding that violation of a ban, when it does exist, is a civil matter under modern guidelines and that no one has ever been jailed for it.
I've read the guidelines which post-date the 1981 law.
Does so-called "hurt-feelings" of those convicted justify sending Mr. Robinson to a jail where he'll surely be killed?
His questioning of those already convicted is no different than the questioning of him by reporters.
I don't trust the BBC.
They're pedophiles too.
The object is to make everyone afraid to speak out against obvious evil.
Its not working and powerful people are getting really, really scared.
They should be.
and not exactly news.
