‘Anyone with a brain in their head can see it!’ Patrick Christys brutally corrects immigration lawyer during tense Epping row

Mr Sampson joined Patrick on the People’s Channel to discuss the ruling, which he argued made sense given the lack of options available to the Home Office.

He said that while housing migrants in hotels across the country is not the ideal solution, the Government has little choice but to do so.

Patrick put it to Mr Sampson that the perfect solution would be “deportations on a mass scale” given how a lot of the people residing in the hotels will have entered the country illegally.

The lawyer took issue with the term of ‘illegal migrant’, which sparked a moment of tension during the discussion.

LATEST DEVELOPMENTS

• Epping asylum seekers allowed to STAY in migrant hotel as court sparks fury from local residents
• Robert Jenrick leads outrage against court decision to allow asylum seekers to stay in Epping hotel
• Keir Starmer has betrayed mothers and their daughters. This will be felt beyond Epping - Rakib Ehsan

He even cited a speech made at Windsor Castle by King Charles in July where he mentioned “irregular migration” between the UK and France.

The immigration lawyer was corrected by Patrick on this front, however, as he mistakenly referred to King Charles as the “Prince”.

“They’ve got to be housed somewhere”, he argued.

“What the Government needs is a sustainable plan to accommodate asylum seekers, but they don’t have one. You can’t close asylum hotels or ask them to leave when firstly, they didn’t ask to be there…”

Patrick took issue with the point, saying that while Mr Sampson’s assertion may be true, being housed in a hotel might not be seen as an unattractive scenario for asylum seekers eyeing up Britain.

“You know what I’m going to say”, he said.

“They’ve overwhelmingly illegally broken into Britain using small boats passing through numerous safe countries.

“If they didn’t ask to be in that specific hotel in Epping, all of them know they are going to be put in some hotel, it’s not a shock to them.

“That’s why they’re coming, a lot of them. A lot of them are currently living in squalid conditions in France. They might not have thrown a dart at a map of Britain and landed on Epping, but they knew they were going to be in a hotel somewhere, didn’t they?”

Mr Sampson hit out at Patrick’s use of the term ‘illegal’, before challenging the GB News presenter on what the penalty should be for them if they have broken the law.

“The penalty should be deportations on a mass scale”, Patrick hit back.

“Unfortunately, that’s not what we’ve got.”

The lawyer continued his point and skimmed over Patrick’s comment, saying: “Unfortunately, there isn’t one [a penalty]”.

“When you do something unlawful, there has to be a sanction. There isn’t one. Describing it as illegal simply isn’t true.”

Patrick said he will continue to term it as illegal because “anyone with a brain in their head will think it is”.

He illustrated his point by saying: “If I let myself into your house at 4am uninvited, that would be illegal, wouldn’t it?”

“Well, yes”, Mr Sampson conceded, before adding: “The Refugee Convention is the law which determines whether it’s illegal or not, and it says it isn’t.”

“I choose not to care about that”, said Patrick. “I think the vast majority of British people now choose not to care about that.”

Patrick was left shocked by Mr Sampson’s next point as he cited a speech by King Charles, where he termed those breaking into Britain as “irregular migrants”.

“He did, yes”, said Patrick.

“The Prince has it right, you don’t”, said Mr Sampson.

“Well, he’s a King for a start”, Patrick sarcastically replied, adding: “I do wonder if whether or not he has ever experienced the delights of living near a migrant hotel in Buckingham Palace.”