Drunk and Muslim in Britain? No jail for you!

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by CorvusCamenarum, Dec 11, 2011.

  1. CorvusCamenarum macrumors 65816

    CorvusCamenarum

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Location:
    Birmingham, AL
    #1
    So refreshing to hear that hate crimes that are caught on CCTV in the UK go basically unpunished. I wonder if this Judge Brown would be as lenient towards a group of drunk Mormons?

    Daily Mail

    ...
    ...
    ...
     
  2. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #2
    It'd be nice if this was in a real newspaper...
     
  3. iStudentUK macrumors 65816

    iStudentUK

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2009
    Location:
    London
    #3
    Yeah I haven't heard this story, but I instinctively know not to trust the Daily Mail! I guess it's the UK equivalent of FoxNews...
     
  4. CorvusCamenarum thread starter macrumors 65816

    CorvusCamenarum

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Location:
    Birmingham, AL
    #4
    Sorry if I couldn't find a link more to your liking, but if you'd rather comment on that rather than the issue at hand, be my guest. Or since you brought it up, you can find another link and we can talk about the discrepancies between the two.
     
  5. iJohnHenry macrumors P6

    iJohnHenry

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Location:
    On tenterhooks
    #5
    Next time offer up the court transcript, there's a good lad. :rolleyes:
     
  6. .Andy, Dec 11, 2011
    Last edited: Dec 11, 2011

    .Andy macrumors 68030

    .Andy

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2004
    Location:
    The Mergui Archipelago
    #6
    The problem with the daily mail is that it's an awful, bottom dwelling, race-baiting tabloid. There is a 99% chance that the whole story hasn't been told and one cannot "comment on the issue at hand" because all we've been fed is a sensational story designed to raise the ire of readers.


    edit: I'd be happy to be proven wrong. Watched the video and it's disgusting. But the only sites with any commentary are terrible tabloids and message boards such as stormfront.
     
  7. CorvusCamenarum thread starter macrumors 65816

    CorvusCamenarum

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Location:
    Birmingham, AL
    #7
    One can hardly claim that the article is race-baiting (or is this case religion-baiting I suppose) when the defendants themselves offered it up as mitigation.
    But that begs the question, as I put above, if a Mormon in same situation would be treated the same way. Or a Baha'i. If not, then why are these four defendants deserving of kid gloves? I thought one of the big selling points of a lawful society was that the laws applied to everyone.
     
  8. CaptMurdock macrumors 6502a

    CaptMurdock

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2009
    Location:
    The Evildrome Boozerama
    #8
    Uh, we don't know that. Just because the Daily Fail said it doesn't make it true.
     
  9. iStudentUK macrumors 65816

    iStudentUK

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2009
    Location:
    London
    #9
    If we believe the Daily Mail (I feel dirty just writing that) it appears the girls were charged and pled guilty under s.47 of Offences Against the Person Act 1861, commonly known as Assualt Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm. The sentencing guidelines can be found here on page 11.

    I have some legal knowledge but I am not a lawyer (yet :)), so adding that caveat, it would appear to me this is probably about a category 2 offence. Therefore, the sentence handed down appears to be well within the range prescribed. I do feel this sentence is a bit lenient, but discussing whether the sentencing guidelines should be altered is quite different from saying these girls only received the sentence they did because they were Muslim.

    Sadly I can't find the court transcript (which was a long shot anyway) but I expected the alcohol issue was only one of many the court considered in sentencing. However, that doesn't make such a good headline for a paper that sells well in the idiot market in the Uk...
     
  10. torbjoern macrumors 65816

    torbjoern

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2009
    Location:
    The Black Lodge
    #10
    It's not "hate crime" when black people do it to whites. Even when they say "kill the white slag" and kick her in the head in front of the police. I should also like to know why it has taken 1.5 years to get those girls to trial, whilst the "tram lady" was arrested and will remain jailed until New Year's for her alleged "hate speech".
     
  11. iJohnHenry macrumors P6

    iJohnHenry

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Location:
    On tenterhooks
    #11
    Perhaps, but 4 on 1 would move me to sentence somewhat higher in the range.
     
  12. iStudentUK macrumors 65816

    iStudentUK

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2009
    Location:
    London
    #12
    Indeed I would like to have seen that too. However, there are many more guidelines than the ones I posted, there are general ones too so they may add more factors.

    Without the transcript we can only speculate, but looking at the factors in the document I linked being a gang 'leader' is an aggregating factor, whereas playing a minor role is a mitigating factor, and one of the girls was given a slightly different sentence. So maybe the court was paying close attention to the guideline factors.
     
  13. CorvusCamenarum thread starter macrumors 65816

    CorvusCamenarum

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Location:
    Birmingham, AL
    #13
    Fair enough, but on page 13, it clearly lists being drunk as an aggravating factor, not a mitigating factor. It also lists having a partner present as another aggravating factor, which there was in this case.

    Well it stands to reason that since they said they weren't used to being drunk because they were Muslim, then had they not been Muslim they would have been used to being drunk, and so might have behaved themselves a tad better. As the judge obviously took their being drunk-while-Muslim story into account for handing down a lighter sentence, their being Muslim had a direct affect on the sentence.

    I'm still wondering how a gang of anyone else in their mid-20s (adults, not children) would fare if they went out clubbing and in a moment of drunken foolishness decided to put a curbstomp on an innocent bystander, then claimed it was all their first time at a bar.
     
  14. firestarter macrumors 603

    firestarter

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2002
    Location:
    Green and pleasant land
    #14
  15. .Andy macrumors 68030

    .Andy

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2004
    Location:
    The Mergui Archipelago
    #15
    The daily mail is race-baiting and incredibly divisive. From the articles available there was accusations of racist comments from both parties. Both of which were dismissed by the court. However the alleged racist comments by the somali women feature prominently in all the newspaper articles.

    Have you got any reason to suggest they wouldn't? Or are you going for the line that because the women were muslim they got special treatment?

    Thew were charged with their crimes and a curfew administered. iStudentUK did a good job with this it's nice to have someone who can reference thanks :).

    Absolute and utter nonsense.

    Did this happen? And if it did is it at all proof that the assault was racially motivated?
     
  16. iJohnHenry macrumors P6

    iJohnHenry

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Location:
    On tenterhooks
    #16
    I thought the same, when I first read the thread title in New Posts. But then i thought, no wait, England does not allow Sharia Law, thank God.

    Am I safe in assuming that their inebriate behaviour was real, and not just a legal trick to mitigate pending punishment. (hey, alliteration). :D
     
  17. Grey Beard macrumors 65816

    Grey Beard

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2005
    Location:
    The Antipodes.
    #17
    Just hit Google and search Rhea Page (the victim) and a lot of other papers are returned. I know not their veracity, or if they are all gutter tabloids.

    I have a Somali neighbour, who is a most pleasant woman with OK kids. But then her husband is serving a long period of incarceration for a rape he committed while driving a taxi. A lot of our cabbies in Wellington are Somali, and come to think about it a goodly number have committed rapes and other assaults.

    KGB:rolleyes:
     
  18. torbjoern macrumors 65816

    torbjoern

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2009
    Location:
    The Black Lodge
    #18
    It shouldn't be that way, I agree with you on that. Unfortunately, the law is not always how we would like it to be, and even less the application of it.
    It did happen. And since it would suffice as proof if the perpetrators had been white and the victims black, then it should count as proof the other way round too. Then again, there is no such thing as "racial motivation" (as aggravating factor, that is) or "hate crime" when the victim belongs to the majority of the population. The UK authorities really hate their own people.
     
  19. CorvusCamenarum thread starter macrumors 65816

    CorvusCamenarum

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Location:
    Birmingham, AL
    #19
    Link please. From the articles available there was accusations of racist comments from both parties. Both of which were dismissed by the court. However the alleged racist comments by the somali women feature prominently in all the newspaper articles.

    I'm just wondering how it would go over if a member of another faith that forbade drinking used being drunk as an excuse while in the dock. Given the lack of remorse, I'd be inclined to believe they'd say anything to get leniency.

    The continued assault after the police arrived is on the video. It's also incredibly disingenuous of you to question whether slurs were said when you referenced them at the beginning of your post.
     
  20. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #20
    If this happened like stated in the article, the Muslims should have gone to jail. Not being used to being drunk is not an excuse.
     
  21. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #21
    What a ridiculous verdict. Would the judge have done the same had they hit someone while driving in a car or stolen something from a store? Seems to me they got off simply because they were Muslim. That's PC crap.
     
  22. iJohnHenry macrumors P6

    iJohnHenry

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Location:
    On tenterhooks
    #22
    And if it's not nipped in the bud, it will be their undoing.

    Political correctness is now being used as a wedge, to attack their judicial system.
     
  23. firestarter macrumors 603

    firestarter

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2002
    Location:
    Green and pleasant land
    #23
    Political correctness does not legislate tolerance, it only organizes hatred. ~ Jacques Barzun
     
  24. .Andy macrumors 68030

    .Andy

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2004
    Location:
    The Mergui Archipelago
    #24
    If you're going to make that claim please back it up with some research that the law is anti-white when it comes to race crimes.

    Oh OK then.

    You have to be kidding. It's in your own article you linked in the OP. You have read your own article haven't you? I can link it for you again if you like :rolleyes:.

    It's not disingenuous at all by any definition of the word. The daily mail beating up race when it wasn't a motivating factor in the assault or the courts verdict is exactly what I was referencing.
     
  25. torbjoern macrumors 65816

    torbjoern

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2009
    Location:
    The Black Lodge
    #25
    The law as it's written, is neutral with regards to colour of skin - but the application of hate crime laws is biased in disfavour of ethnic Brits. This is a violation of human rights, and although it's nothing new, I'm a bit shocked to see how obviously the judicial system is into it. Makes we wonder if I'm either psychotic or have missed out on some vital information that nobody wants to tell me.

    There are several cases whereas white perpetrators have received harsher sentences based on the presumption that the act was racially motivated - probably with good reason in some of the cases. However, this has never happened when the perpetrator was black/arab/pakistani and the victim was white. Not once. Within the paradigm provided by PC, it's never considered racism when the perpetrator belongs to an ethnic minority.

    If some English girls had assaulted a Somalian girl in a similar manner, racial motivation would immediately be presumed by the court even if no racial slurs had been uttered in the act. In this case, however, instead of taking the obvious hatred of whites into consideration as an aggravating factor, the court let self-imposed drunkenness (otherwise aggravating) be a mitigating factor based on the defendants' ethnic/religious background.

    This case is a parody of its kind.
     

Share This Page