White girls suffer less as a result of child abuse!
That is the bizarre though natural conclusion that emerges from the bonkers logic of the sentencing justification of the original trial judge, Judge Cahill, and the Court of Appeal headed by Mr Justice Walker and sitting with Lord Justice Laws and Mr Justice Mitting.
Nobody is suggesting that Jamal Muhammed Raheem-ul-Nasir, who was jailed for seven years at Leeds Crown Court last year for sex attacks on two Asian girls, aged nine and 14, should have received a lesser sentence but it is a cause for concern that it appears that he received a harsher sentence than if he’d committed exactly the same offences against two white girls.
The logic for this was that the Asian girls’ fathers might struggle to find a good match for their daughters when it came to negotiate their arranged marriages. Thus more harm was caused to the Asian girls than would have been caused if the children had been white.
Is the judiciary sending paedophiles a clear message that they’ll receive a lesser sentence if they rape white girls than if they rape Asian girls. Is the rape of white girls now considered a lesser crime ? This is, of course, similar logic to that used by the Asian grooming gangs that operate throughout the UK. Underage white girls are considered “white trash” or “white meat” which is OK for them to “practice on” . In short these abusers believe that white girls are less deserving of respect than Asian girls and it seems that the UK judiciary agree with them.
Regardless of the ethnicity of the child, boy or girl, a survivor of child sexual abuse is far more likely to have issues of trust and intimacy within the future adult relationships that they might have. It seems that first Judge Cahill and then the Court of Appeal have concluded that because Asian families often treat girls as property to be bartered during arranged marriage negotiations, and as that property has been somehow ‘damaged’ and therefore has less value, the crime is somehow greater.
The judiciary in the UK have always put property rights above human rights and so I guess that thinking about children as property that has been damaged, rather than girls that have suffered sexual abuse, has led them to see a more grievous crime ?
A senior judge has ruled a child molester was rightly given a tougher than normal sentence because his victims were Asian and so suffered more from his crimes.
Jamal Muhammed Raheem-ul-Nasir was jailed for seven years at Leeds Crown Court last year for sex attacks on two girls, aged nine and 14.
But the paedophile took the case to appeal, with his lawyers complaining that his sentence was unfairly inflated and ‘excessive’.
Senior judge Mr Justice Walker has now thrown out those arguments after hearing that the victims’ families feared they would struggle to find future husbands because of the abuse.
The move has been criticised by children’s charity the NSPCC, who insist justice should be blind to the race of victims.
19 responses to “Judge Mental ! Judge Cahill, Mr Justice Walker, Lord Justice Laws and Mr Justice Mitting”
Reblogged this on Armor Of God Foundation.
I suppose that the rapist of a pupil of Cheltenham Ladies College would receive a longer sentence than someone who perpetrated a similar crime on a female living on a Council estate and attending a ‘bog standard comprehensive’.
I live in the same area as this so-called “judge” and am hoping that we don’t ever meet in the street cos it ain’t gonna end well for either of us. When you get scum like this, you have no alternative but to DLY (‘do law yourself’).
I agree with everything expressed: the anger that the life-long suffering of the victims of CSA is not recognised; the outrage that we are no longer equal before the law and that children are seen as the property of their parents; and the obvious conclusion for abusers to draw that it would be better to target abuse on specific ethnic groups.
I would just add that in their desperation to be PC, the judges have painted an unflattering picture of South Asians as people who think less of the child victims of rape as if the victims were responsible for the crimes. Sadly this may be a true depiction of many but it is an ugly caricature of those who don’t share these views.
The dilemma of political correctness, public policy dictates that every possible national, ethnic, religious, sexual identity group and every sub group therein should be treated sympathetically, in order to tailor policy and legislation it is necessary to find a way of defining the groups, hence generalisation and stereotyping. As soon as unflattering qualities or properties arise from the necessary generalisations it becomes politically incorrect to generalise, damned if you do and damned if you don’t, an idiotic policy that generates ever more idiotic policy and legislation in its wake. Idiot judges don’t help of course.
I think you have something there with “their desperation to be”.
The report in The Guardian goes a little deeper than the DT…
“…Mark Fenhalls QC, chair of the Criminal Bar Association, said that the Sentencing Council’s guidelines require judges to consider, as a priority, the seriousness of the psychological and physical harm suffered by the victim.
He said: “The justice system does not look to favour one section of the community over another. The judgment reflects the duty of judges to take proper account of the extent of the harm suffered by individual complainants when deciding on the appropriate length of sentence in each case.”…
…The court of appeal decision is in line with new sentencing guidelines for sex offences, which came into effect in April last year. Previously, when assessing the severity of a crime, judges were advised to consider which body parts were touched in a rather mechanistic cataloguing of the degree of wrongdoing.
The new guidelines are in line with current thinking in the criminal justice system, which is far more focused on the effect of crimes on victims. …”
For sure, nobody comes out of this well, and other cases of ‘Rape’ – since the new guidelines were introduced in April (2014?) – have perhaps not attracted the same degree of coverage. [I assume there have been other cases since then.]
P.S. The Guardian article does have repeated comments as to ‘even-handedness’ and no racial bias etc.
It may be also that some messengers are worth shooting.
This ruling by the first judge and ratified by these three further incompetents is incomprehensible to any right thinking person. Where do they find these out of touch idiots . No wonder many of us think British justice is a farce. Sexual abuse of children of any colour or creed is pure evil and does no end of harm to the victims. Sentence them on the crime, not on the perceived harm, to an Asian families future prospect of marriageability.
Well to start with 7 years, and he will prbably be out in less, is outrageous. What these judges have done here is go back to a time when women were seen as property – not people. If she was raped she would either have to be married or be a virgin for harm to be seen as done.
You have judges who are incompetent and corrupt. MP’s investigating themselves to clear them offf any crime. Police investigating themselves. Media that is little more than a gatekeeper for vested interests.
How many years ago did you start this blog gojam? how many years ago did Tom Watson raise the issue? Sweet nothing has happened. Sure janner might face trial, but I doubt he will live that long. Question you need to be asking people on your blog is what are they going to do? Because all I see is the establishment having a laugh with investigations, and investigations of the investigations, and the years go by.
“Sweet nothing has happened.”
You’re correct that there have so far been very few prosecutions, but it is also important that thanks to the efforts of Tom Watson, Simon Danczuk, and child advocates (including this blog), the British public are now aware of the depravity of some of their highest elected officials, and the fact that even the ones who aren’t actually involved in abuse seemingly do not consider it to be a big deal.
I think this is an important point. It has been reported that the public stayed away from the Sir Edward Heath 50th anniversary leadership tribute, due to the allegations against him.
And the reputations of MPs and ministers like Sir Peter Morrison, Leon Brittan, Keith Joseph, George Thomas, Leo Abse, Ralph Bonner Pink, Victor Montagu, Michael Havers, and many others are now destroyed/ruined. Even though they are dead and cannot be brought to justice, the whole country now knows of the allegations against them.
Max Clifford and Rolf Harris are in gaol, and Harris has been stripped of his CBE. Earlier this year, Police raided the houses of Leon Brittan, Harvey Proctor, and Lord Bramall. And a British jury chose to believe the word of an ethnic minority actor over the word of a former Chancellor of the Exchequer, in a trial for perverting the course of justice. It’s hard to imagine any of these things happening a few years ago.
Most importantly, the British public is realizing how the elites have betrayed their trust.
Imagine if they ruled it the other way – that raping a black or asian girl was not as bad as raping a pure innocent white girl. Whatever happened to “rape is rape”?
No doubt that granddaughters of Judges would be at the top of the sentencing list.
My [late] best friend was sexually abused from the age of 3-16yrs and all her life she was affected by this: she suffered PTSD, fear of men; crowds, the dark, an eating disorder. etc.
Suffice to say: she was tortured all her life and THAT JUDGE has the temerity to say she suffered less because she was white!!!
WHAT’S WRONG IS: JUDGE’S LIKE HIM THAT LET PAEDOPHILES OUT TO OFFEND AGAIN & AGAIN! How many children would be alive today if paedophiles were locked up forever!
Reblogged this on Floating-voter.
Unbelievable, and they rule over us! Male judges, no doubt from Silver Spoon backgrounds, incapable of understanding the effect of rape on every child, probably because this was normalized for them at their public schools.
In their ridiculous attempts at being PC, they are sending out a message that if you rape a white girl you will get a lesser sentence. Please can we have a Revolution!
‘normalized for them’, my thoughts exactly.
Sally Cahill, the judge in the original trial, is female (see the Telegraph link given by Tom Austin above).
Too right. This is scandalous and oh so wrong!
I read this story on The Telegraph site, although the article was poorly written. The headline too did not augur well of getting any where near to an actual point…
“Child molester given longer sentence as victims are Asian”
“Molester”??!! Journalism in MSM is a dead art.
Reblogged this on perfectlyfadeddelusions and commented:
No all girls suffer you moronic piece of shit.