This is absolutely unbelievable to read. I’m actually stunned.
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.
So an “Asian” (read Pakistani Muslim) man in England raping “Asian” children is apparently a more serious crime than if he had raped native born white English children. This is literally what they’re saying.
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’.
He’s literally claiming that getting a seven year sentence for raping a 9 year old and a 14 year old is excessive. This is what we’re actually supposed to believe. As far as I’m concerned, if we lived in a sane society, he would have been fucking executed for it.
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.
So because of their primitive and barbaric culture, which has logic like that, they should get special treatment, over little white girls who come from a more understanding culture? Here’s a thought, why the fuck is that different culture even in Britain. What is the benefit of having them there? And no, saying diversity doesn’t count, unless someone explains why diversity is a good thing (which never ever happens).
The move has been criticised by children’s charity the NSPCC, who insist justice should be blind to the race of victims.
Makes sense to me.
Nasir, 32, was convicted of two counts of sexual assault on a child under 13 and four counts of sexual activity with a child and handed the prison term in December last year.
The judge who jailed him, Sally Cahill QC, specifically said that the fact the victims were Asian had been factored in as an ‘aggravating feature’ when passing sentence.
All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.
She stated that the victims and their families had suffered particular ‘shame’ in their communities because of what had happened to them.
Additionally there were cultural concerns that the girls’ future prospects of being regarded as a good catch for arranged marriages might be damaged.
Lawyers for Nasir, of Liversedge, West Yorkshire, argued at London’s Criminal Appeal Court that his sentence had been unfairly inflated.
I actually think that’s incredible. So 7 years is an “inflated sentence” for raping children. If that’s the case, what is the standard sentence length? I’m actually finding this story hard to comprehend. This is complete insanity.
But their complaints were rejected by Mr Justice Walker, who said: ‘The victims’ fathers were concerned about the future marriage prospects for their daughters.
‘Judge Cahill was having particular regard to the harm caused to the victims by this offending.
‘That harm was aggravated by the impact on the victims and their families within this particular community.’
So because their families and their community aren’t as loving and as understanding as the native white English, they deserve special treatment?
The argument that Ul Nasir was given a longer sentence due to his own ‘ethnic and religious origin’ was based on ‘a misconception’, he added.
Literally trying to claim that his sentence was based on his race, even though his victim was a member of the same race, and when other members of his race, rape children from the indigenous white English race, they get a more lenient sentence. What a shameless chancer this prick is.
‘The judge who tried the case was in the best position to determine the correct sentence.’
Mr Justice Walker, sitting with Lord Justice Laws and Mr Justice Mitting, at London’s Royal Courts of Justice,, concluded: ‘There is no basis for saying that Judge Cahill adopted an incorrect starting point. This application for leave to appeal against sentence must be refused.’
I think she fucked up royally, not because she gave him a harsh (well in comparison to the incredibly lenient standard) sentence, but because her motivation for doing so was based on the race of the victims.
But an NSPCC spokesman said: ‘British justice should operate on a level playing field and children need to be protected irrespective of cultural differences.
‘Regardless of race, religion, or gender, every child deserves the right to be safe and protected from sexual abuse, and the courts must reflect this. It is vital that those who commit these hideous crimes are punished to the full limit of the law.’
This summarises the problem quite well. The problem isn’t that he got a more severe sentence because for having non-white victims. The problem is that people just like him are getting lesser sentences for having white ones. What should be done is to give harsh and draconian sentences across the board for these types of crimes, regardless of the race of the victims.
Why isn’t that obvious to people?