Translate

Showing posts with label criminal standard of proof. Show all posts
Showing posts with label criminal standard of proof. Show all posts

Friday, 28 September 2018

On being accused of "apologising for terrorism"




Jay seems to think I am some sort of queenpin of child prostitution or leader of terrorist organisation when he says "regarding your terrorist or grooming gangs"at 6:4.

He then says I excused them at 7:56.

At 9:17 I accuse him of using the tactics of smear on me through making accusations but refusing to give particulars.

I share Cressida Dick's position on not assuming that Muslim terrorists commit acts of terrorism because of Islam. Some of them may well just be mentally ill, have a grude against society and want to go out with a bang through suicide by cop.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/may/15/westminster-attacker-had-record-of-increasingly-violent-attacks


Jay is referring to the video at




I said it was "probably an attempt to integrate [the words following deliberately omitted by Jay Walker are as follows] 

... and enjoy the modern culture of underage sex that makes these pedophile Muslim grooming gangs do what they do.

I stand by that. Having sex with anyone who isn't your spouse is punished in the Koran with quran.com/24/2

31:00  Senate Judiciary Committee

35:00 Dr Christine Ford was the cat's paw of the Democrats.

a person who is used by another to carry out an unpleasant or dangerous task. 
"he was merely a cat's paw of older and cleverer men"

37:00  Deutoernomy 19:15
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy+19%3A15&version=NIV

Ann Coulter's position: Dr Ford was probably sexually assaulted, but not by Kavanaugh.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaslight_(1944_film)

In the interests of justice Rolf Harris should be found not guilty even if he was

45:00  Criminal standard of proof

59:00  Criminal standard of proof

1:04:00  The story of The Monkey and the Cat
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Monkey_and_the_Cat

1:05:00  Tommy Robinson

1:08:00  Islam is the more powerful Abrahamic faith for gentile

1:09:00  When people talk about multiculturalism, they mean immigration.

1:10:00  Notice how he sneaks in the words "Rochdale where your grooming gangs are" while I was talking about something else. People like him would say I must be guilty because I finished making my point without bothering to contradict him.

You may well wonder why I bother with people like that who are ready to casually traduce you and denounce you just because they say something they hate.

"In all 36,708 people in Luton voted for remain, 47,773 for leave (56%). Luton’s total turnout was 84,636 (66.32%) - 70,337 of those votes were made at polling stations."

https://www.lutontoday.co.uk/news/politics/eu-referendum-luton-votes-for-brexit-1-7447607

"The vast majority of jobs on offer in Luton are low-skilled. Both white and Muslim Asian communities are worried by the wage depression caused by Eastern European migration."

https://www.politico.eu/article/immigrants-who-voted-for-brexit-luton-migration/

Birmingham and Harrow Asians voted to leave.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36616108

Bradford, stuffed with Muslims, voted to leave.
http://www.itv.com/news/calendar/update/2016-06-24/eu-referendum-bradford-votes-to-leave-the-eu/

1:14:00  My Jewish view of suffering

https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/jewish-answers-to-suffering-and-evil/

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/suffering - Punishment and Purification

1:15:00  Nationalism

1:16:00  Imagining a post-pogrom white nationalist future: 1970s had wildcat strikes, inflation, the three day week, the miners' strike bringing down a Conservative government.

1:17:00  What doesn't kill you makes you stronger

1:18:00  The demand for foreign labour was caused by a labourt shortage, the bad parenting of never married mothers which  no member of the government dared to condemn other than Keith Joseph  who subsequently had his career detroyed because no one would support him.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/wintour-and-watt/2010/nov/25/conservatives-davidcameron

http://rabbisacks.org/covenant-conversation-5771-behaalotcha-two-types-of-leadership/

1:21:00  Jay refuses to support the restoration of patriarchy

1:25:00  "The Mark Collett school of thinking"

1:25:00  Jay: "Nobody wants to have children in a multicultural shithole"

1:27:00  Marriage is not a good bargain for men, but the only way to incentivise them is forbid fornication with quran.com/24/2 and to ban usury to make property prices affordable to ordinary couples.

1:33:00  Gay marriage is an insult to married parents rearing the next generation.

1:40:00  Are we closer to pogrom?



Richard Hooker: "Change is not made without inconvenience, even from worse to better."

1:43:00  Sexism, misogyny

1:46:00  FGM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prevalence_of_female_genital_mutilation_by_country

The White Masai
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-africa-43349594/the-girl-who-convinced-the-maasai-to-stop-fgm

1:49:00  I don't think minorities should be blamed for the defects and failures of our religion and political system.

1:50:00  Male circumcision

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/10201882/Circumcision-is-one-of-the-oddities-of-the-Royal-Family.html

1:53:00  https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/how-to-reverse-the-irreversible-1338650.html

1:56:00  Tommy Robinson joining UKIP

1:57:00  National Socialist

1:59:00  Football teams and the racial composition of these teams. I support Millwall, but I have only watched one game live at the Den.

2:06:00  Tommy Robinson joining UKIP

2:09:00  Jay says for my own safety I should deleted my video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFrPOlNasZ0&t=165s

2:12:00 Masood the Westminster attacker mentioned again.  https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/may/15/westminster-attacker-had-record-of-increasingly-violent-attacks

2:25:00 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFrPOlNasZ0&t=165s referred to again.

2:27:00  On being compared to Dr Christine Blaisey Ford

2:30:00  "organic consequences"

2:32:00  Secular Koranism

No one has been able to think of a better idea other than
a) vote UKIP every five years
b) put up with the status quo
c) wait for race war

2:33:00  Moral cripples

2:34:00  The Virtue of Nationalism by Yoram Hazony

2:36:00  The world empre of the British became the world empire of America

2:38:00  The one party state will do away with political parties sacrificing the national interest for short term votes by pandering to minorities.

2:50  https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/09/27/trump-an-assessment/

3:02:00 Trump's strategy is a prelude to American isolationism

3:05:00  All the political parties who expelled me don't believe in free speech.

3:17:00  Jay and I agree that 80/20 should be the proportion of the dominant race and minorities.




at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Monday, 19 February 2018

Will the West go the way of the Qing Dynasty during the Boxer Rebellion if its massive matriarchal mistakes remain uncorrected?


The Koran is crystal clear on so many things. The New Testament is a mess of vague platitudes and weird extremist stories. If Christianity has failed, it is not really not hard to see why. As for the Old Testament, it is for Jews only and many Jews find Judaism too uncomfortably high-maintenance to remain Jews. It certainly appears that Islam will be the more successful attempt at adapting Judaism for gentiles. What remains now is to convince enough good strong men of influence capable of getting things done - and they won't necessarily be part of the political establishment whose pool of talent is currently so small and shallow - that the political system and religion of the West needs to be changed, otherwise, there will be trouble ahead.

The Boxer Rebellion

Simon Sheppard says our justice system is now feminine

at No comments:
Labels: , , , , ,

Tuesday, 24 May 2016

On the balance of probabilities, I would have convicted. For proof beyond reasonable doubt, I would have had to acquit.

THE LORD CHIEF JUSTICE OF ENGLAND AND WALES
LADY JUSTICE HALLETT
Vice President of the Court of Appeal Criminal Division
and
LORD JUSTICE TREACY
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Between:

Regina
-and-
Stuart Robert John Kerner

Hearing dates: 8 & 9 March 2016

42. The applicant Stuart Kerner was tried on an indictment containing eight counts in the Crown Court at Inner London. On 5 December 2014 he was convicted of two counts of sexual activity with a child whilst in a position of trust (counts 5 and 7). On counts 1 to 4 (inclusive), 6 and 8 he was acquitted. Those counts were allegations of either sexual activity with a child or sexual activity with a child by a person in a position of trust. The difference between those charges arose from the fact that sexual activity with a child was charged where the complainant was aged 15; sexual activity with a child in a position of trust was charged where the complainant had attained 16 years.

43. His application for leave to appeal has been referred to this court by the single judge.

The factual background
44. Kerner is a teacher with over 20 years’ experience with, inter alia, responsibility for ethics. The complainant, C, was a pupil at his school. It was acknowledged that she had behavioural problems and that she had told significant lies about herself and was an attention seeker. For example, she falsely claimed over a period of time to have been involved in a road traffic accident and that a heart defect had been discovered. She had obtained free school meals after falsely complaining that her mother had not provided food or money. There was evidence that C had formed an attraction towards the applicant and had engineered events so as to be close to him.

45. The eight counts on the indictment represented sexual activity which C said had taken place over a period between March 2011 and November 2012. Count 5 represented an incident at the end of February 2012 which C asserted was the first occasion upon which full vaginal intercourse had taken place. She also said that anal sex took place on that day. Count 7 represented events on 3 October 2012, an occasion when C said she had visited Kerner’s home for the first time and sexual relations took place.

46. The defence advanced was that no sexual activity had ever taken place between the pair.

The counts on the indictment which reflected matters recorded in C’s diary represented a fantasy on her part.

The summing up
47. The judge directed the jury to return separate verdicts in relation to each count having considered the evidence in relation to each count separately. If the jury was not sure on any count that Kerner had intentionally touched C as alleged, they should acquit. She went on to say that a central issue was whether C was a truthful and reliable witness. In the light of evidence which had been given about C’s character and honesty, the judgegave the following direction:

“It is open to you to find the defendant guilty even if you conclude that there is no corroboration or supporting evidence of C’s allegations if you are sure she is telling the truth and is a reliable witness. If, on the other hand, you retain some reservations as to whether C is a truthful and reliable witness, and therefore are not prepared to rely solely on her evidence, you will then want to look to see if there is any corroboration or supporting evidence which, despite any reservations you might have about C and the quality of her evidence, nevertheless drives you to the conclusion that you can be sure that the defendant is guilty.”

The issues on counts 5 and 7
48. Counts 5 and 7 were different from the remaining counts which depended solely on the word of C.

49. The events relating to count 5 were alleged to have taken place at the school during the school day at a time when C should have been in class. Examination of the electronically maintained school attendance records showed that there had been a suspicious alteration of the records as to C’s attendance for the material time. At the same time the applicant had free periods. Kerner and C were the only two realistic candidates for having altered the records. C would have needed to acquire a password in order to do so; Kerner had the password.

50. In relation to count 7 records showed that C and Kerner were away from school at the material time. C was able to give a detailed description of the layout of Kerner’s house which she said she had attended, contrary to Kerner’s denial. Cell site analysis of the applicant’s phone, of which C would have been unaware at the time she gave her account, showed a picture of movements of that phone consistent with C’s account of having been picked up by Kerner near the school and then driven some distance to his home where sexual activity took place, before being returned to the school.

51. The judge put the competing arguments as to the significance of the supporting evidence fully and fairly before the jury. Mr Ellis’ attempt on behalf of Kerner to portray that evidence as having been “neutralised” was wholly misconceived.

Our conclusion on the alleged inconsistency of the verdicts
52. The primary ground of appeal advanced on behalf of Kerner is that there is a logical inconsistency between the verdicts on counts 5 and 7 and the remaining counts.

53. Our conclusion is that no such inconsistency exists; the verdicts can stand together.

There is nothing unreasonable in the jury’s conclusion. As the judge foresaw in her direction to the jury, counts 5 and 7 might be viewed in a different light from the remaining counts which depended wholly on the word of C. In the case of counts 5 and 7, there was the supporting evidence which we have identified.

54. We conclude that the jury’s verdicts represent close attention to the judge’s direction and that they were only prepared to find allegations against the applicant proved where there was supporting evidence. There is thus a clear distinction between counts 5 and 7 and the other counts which leads us to reject the main ground of appeal.

The other grounds of the application for leave to appeal
55. There are subsidiary grounds of appeal.

56. The first of these asserts that by reason of a failure by the school to retain full child protection records and a failure by the police to carry out a DNA sweep of Kerner’s car and home, the trial was rendered unfair. We reject that submission. The absence of some records was raised during the trial by the defence and the jury were reminded of the issue in summing up. In any event the jury were well aware of the issues surrounding C’s credibility. It is impossible to see how any additional records could have improved Kerner’s position further. Again the issue of a failure by the police to subject the applicant’s car and home to DNA analysis, sometime after the alleged events, was raised at the trial and commented on by the judge in summing up. Both of those were matters for the jury’s consideration in deciding whether it could be sure that guilt on any count was shown. No arguable unfairness arises. We note that there was no suggestion at the trial that it should be adjourned or halted by reason of the absence of this material.

57. A further ground submits that there must be a lurking doubt as to the safety of the convictions. In this context, matters going to the credibility of C were raised, and reliance was placed on comments made by the judge at the time of verdict and in passing sentence. We are not persuaded that there is any arguable ground. The evidence as to C’s credibility was fully before the jury, and the views of the trial judge are, with respect, irrelevant. The decision in the case was for the jury not for the judge.

58. We deprecate the use of the phrase “lurking doubt” as it represents an invitation to this court to substitute its view for that of the jury. The question for this court is whether by reason of the matters raised the convictions are unsafe. For the reasons given, we dismiss this application.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/6986824/Teacher-who-had-sex-with-schoolgirl-launches-appeal-against-child-sex-convictions-after-judge-claims-she-groomed-HIM.html

 "They said CB had a vast amount of information about Mr Kerner's private life, details that nobody could have known unless they were in a relationship with him.

"They used evidence from a computerised register system which they said Mr Kerner altered to make it look like CB was in a class when she wasn't, and also relied on cell site evidence."


"Each of those grounds was subject to cross examination and found to be unreliable.
"It was found that CB could have learned the personal information by overhearing it or being told by other students.

"She stalked my client and found out a vast amount about his movements and personal life.

"As for the computer system, it transpired that anyone could have made the alterations as long as they had his password. Mr Kerner also gave evidence that he sometimes left his computer unlocked.

"And the cell site evidence was nullified when it was shown that it could support either side.

"The judge was clearly of the view that evidence was not sufficient for conviction, and this was reflected in her comments and the sentence she passed."
 
at No comments:
Labels: , , ,

How do you prove that you didn't have sex with a lying schoolgirl who said you did?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2850960/RE-teacher-accused-18-month-affair-girl-pupil-claims-vain-stalker-teenager-up.html

She told jurors that Kerner took her virginity in one of the store cupboards, and claimed he had once taken her for a day-long sex session at his home while his wife at work.

How would you prove that you didn't take the virginity of a schoolgirl in a store cupboard, on a yoga mat, or that you didn't take her out for a day-long sex session in your home while your wife was at work?

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/teacher-stuart-kerner-who-took-4755793

The English tradition that guilt must be proven beyond reasonable doubt has been suspended in the case of men accused of a historic sexual offence, but no English lawyer seems to have noticed this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_absence

Is it because they are mostly female these days?

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/dec/23/more-female-solicitors-than-men-scotland-law

The rate at which women are being appointed judges is gathering momentum in a “snowball effect”, ensuring gender equality on the bench is not that far away

Male students are outnumbered by females at most UK universities. 

the latest Law Society statistics show that that 62.4% of students accepted onto LLB courses in England and Wales in 2012 were women 

The Division is led by the Lord Chief Justice, currently Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd, assisted by the Vice-President of the Criminal Division, currently Lady Justice Hallett.

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Court_of_Appeal_of_England_and_Wales#Criminal_Division

Lady Justice Hallett: 'Senior judge propositioned me after getting me promotion'

Perhaps he did, perhaps he didn't. If he did, perhaps he was joking. It is unlikely now that he will come forward and say he was only joking, is he? Feminazis complaining about sexism are infamous for their humourlessness. What if a male judge dissents from Lady Justice? It would be the easiest thing in the world for her to accuse him of a historic sexual offence to get him to toe the feminazi line. Just the mere hint of a threat would be enough. 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/8875040/Lady-Justice-Hallett-profile.html

Thomas is one of the Founding Members of the European Law Institute, a non-profit organisation that conducts research, makes recommendations and provides practical guidance in the field of European legal development with a goal of enhancing the European legal integration.

As for Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd, it does sound like he will be voting to remain on 23 June 2016. This makes him a liberal, and we know what liberal judges do to the beta male victims of feminism, don't we?


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Thomas,_Baron_Thomas_of_Cwmgiedd

Don't expect things to improve if Britain votes to remain in the EU. Expect it to get much much worse and be very very afraid, especially if you are a beta male victim of feminism. You have no one at all to represent your interests because all the leaders of all the political parties are chasing the female vote and are terrified of alienating their female voters.

If you are poor, old and ugly, you already fit the profile of the average paedophile perfectly.

If you are wealthy and successful, you will probably have a queue of lying sluts saying you sexually assaulted them decades ago.  YOUR WEALTH AND SOCIAL STATUS IS NO PROTECTION.

http://thebattlefieldoflove.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/why-alpha-male-no-longer-exists-in.html

Bhagavad Gita: "Out of the corruption of women proceeds the corruption of races; out of the corruption of races, the loss of memory; out of the loss of memory [of established legal tradition ie the right of anyone accused of a crime to a fair trial to establish his guilt *beyond reasonable doubt*], the loss of understanding, and out of this all evil."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3538907/The-feminising-justice-makes-hard-men-charged-rape-fair-trial-writes-human-rights-lawyer-BARBARA-HEWSON.html

By the way, Britain has no alpha male though the are men who have alpha (ie leadership) qualities. If you are a man and have not yet been a victim of feminism, it doesn't mean it won't happen to you, only that it hasn't happened yet.

Oh, and the Directrix of Public Prosecutions is female.

Did the Crown Prosecution Service exceed its powers as John Humphrys was suggesting to Alison Saunders?

The head of the Crown Prosecution Service in London says that the demonization of young women in the media, especially those who’ve been out drinking, is contributing to the low conviction rate in rape cases.

Feminazis hate footballers

http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/calling-out-false-abuse-allegations/18349

One defence lawyer has said that 70 per cent of cases in Crown Courts now are sex cases. The CPS (65 per cent of whose workforce is female) evidently has no concept of age discrimination. It zealously prosecutes offenders ranging in age from 12 to 101.
The more promiscuous the women, the higher the number of rape complaints.

Sweden has the highest rate of reported rape in Europe – about 63 per 100,000 inhabitants. 

http://www.iea.org.uk/sites/default/files/publications/files/DP_Supply%20and%20Desire_61_amended_web.pdf


http://www.express.co.uk/comment/expresscomment/379367/Are-some-people-just-too-stupid-to-serve-on-a-jury
at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , ,

Monday, 12 October 2015

Keir Starmer's "victim's law" has undermined the requirement for a criminal standard of proof to convict




There is an easy way to solve this problem.

All complainants should satisfy the condition of being able to stand up in court and satisfying the criminal burden of proof.

The civil balance of probability is 50+%.

The criminal standard of proof is 75+%.

If you have a complaint ask yourself these questions:

1. Were there any witnesses or is it uncorroborated testimony?

2. Are they still alive?

4. Can you get hold of them?

5. Are they of good character?

6. Are they credible witnesses?

7. Might they have an axe to grind with the person who are thinking of accusing?

8. If there were no witnesses and your testimony cannot be corroborated by anyone else, do you have any other evidence against the person you considering accusing?

If your answer to 7 is YES and NO to all the other questions FORGET IT.

 If you still go ahead you should be done for wasting police time.

Policemen who proceed with this kind of dodgy evidence should be found guilty of malicious prosecution.

DPPs Keir Starmer and Alison Saunders should be forced to apologise for causing so much injustice by diluting the requirement of the criminal standard of proof ie beyond reasonable doubt to balance of probability in sexual assault cases.

Alison Saunders should resign for allowing this nonsense to carry on under her watch and immediately review Rolf Harris's case.

Keir Starmer should be named and shamed for his "victim's law" which started all this nonsense because it undermined the principle of the criminal standard of of guilt beyond reasonable doubt which has resulted in so many probable miscarriages of justice.  Keir Starmer heads Labour's victim treatment review 
at No comments:
Labels: , , , , ,

Wednesday, 7 October 2015

Will Panorama succeed in stopping the witch-hunt on elderly and dead white men of the establishment?

THE CRIMINAL STANDARD OF PROOF
THAT PANORAMA PROGRAMME

"Mark" looks gay and is the most compelling interviewee. He was the one abused in the Grafton Close care home by the owner of it and his friend the Catholic priest. He has never been to Elm Guest House. It was in his own care home where the abuse took place.

He was a pretty boy, small for his age. He and another boy were the owner's favourites.

Man who worked at Elm Guest House briefly in the 1980s didn't recall any high profile visitors. He said he would have recognised him.

Chris Fay - the old man who insisted he had seen the compromising photographs of Leon Brittan in an apron was previously convicted for fraud connected with shares.

Peter Saunders appears to trust the CPS which is run by an unashamed feminazi implicitly.

But then Peter Saunders is from the National Association of People Abused in Childhood.

Lord MacDonald former DPP 2003 - 2008 speaks out against these police investigations and doubts their impartiality.

No reports of murders or runnings over of schoolboys in Kingston at the time.

http://barristerblogger.com/2014/11/16/exaro-news-playing-dangerous-game-paedophile-murder-story/

" ... and a first name and .... "


"David':
"I could never be 100% sure it were Dolphin Square, not really, no. I can only be ... I can only be sure about ... I can only think I'm sure ... in my mind if people say 'Yes, you're right, it is, it is Dolphin Square, so really it came from other people, not from me, because I never said properly back in 1990, being honest, I never said Dolphin Square." 
What about the man 'David' identified as one of his abusers Leon Brittan?

"The surname came out of Chris Fay's mouth, and I just went along with it. I identified him with a photograph, but there again, he were a well-known MP and I might have seen him on TV through the years and stuff and I might have just gotten confused."
The police interviewed David for 50 hours but didn't pursue the case. They didn't consider Darren's evidence to be significant either.

Then a WOMAN called Jane accused Leon Brittan about an alleged incident in 1967. She claimed she had been raped in his basement flat; Leon Brittain lived in a top floor flat. Tom Watson took on her case even though she wasn't one of his constituents. All who could have corroborated her evidence contradicted it.

Watson says the evidence he gave to the police has resulted in three successful prosecutions. Appeal, appeal!

Ian McFadyen who was sexually abused and went to the same prep school as Francis Wheen, Deputy of Private Eye says:

"Do I think some people have used us a step politically upwards? Yes, I do."

Ends with Peter Spindler saying they all can't be making it up.

Lord MacDonald criticises Tom Watson's risky behaviour.


I know most people want to think they did it, and would happily punish them even if they actually knew they didn't do it. That is how much politicians are hated and held in contempt. This is something they should reflect on as they go about their business.
at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Friday, 24 April 2015

Claire Khaw's free legal advice to Lutfur Rahman



Tower Hamlets Mayoral Election - Thursday, 21st October, 2010

Lutfur Rahman Independent 23283 51.76%
Helal Abbas          Labour             11254 25.02%

Tower Hamlets Mayoral Election - Thursday, 22nd May, 2014

 Lutfur Rahman Tower Hamlets First 36539 43.38%
 John Biggs          Labour                            27643 32.82%

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/apr/23/tower-hamlets-mayor-lutfur-rahman-found-guilty-of-electoral

Ken Livingstone, the former London mayor, said he was “distinctly uncomfortable” with a court’s ability to remove an elected mayor. “If there is any illegality, then surely that’s a matter for the police.

 “I’m uneasy that a mayor who has taken on the political powers in a borough can be removed by someone who is essentially a bureaucrat. What I don’t understand is why he [Mawrey] found evidence of corruption that the police have so far failed to identify,” he said.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lutfur_Rahman_%28politician%29

He was re-elected at the 2014 mayoral election, but the result of this election was declared void in April 2015 by the Election Commissioner after Rahman was reported guilty of electoral fraud under the Representation of the People Act 1983.
On 16 April 2014 the Metropolitan Police said there was "no credible evidence of criminality" to substantiate allegations made against Rahman, so they are not carrying out an investigation at this stage. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representation_of_the_People_Act_1983

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3052100/Mayor-Tower-Hamlets-guilty-electoral-fraud.html

- Rahman 'let loose a mob of excitable, politically committed, young men' who 'approached voters, particularly Bangladeshi voters and harangued them in a manner that appeared to some onlookers to be rather aggressive'. Some voters said getting into polling stations was like 'running the gauntlet'.

Is this illegal?

- Up to 300 votes were 'dubious' or the result of 'personation', an electoral offence where someone votes as someone else.

Is there proof that Rahman was personally responsible for this or could it have been done by his over-enthusiastic supporters? One also has to wonder how many elections might have up to 300 votes that are "dubious', whatever that means.

- Rahman 'ran his campaign on the basis that it was the religious duty of faithful Muslims to vote for him'.

Is it illegal for Rahman to say to the voters of Tower Hamlets "Vote for me because I am Muslim and you are Muslim than vote for a non-Muslim?"

- He ran his party, Tower Hamlets First, as a 'personal fiefdom', which 'had no other aim, objective or ideology beyond the continuation of Mr Rahman in the office of Mayor of Tower Hamlets'.

Surely it is the purpose of a politician to remain in office? Is this criminal now, if you are Muslim?

But most disturbingly, he had close links to an Islamic extremist group – the Islamic Forum of Europe (IFE) [which campaigns for a sharia state] - and allegedly channelled millions of pounds of council money to its front organisations, while diverting council grants away from secular bodies. 

Let us see how "extremist" they are at:



If you wanted to campaign for a sharia state, you would have to campaign for a change in the law. An example of this would be to campaign for the constitutional right of citizens not to be taxed more than a 20% flat rate tax, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khums for example, or lashing unmarried single mothers 100 times in public for each illegitimate offspring, http://quran.com/24/2 both of which I myself advocate. https://www.facebook.com/pages/Should-Spinster-Single-Mothers-be-lashed-100-times/417696111659379?fref=ts


My ideas are undoubtedly radical which will of course have me labelled as an extremist, but I don't mind. But I would just ask this: Who is the zealot and fanatic?

The election court heard how, during his time as mayor, Rahman had siphoned public funds to IFE front organisations and presided over £2million in council funding for the East London Mosque and the Osmani Trust, a Muslim-only youth group allied with the IFE. Indeed, the IFE mobilised hundreds of supporters to achieve Rahman’s election victories.
Is any of this proven, and is any of this illegal?

It has links to the Birmingham ‘Trojan Horse’ plot and, according to own leaflets, wants to change the ‘very infrastructure of society, its institutions, its culture, its political order and its creed…from ignorance to Islam’.

It seems reasonable for non-libtard parents of all races and religions to protect themselves from the abomination that is sex education for 5 year old children currently being proposed in the UK and about to be implemented in Canada. I suspect socially conservative non-Muslims who are usually Catholic and chauvinistically Islamophobic secretly envy the effectiveness and social cohesion of the "Trojan Horse" Muslim parents.



Rahman also got rid of his competent chief executive, and ordered that all grants over £1,000 must be decided by him. In 81 per cent of cases, council officer recommendations were overruled by Rahman or his cronies, who would cite ‘local knowledge’ as their reason for diverting millions away from non-Muslim groups.

Why did he get rid of his chief executive? What does he say and what do his opponents say? Is he not entitled to order that all grants of over £1,000 be decided by him? Were the reasons for overruling council officer recommendations irrational and unfair?

While mayor, he also appointed a 100 per cent Bangladeshi and Muslim cabinet – even though the borough is only 34 per cent Muslim.

Were the reasons for doing so irrational, unfair and not conducive to the good running of the borough?

Rahman ignored the non-Bengali media but diverted thousands of pounds to Channel S, an influential TV station broadcasting to nearly half a million Bangladeshis, in return for fawning coverage. Astonishingly, he even paid the station’s chief reporter, Mohammed Jubair, £1,050 a week as a part-time ‘community relations adviser’.

Are the British media complaining that thousands of pounds had not been diverted to them? Was Rahman breaking any rules when he did this? 

Rahman threatened to dispose of a Henry Moore artwork which offended Islamic sensibilities. The borough’s public libraries stocked large quantities of extremist literature.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/lutfur-rahman/henry-moore-old-flo-sculpture_b_2093809.html gives Rahman's explanation for his reasons for doing so pointing out that his is not the only borough to sell off works of art. It is hideous anyway and you can imagine the vandalism that would be regularly wreaked on this monstrosity. Is Rahman to be held responsible for public librarians' choice of books?



He transferred valuable council property to close associates at far less than their true market value.
Which ones? What was the "true market value"? Who valued the property? What was the purchase price? Was any of this illegal or corrupt?

DID LABOUR ADD TO THE MESS? JUDGES SLAMS PARTY'S ACTIONS

 Despite multiple findings against Mr Rahman, the judge yesterday also criticised the Labour Party for its treatment of him in 2010.

 Labour sacked Rahman as its mayoral candidate on the basis of smears following an order from the party's National Executive Committee (NEC), which was attended by Harriet Harman.

 Rahman was left 'completely unaware' he had been accused of links to extremist groups by a party rival, Helal Abbas, the judge said.

 Commissioner Mawrey said there was 'not a shred of credible evidence linking Mr Rahman with any extreme or fundamentalist Islamist movement'.

 The judge said: 'The Committee did not even decide to hold an investigation. It did not summon Mr Abbas and ask him to justify his serious allegations. A resolution was passed to suspend Mr Rahman, unseen and unheard.

 'The upshot of the meeting was thus that Mr Rahman, completely unaware of the accusations and given no opportunity to counter them, was summarily sacked as candidate and his accuser substituted. '

 Condeming the party's actions, he added: '[Mr Rahman's] treatment by the NEC was, by any standards, utterly shameful and wholly unworthy of the Party.'

I am delighted Mr Mawrey mentioned this. Wouldn't it be nice to have political parties declared public bodies and subject to judicial review, as India has done? http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2015/01/indian-court-acknowledges-indian.html

When local Tory councillor Peter Golds phoned the Daily Mail in May 2010, he and a reporter visited east London addresses where large numbers of voters had been added to the electoral roll. At one Labour candidate’s home, five voters had mushroomed to 12 within a month.
When a reporter for The Independent knocked on the same door, he was badly beaten by a mob. No one was charged. Mr Golds said: ‘Why on earth have the police been arresting journalists [over alleged phone hacking and paying officials] … ?
‘We need a free press to expose things like electoral fraud … the police are too frightened to do it.’

Why are the police "too frightened"?





So, basically, Lutfur Rahman was convicted of a criminal offence in a civil court. If the CPS is dealing with it, then it is a criminal matter. Lawyers will know what I mean and so should Mr Mawrey. I would damn well appeal if I were Rahman. If they still stitch him up Muslims and non-Muslims would know what to damn well think about a government that ignores its own rules, wouldn't we?

... the then education secretary Michael Gove, said pupils must be made aware of fundamental British values of democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty, mutual respect and tolerance of different beliefs.

What is the rule of law? It means putting down your laws in writing and abiding by them, including your established legal principles and traditions.

What makes English law different and superior to other legal systems?

It is considered superior to other systems because a higher standard of proof is required to convict for those accused of criminal offences and is therefore more protective of the liberty and reputations of those who are subject to it.

Are the British going to throw out this rule of law now, in its mania to satisfy its Islamophobia?

We won't know till Rahman appeals and the judgement of the Court of Appeal goes against him. 


at 2 comments:
Labels: , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

Mark Parker entertains doubts

26:00  Psyop is just another word for state propaganda. 35:39 @DigitalGnosis ​​I dont believe Homer was a person Homer was a pagan. There wi...