Saturday - May 26, 2012
same movie, same plot, same species with different cast.
Well here we are again. Same story but another cast and coincidentally members of the same sub species. Verminous scum.
You can bet your boots that had the attack been against the overprotected minority insects, the ladies who in this case are the victims, would have landed in jail.
But just as bad, what we have here is yet another idiot judge. Some of you may recall another case some months ago when a girl gang (same low life species) were allowed to go free because the poor dears were drunk when they beat up someone.
Well here we are again. I believe it’s a different judge but the result is the same. So I take it that provided you’re a member of a favored racial group, getting drunk and beating the crap out of someone is ok cos being blotto is a mitigating factor. Unless of course you’re white in which case it’s the crime of the century and racially motivated. Not that there aren’t too many drunken white yobs about these days. Sadly, there are.
Woman attacked by girls who ‘rained fists’ and wiped pizza in her face slams court for letting thugs go free
Kalee Powell and Precious Gordon attacked their victims ‘like a pack’
By ANTHONY BOND
A legal secretary savagely assaulted by a girl gang during the Royal Wedding celebrations today slammed a decision to let her attackers walk free from court.
Daniela Holischeck, 41, was left with a bloodied face after being battered by ‘raining fists’ following a street party to mark Prince William and Kate Middleton’s marriage in April last year.
Kalee Powell, 18, and Precious Gordon, 19, along with a 17-year-old who cannot be named, attacked her and fellow legal secretary Birgit Habersetzer ‘like a pack’ after spending the day boozing.
Gordon admitted affray and assaulting Ms Holischeck and Ms Harbersetzer, while Powell was convicted of affray for her part in the attack on Ms Holischeck after a trial at the Old Bailey.
Both were given community orders and told to pay a total of £300 compensation to their victims.
After the sentencing, Ms Holischeck, who worked for a City law firm, said she had been denied justice and was still haunted by the attack near her home in Kensal Rise.
Ms Holischeck said: ‘It’ll probably be a bit of street cleaning for a year and won’t hurt them. But I will remember this for the rest of my life.
‘I’ve decided to move away from the area to the home counties. I’m trying to forget. I haven’t been allowed to do that until now.’
Ms Holischeck, who worked for City law firm Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker, was left a bloodied mess and had pizza smeared in her hair during the beating.
She spent the night in A&E after the attack and had to take a fortnight off from work.
Judge Stephen Kramer QC said Ms Holischeck and her flatmate had been caught up in ‘an ugly incident in which mindless, drunken and unlawful violence was used’.
‘It must have been a shock and thoroughly frightening for the two women who were victims,’ he added.
This part just has to have a space all its own. The judge continued with:
‘I am satisfied what you both did you did that night because you were fuelled by alcohol, having gone to a street party and drunk alcohol celebrating the Royal Wedding.
Oh heck. That’s okay then. See, when it’s explained properly, it all becomes clear as **** mud.
Now then, as for celebrating a royal wedding. Take a good look at these two beauties. Do they look like anyone who’d care about the monarchy or their weddings? They were simply doing something that’s second nature to them. It’s in the DNA ya know. And thanks to their birthrate, the times-a-comin when they’ll be fully in charge along with muzzies-gypos-travellers and all the other, friends of the liberals.
Posted by peiper
on 05/26/2012 at 09:08 AM
Filed Under: • Crime • CULTURE IN DECLINE • Daily Life • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • Justice - LACK OF •
• Comments (3)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Wednesday - May 23, 2012
You have never had a full sexual relationship says judge. get outta jail free.
Oh what a fraken sweety is the judge. Stupid F***!
I can’t believe I’m seeing and reading this. Have you folks noticed lately that everybody who commits some sort of crime suddenly isn’t really just a sick shit. No.
They have what I refer to as Asparagus syndrome. OK that isn’t the proper name but it should be. Excuses, excuses. Jeez one get tired of this crap no kidding.
And the public sure is and why not. They’re the ones at risk. I don’t want to wish harm on a guy’s family who are innocent of any wrong doing. But I sure wish one or two of these bed wetting, bleeding heart sympathetic judges would have their asses kicked up around their ears so they’d get a taste of what they only hear about in their courts.
This is beyond simple loony tunes and btw I must thank Drew for the graphic.
So what has the idiot judge done to earn the honor of being center of the loony logo?
Read this.
‘You have never had a full sexual relationship. It must be very frustrating’: Judge’s pity for predatory sex attacker as he SPARES him jail for stalking underage schoolgirls
* Andrew Jackson, 48, twice stalked schoolgirls aged 13 and 14 and sexually assaulted a disabled woman in Bridlington, East Yorkshire
* Judge says he should go to prison but spares him as it would be ‘cruel’
* Jackson given sexual offences prevention order and community order
By JAMIE MCGINNESA predatory sex attacker has escaped jail because a judge decided locking him up would be ‘utterly cruel’.
Andrew Jackson, 48, twice stalked schoolgirls aged 13 and 14 and made sexual approaches in Bridlington, East Yorkshire, before finding a disabled woman to attack.
But Judge Jeremy Richardson QC allowed Jackson to walk free from Hull Crown Court, saying it would border on cruelty to jail him because he suffers from Asperger’s Syndrome.
He told Jackson: ‘I wish to make it plain you deserve to be sent to prison.
‘But sending someone like you to prison would be utterly cruel.
‘You are very much to be pitied.
‘You have never had a full sexual relationship. It must be very frustrating.’
He added: ‘I have a public duty, but it would be quiet wrong to impose a cruel punishment.
‘Quite frankly you could not cope in prison. I have no doubt your life would be a misery.’
Jackson had already been spoken to twice by police for stalking children around Bridlington in playgrounds and wooded areas on a moped.
He showed one girl aged 13 a picture of his privates.
The police said he sexually questioned two 14-year-old girls before asking: ‘Are you legal?’
And the court heard Jackson sexually assaulted a disabled woman he met while walking around Bridlington on April 18 last year.
He shoved his hands into the underwear of the 21-year-old on a park bench and refused to let go.
The woman’s friend heard her screams for help and had to drag Jackson off her.
Judge Richardson said he aggravated matters by initially insisting on a trial falsely claiming the woman had prostituted herself to him for £20.
Barrister Martin Sharpe said police in Bridlington were so concerned about Jackson’s potential threat they wanted a Sexual Offences Prevention Order for him to stay out of children’s playgrounds.
Defence barrister Patrick Palmer said Jackson had an IQ of 75, lived at home with his parents, did not work and had suffered all his life from an undiagnosed condition.
Mr Palmer said he had a facial habit of winking which was open to misinterpretation by young girls.
He said Jackson’s Asperger’s could not be cured, but could be managed from day to day
Jackson, of Trentham Close, Bridlington, had pleaded guilty to a charge of sexual assault by touching, knowing that the woman did not consent.
He was made the subject of a two-year community order with a supervision requirement in an effort to alter his behavior in the long term.
Judge Richardson also imposed a 10-year sexual offences prevention order and placed Jackson on the sex offenders’ register for five years.
The judge told Jackson: ‘Young girls have to be protected in your area.
‘You have to learn to control yourself. I regard sexual offences as a very serious crime. Usually the men involve deserve to be sent to prison. It would not be right here. It would be bordering on cruelty.
‘However if you harass any more girls you will end up in jail.’
Oh good. He gets another chance to put his hands down some woman’s pants and if she’s disabled at the time, so much the better. Maybe she’ll only be 12 or 13 too. Whoopee. If he’s that out of balance mentally then delete the schmuck cos he’s a waste of space and user of valuable air. And so’s the judge. We can only hope the next girl or woman he gives unwanted attention to, is carrying a nice sharp blade.
Posted by peiper
on 05/23/2012 at 12:22 PM
Filed Under: • Crime • CULTURE IN DECLINE • Daily Life • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • UK •
• Comments (11)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Tuesday - May 22, 2012
sovereignty? are you mad? hahahaha sovereignty? oh stop it, the joke’s too funny
Back after hours of tech support with MSFT in India. What a headache. Literally.
btw ... has anyone else had any problems with today’s (in UK) or yesterdays (USA) MSFT patch Tuesday updates? Kind of nightmarish for awhile.
One of the least funny things I can think of, are those folks with no borders in mind, who think the USA should be part of this world order too.
Now that would be the very last straw.
Some weeks past I brought this subject up. Has to do with the uman rights court in England’s new capital. Strasbourg. Or is it Brussels? Sicko joke but darn near the truth.
Just to jog the memory of some, an axe murderer who is now out and a free man, cos that how the system works, has campaigned for prisoners to have the right to vote. I think at the time I may have said something like it will be interesting to see how this one plays out.
The verdict from the court.
Court to Britain. Screw your sovereignty.
European Human Rights judges ride roughshod over our laws (again) to tell Britain it has six months to give prisoners the right to vote
MP’s brand Strasbourg ruling an ‘infringement of Parliament’s rights’
Euro court states ban on prisoners voting violates human rights
Ministers given six month deadline to amend rules or be forced to hand criminals thousands of pounds in compensation
By JACK DOYLETens of thousands of prisoners must be given the right to vote, European human rights judges have ruled.
In a judgment which will provoke fury in Parliament, the Strasbourg court said that the current ban on inmates voting in England and Wales breached human rights laws.
The ruling by the court’s highest body, the Grand Chamber, came despite an overwhelming vote last year by MPs who insisted the ban was right and should remain in place.
It sets the stage for a major showdown between Parliament and the human rights court in coming months.
Tory MP David Davis, who led the campaign against prisoner votes in Parliament, said the ruling was an ‘infringement’ of Parliament’s rights.
Ministers were given a six month deadline to amend the rules and decide which prisoners should have access to the ballot – or else face paying thousands of pounds in compensation to criminals.
It will undoubtedly lead to further calls for Britain to withdraw from the court, which has caused outrage with a string of controversial rulings on deporting foreign criminals and terror suspects.
Today the court upheld its ruling in the case of John Hirst, a convicted axe-killer who first demanded voting rights for inmates more than seven years ago, when it first ruled against the blanket ban.
Since then Labour and then the Coalition resisted implementing the ruling, knowing it would outrage the public, who are overwhelmingly in favour of the ban remaining in force.
But in today’s ruling the court makes clear its insistence that the ban breaches Article 3 of the Convention, the right to free elections, and demands that ministers change the rules.
If they do not, it will start awarding compensation to around 2,500 prisoners who have already lodged claims with the court.
However, any attempt to introduce a law will enrage MPs, who will see the ruling as a further power-grab by the unelected judges of the controversial court.
Tory MP David Davis, who led the campaign against prisoner votes in Parliament, said the ruling was an ‘infringement’ of Parliament’s right to decide on issues which are ‘fundamental to the British way of life’.
He said: ‘In its ruling today in the Scoppola v Italy case, the ECHR has ruled that the UK must give prisoners the right to vote.
‘This regrettable decision is an infringement of the UK Parliaments right to decide on matters which are fundamental to the British way of life, and which are not appropriate to judicial intervention.
‘This will inevitably lead to a clash between the express wishes of the UK Parliament and the assertions of the European Court and will not help the court achieve its important functions in stopping breaches of fundamental rights throughout Europe.’
The public will be demanding that the Prime Minister now stands up for British interests and refuses to give convicted prisoners the right to vote.’
‘As well as continuing to demand that convicted prisoners get the right to vote, Europe’s out of touch judges have blocked the Home Secretary from deporting Abu Qatada and allowed dangerous foreign criminals to remain in the UK.
‘It is about time real changes are made to prevent out of touch European judges meddling in our laws again.’
Posted by peiper
on 05/22/2012 at 01:05 PM
Filed Under: • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • EUro-peons • Judges-Courts-Lawyers •
• Comments (3)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Sunday - May 06, 2012
there’s deep hate, and then there’s my kinda hate. and I can’t say it all here.
I seriously hope some American patriot (won’t hold my breath) tracks down and puts a world of hurt on this filthy slag.
I hope she gets a cancer so painful that no drug will relieve it and that she won’t be able to die.
And if you think that’s HATE .... you’ve no idea of what I am not saying here. There’s so much more I could add.
Stupid suck up rotten bitch.
And why do we have to be so kind and thoughtful towards these lice in human form.
They’re causing a bit of a problem we read. They don’t want to co-operate. Uh huh. How about a little gasoline on the beard and a match, Whoosh.
But just burn enough to cause extreme pain with the promise of worse on other parts. Betcha they’d behave after a simple demonstration.
One of the lawyers says they’re concerned about a fair trial.
Right. Like the fairness and compassion shown to the victims of 9/11.
American female defense lawyer covers up in traditional Islamic dress at 9/11 Guantanamo trial ‘out of respect’ for her client’s religious beliefs
Cheryl Bormann, 52, insisted other women in court also dress ‘appropriately’
Five men charged with the 9/11 attacks appearing in public for first time in 3 years for military tribunal
Mohammed repeatedly refused to answer judge’s questions
Co-defendants delayed arraignment by kneeling in prayer, removing their headphones and reading a magazine
Prisoner Walid bin Attash put in restraint chair for unknown reasonsBy Daily Mail Reporter
A female defense attorney, who is not Muslim, wore the traditional Islamic hijab to the military court staging the trial of five Guantanamo Bay prisoners accused of the September 11 attacks yesterday.
Cheryl Bormann, 52, who represents Walid bin Attash, said that her client had demanded she wear the clothing and insisted that other women at the hearing also wear ‘appropriate’ clothes out of respect for his religion.
Today she explained her decision at Guantanamo Bay, saying she always wears the hijab around her client.
She asked that other women follow her example so that the defendants do not have to avert their eyes ‘for fear of committing a sin under their faith’, according to Fox News.
The lawyer’s decision was one of the less controversial moments during Saturday’s hearing where at times the accused openly defied the court.
Proceedings were further delayed as one of the defendants, Waleed bin Attash, appeared while being restrained in his chair.
The restraints were later removed after defense counsel had given assurances that he would ‘behave’.
Another defendant, Ramzi Binalshibh, stood up, then knelt on the courtroom floor and prayed for several minutes as a row of guards in camouflage uniforms kept a close watch.
Mohammed and his co-defendants could all face the death penalty.
‘It’s actually a joke, it feels ridiculous,’ said Jim Riches, whose firefighter son, Jimmy, died at the World Trade Center.
Mr Riches watched the hearing from a movie theater at Fort Hamilton in New York City, one of four U.S. military bases where the arraignment was broadcast live for victims’ family members, survivors and emergency personnel who responded to the attacks.
‘It’s been a mess for 11 years,’ Riches said as he stood in the rain during a break in the proceedings and described the atmosphere inside.
Riches, himself a retired firefighter who worked digging up remains in the days after September 11, said he carried with him dark memories of the days after the attacks, and he hoped that if convicted the five men would be executed.
‘I saw what they did to our loved ones - crushed them to pieces,’ he said.
Posted by peiper
on 05/06/2012 at 05:39 PM
Filed Under: • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • muslims • Terrorists • USA •
• Comments (12)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • VERMIN AT LARGE IN THE UK, PART ONE
Didn’t think I would be on line today but booted to check things.
I wasn’t going to post the story or pix thinking you folks could see the same thing in any country you’re from while visiting us at bmews.
I haven’t a clue about the laws or systems of justice in other countries. But justice seems to be sorely lacking in some western countries and especially here in the UK and perhaps the USA as well.
I’ve been here a number of years which doesn’t qualify me as expert in any way. But heck, I read the papers and listen to the radio, and have no TV by choice.
And what I see and hear makes me despair.
How is it that growing up in a very innocent age, by comparison to today, I still managed to work out right from wrong? I didn’t need anyone to tell me. I knew. We all did. Which ain’t sayin’ we always did right when sometimes wrong was fun or just something we knew we could get away with.
But I promise you we never even thought of doing the things I read about today. Rape? Stabbing ppl? Sure, it happened even then. But never on this scale.
And of course in those days there was the death penalty. Emphasis on that last word. Doesn’t seem to be much of that anymore.
A few weeks ago I saw two stories crime related, never posted cos it was the same old same old. But what did stand out was that in two separate cases the accused when being sent off to prison, shouted out in court, haha. Easy. I can do that.
Another said, “I can do that standing on my head.” Or words similar. They just don’t care and they know they’ll get out sooner rather then later.
One prisoner with a violent background even took the prison to court AND WON the right to be called Mister by the prison guards.
And here’s this group of sub human life forms who if you read it all will discover that for them, they were merely doin’ what comes naturally.
And speaking of what comes naturally, take a good look at this animal.
He looks like he grunts, ape like, instead of speaking as humans do. And he’s only one of that group.
Sickening.
Six months for boy who raped girl of 11 sparks outrage over 16-year-old thug’s soft sentence for attack in McDonald’s toilet
* Series of attacks took place on three separate dates
* Involved up to eight members of the same street gang
* Only two were convicted, but investigations continue
* Ringleader, then aged 13, was jailed for five years
* Judge said attack had ‘far reaching effects’ on victim
* Thugs beat her up to make sure she kept quiet
By KATHERINE FAULKNER
A teenage gang member who raped a girl of 11 in a McDonald’s toilet will serve only six months behind bars after an astonishing ruling by a judge yesterday.
The 16-year-old was one of several thugs who preyed on the ‘vulnerable and lonely’ victim over a number of months.
They subjected the girl to a series of horrific rapes before trying to intimidate her into staying silent.
But incredibly, he was locked up for just one year yesterday after the judge said the victim’s unwillingness to have sex ‘may not have been obvious’ to him and he deserved ‘very great credit’ for pleading guilty.
The teenager – who cannot be named – is likely to serve only six months in a young offenders’ institution.
Last night the sentence was condemned by victims’ groups, who said it trivialised the rape of a child. In law, a girl of 11 is deemed incapable of consenting to sex in any circumstances.
Jo Wood, a spokesman for Rape Crisis, said: ‘Victims will be appalled by this kind of sentence. That victim will undoubtedly serve a life sentence after what has happened to her.
‘It will have taken considerable courage for her to come forward. I am very concerned that this sentence does not reflect the seriousness of the crime at all.
‘Courts will need to seriously consider the message that sentences such as these send out.’
Stephen Timms, the Labour MP for East Ham, said: ‘These attacks were horrendous, repeated and committed by young men who seemed to have little remorse for the trauma they have inflicted on this girl. I am shocked, especially given the gang dimension to this case, that their sentences are so short.’
Conservative MP Philip Davies said: ‘For a court to hand down such a derisory sentence for one of the most serious crimes seems to me to be totally unacceptable.’
Mr Davies said such sentences had ‘left the public with no confidence in the criminal
justicesystem’. He added: ‘It certainly won’t act as a deterrent, or encourage victims of rape to come forward.‘Given how serious the problems with gang culture are in this country, I think it is very weak indeed.’
The victim, who is now 13, stared at the floor in court yesterday as Ibraheem Giwa, 15, and his 16-year-old co-defendant, who cannot be named for legal reasons, were sentenced to five years and one year respectively.
Both had been members of the Say No More gang from the Custom House area of Newham, East London – an area blighted by violent turf wars.
Ibraheem ‘Ibby’ Giwa – described as the ringleader – was just 13 when he carried out the first attack on the girl in September 2009, Inner London Crown Court heard.
He dragged the girl, who had just started secondary school, into the bushes at a park, and raped her while another boy watched. He then invited her to his house, where she asked him: ‘If I do it, are you going to leave me alone?’
Giwa then raped her again, before inviting a queue of up to eight other gang members to do the same.
The victim wept throughout the attacks and asked the boys to ‘stop it’, but they simply told her to stop crying because it ‘made it look like they’d done something’ to her.
She later told police: ‘They didn’t ask me if I wanted it or not.’
Six months later, in March 2010, she was attacked in the toilet of a McDonald’s restaurant in East Ham, East London, by the gang member, then 14, who had heard about the previous rapes.
He followed her into the toilet and raped her while his friends waited outside the door. After the attacks, members of the gang bombarded the victim with texts and phone calls warning her not to tell anyone about what had happened.
On two occasions, she was beaten up as a warning not to report the crimes. When she finally did go to the police, officers seized the defendants’ computers and found that Giwa had discussed the rape with others on Facebook.
In one conversation, Giwa had written: ‘I think the girl we rapped (sic) went to police.’
A 15-year-old, who cannot been named and who was later cleared, wrote: ‘What girl?’ Giwa replied: ‘The girl we bang at my house.’
Passing sentence, Judge Patricia Lees said the rapes had been ‘selfish and debased’ attacks on a vulnerable and lonely child who had been left genuinely frightened of gang reprisals.
ALL THE REST OF THE STORY IS HERE
Posted by peiper
on 05/06/2012 at 12:52 PM
Filed Under: • Crime • CULTURE IN DECLINE • Daily Life • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • Justice - LACK OF • UK •
• Comments (0)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Wednesday - May 02, 2012
I used to live in England and now I live in the United Nations
A couple of months ago I posted a YT video of a woman losing her cool thru drink, and going on a racist rant on the tube. That’s Britspeak for subway.
So then here’s an update which is interesting and just shows how right, maybe I should use the word correct instead, people accused of the big ‘R’ actually are.
There are valid reasons for their many seasons of discontent. Mostly the feeling that they are losing their country. Their culture is being buried and they don’t understand how it’s been allowed. The huge and people I do mean the very huge influx of uncontrolled immigration to this ISLAND.
I just need to emphasize that in case anyone forgot.
About a week ago an MP complained loudly after getting a less then quality sandwich and apparently not what he ordered, because the person who waited on him didn’t have much of an understanding of English. And so he asked why the fast food place couldn’t hire English ppl or at lease ppl who had a grasp of the language, instead of so darn many eastern Europeans. Naturally the bed wet crowd called for his head accusing him of ... wanna say the word?
If every single person who felt the same way this woman did and spoke out the same way, drunk or sober, they would number in the millions and there would not be enough room in the jails to house them all.
Now then, what has me seeing red this chilly grey morning, is that the lady in question here could face jail because of her drunken rant on that subway.
Seems to me I recall a gang of four black muslim slags who beat the hell out of a white girl but were let off cos .... they weren’t used to being drunk.
I wonder if this woman can use the same defense. Course not. She be the wrong color and religion and race.
Happy New Year 1984.
Secretary, 42, told she faces jail after admitting champagne-fuelled racist rant on train that was posted on YouTube
Jacqueline Woodhouse, 42, abused passengers on the Central Line train
Film uploaded to YouTube has been watched 200,000 times
Sikh man on his way back from funeral who filmed it, said he put it on YouTube to ensure speedy justice
By EMMA REYNOLDSA drunken secretary has admitted hurling racist abuse at fellow passengers on the London Underground after a video of her appeared on the internet.
Jacqueline Woodhouse, 42, directed a drunken, expletive-ridden rant at passengers on the Central Line between St Paul’s and Mile End stations on January 23.
The court was told that Woodhouse had drunk an ‘unknown’ quantity of champagne at a retirement party before getting on the Tube at 11pm.
She now faces jail, after police launched an investigation into a seven-minute long video of the verbal assault that was uploaded to YouTube.
Today at Westminster Magistrates’ Court, Woodhouse, of Romford in Essex, admitted causing harassment alarm and distress to the Sikh man who filmed her - Galbant Singh Juttla.
The video clip begins with Woodhouse shouting in a thick Essex accent about ‘foreign s*** heads’.
She turns to her passengers and asks: ‘Where do you come from? Where do you come from? Where do you come from?
‘I would like to know if any of you are illegal? I am sure like 30 per cent of you are.’
She then turns on the Pakistani man sitting next to her, who is singing his national anthem, and threatens to ‘punch him in the face.’
‘I wouldn’t mind if you loved our country,’ she adds.
She then turns to Mr Juttla’s camera, as he assures her he would rather be listening to his music than to her.
She goes on: ‘Why don’t you tell me where you’re from?’
He replies: ‘I am British.’
She gets her phone out of her black handbag and looks as if she is filming him too.
Mr Juttla warns her: ‘Watch what you are saying.’
She replies: ‘I used to live in England and now I live in the United Nations.’
As he tells her to keep her mouth shut, informing her that she has had too much to drink, she becomes extremely agitated and starts screaming.
‘It’s not your country anyway so what’s your problem?’ she yells. ‘It’s been overtaken by people like you.’
The court heard that Mr Juttla decided to film Woodhouse after she started berating an unidentified black female. She then sat down between two men and began another barrage of abuse.
Woodhouse told police she could not remember the rant but recognised it was her in the video.
She attended court today wearing a black suit and white shirt. She sat in the court with her brow furrowed and her head bowed as the magistrate was shown the video clip.
Ms Campbell said Woodhouse verbally abused a male passenger while on a train to Stratford. She asked whether he had paid taxes, adding: ‘I have had enough of it, why don’t they go back to where they come from?’
Outside court Mr Juttla, who runs a print company, said: ‘I found it very distressing.
‘I uploaded it to YouTube because I thought that was the fast-track process to catching this person.
‘I also needed to show the public that kind of person is out there and not to put up with this kind of behaviour.
‘My kids have seen the video and they are disgusted by it. They don’t expect for someone to shout abuse at their dad.’
Adjourning sentence, District Judge Elizabeth Roscoe said: ‘Bearing in mind the level of abuse, the persistence of the abuse, the number of people on the train unable to leave without aborting their journey, and the children present, means that I think the court has to have a pre-sentence report.
‘I make it clear that all options are open to the sentencing court, including committal or immediate custody.’
The judge imposed stringent conditions banning her from the Tube network (for two years it’s reported elsewhere) and she was ordered to keep to a daily curfew between 10pm and 6am, which will be monitored by electronic tag.
She will be sentenced at the same court on May 29.
MORE ON THE SUBJECT AND PHOTOS
If you go to the link, take a look at the comments below the story.
Posted by peiper
on 05/02/2012 at 04:43 AM
Filed Under: • CULTURE IN DECLINE • Illegal-Aliens and Immigration • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • Justice - LACK OF • Outrageous • Racism and race relations • UK •
• Comments (3)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Monday - April 09, 2012
law and order?
Now how is this for a great defense?
My client has suffered persecution.
Judge didn’t buy it which is a surprise, as the gremlin found guilty happens to be a member of a special species.
Discrimination is no excuse to commit burglary, judge tells gypsy
The discrimination suffered by gypsies is no excuse for them to commit burglaries, a judge said as he jailed a serial offender.
Naturally, the folks who always cry race and prejudice never seem to ask why ppl treat em that way. Like, they never bring hate upon themselves.
Nah.
Here’s the rest.
Viorel Dumitrascu, 43, a Roma gypsy who was convicted of rape in Romania, has now been jailed for breaking into six homes in a single day.
He admitted targeting elderly residents in Crewe, Cheshire on Jan 25 at Chester Crown Court. He previously served seven years in a Romanian jail for rape, five years for robbery and three for aggravated larceny.Dumitrascu, a father-of-three from Birmingham, stole jewellery, laptops, digital cameras and items of sentimental value from six elderly victims in the town.
In one case Dumitrascu stole around £1,200 worth of jewellery from the room of an 80-year-old woman at a Crewe care home. He also targeted addresses in Wells Avenue, Wrexham Road and Vine Tree Avenue, smashing windows to gain access to the properties.
The court heard how all properties were empty at the time.Dumitrascu, who also has five previous convictions for seven offences of dishonesty in this country, was arrested on the M6 later that day on his way back home to Birmingham.
Defending, Andrew Fitzpatrick said: “He (Dumitrascu) faces the difficulties a Roma gypsy when travelling around Europe.”
However, Judge David Hale rejected that claim and said: “I don’t like that at all. It is no excuse to go and burgle people’s houses.”Mr Fitzpatrick added: “It is an inappropriate way to provide for your family. The jewellery has been returned. He wants to stay in this country.”
Sentencing him to 32 months in jail, for which he will serve just half, Judge Hale added: “Burglary is very serious in this country and I suspect it is in Romania too.“You wouldn’t want your parent’s home rifled through. These were quite deliberate offences and your culpability is high.”
Speaking after the sentencing, DS Andy Mcgillan, from the Crewe burglary team, said: “This is a great result for the team who worked hard to bring a file of evidence to court that would prove his guilt.“All of the houses were unoccupied but secure at the time and when the occupants came home discovered they had been broken into and numerous items, some of which were sentimental, were missing causing them great distress.
“Being able to reassure the victims that the person who violated their homes is behind bars is very satisfying and part of the reason why we do this job.”
So our gypo hero gets to serve only half the time. Good. That’ll teach him. Half the time will put the fear of god in him alright. Jeesh.
He’ll get out and be doing business at the old stand as usual.
Posted by peiper
on 04/09/2012 at 10:26 AM
Filed Under: • Crime • Judges-Courts-Lawyers •
• Comments (2)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Thursday - April 05, 2012
useless info that is certain not to make you feel any better for knowing
A tourist asked by the officer in passport control at Athens airport:
What is your nationality?
Tourist replies:
German.
The officer then asks: Occupation?
Tourist replies:
No. Only visiting.
It’s been a crappy month so that’s my contribution to humor for the rest of the year. Maybe.
Don’t wanna bore readership with health issues but my posting has been nil to none with mostly none of late. Wife still having a problem which naturally affects me cos I love her and hate to see her hurting. As for myself, I’ve had a short spell of something I think was self induced. In an effort to get rid of one pain I went about creating another which has plagued me for a week now but I must be better since, at last, for now, I’m back. Yawn. I heard that!
Now just cos I’ve been away in a manner of speaking, should not imply that I haven’t been reading the papers. And the goofiness always manages to get to me. Sometimes anger and sometimes a laff but almost always frustration, because I can’t take in how easily educated people let themselves be taken in by this world of the politically correct. Many of them are I know way smarter then I am, or anyway, they’ve had enough on the ball to pass college exams. Or maybe they’ve excelled in easy courses.
There have been some suggestions I have read by these people like, and I kid you not, the suggestion to drop the terms husband and wife as those terms are dated here in the 21st century and haven’t the same meaning they once did. HUH? Yeah, the suggestion is that the word “partners” be used in place of.
I read that weeks before April 1st. Just thought I should mention that.
Then of course another write up on the suggestion to let boys wear skirts, because clothing that is too gender specific can cause distress. A commissioner for kiddies says that with regard to school uniforms, young ppl with “gender variant issues” who are forced to wear gender specific uniforms could be in violation of the UN Convention on the “Rights of the Child.”
OK, I see what he’s saying. Little boys and girls who somehow believe they aren’t really little boys and girls but instead are little girls and boys deep inside, will somehow be harmed by being made to wear a uniform that doesn’t fit with how they see themselves.
I have a lot on my plate right now so I’ll let you figure that one out all on your own. I know you can.
Then there’s something else with the kids in mind. In one school anyway and forgive me but I have lost my link and notes, even the hard copy I had. So from memory now, apparently kids should not be encouraged to form the kind of friendships that will lead to emotional distress and hurt. Hmmm. Kay, so far a parent reading that might well say yes. You know, like the wrong influences at school that your child may encounter. But the advice went beyond that. No longer must kids develop friendships where the friend is referred to as, “A best friend.” Kids should not it is claimed by some dim light, have a best friend, because either due to a falling out or a move away or illness, accident or the worst, losing someone regarded as a best friend will emotionally damage a child and cause much hurt. I could never in my wildest imaginings make that up. And just to give you an idea of how goofy our world is, not just goofy but actually unreasonable as well, take a look at this letter to an editor of the Mail. No link so I copied out what the person wrote.
MIND CONTROL
WHAT is it with our schools? First they aren’t allowed to have “a best friend,” only groups.
Now, at my grandson’s school in Kent, the words ‘boyfriend’ and ‘girlfriend’ are taboo.When he and two friends were heard saying these words, they were kept in class. They’re eight years old. Is this brainwashing?
B. White, London SE9
And as if that is not bizarre enough, what do ya make of this?
A drug dealer served five years in prison and was to then be deported. But first, he dumped his wife and his children for another woman. With me so far? Good.
Because it turns out the govt. can not deport this fellow because he has “family rights.” Yeah but … he deserted both wife and kids.
Yes. But he now has a child by the mistress, AND, an immigration appeal found that an earlier tribunal did not take into consideration the “detrimental effect” deporting him back to Jamaica would have on his mistress and their child.
Then why not send them all to Jamaica to keep him company?
It isn’t as if there’s a shortage of that minority group in this country.
Stay Tuned
Posted by peiper
on 04/05/2012 at 07:36 AM
Filed Under: • CULTURE IN DECLINE • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • Stoopid-People • UK •
• Comments (1)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Tuesday - April 03, 2012
simply un-obama-lievable
I think this is another one of those situations where the mask slips, and the true Barry Soetoro peeks out. I don’t even know where to begin on this one. Stupid? Uneducated? Villainous? Egocentric narcissistic tyranny? A fundamentally flawed concept of what America is all about and how it works? All of that, and more. Let’s add in a total disrespect for our time honored system of government, the basest of political pandering, and yet another attempt to spread a meme that is so far beyond wrong that you’d be almost unable to believe that an actual American citizen would even be able to form the thought in his mind. Unreal. And this clueless thug is in charge.
Obama warns ‘unelected’ Supreme Court against striking down health law
President Obama, employing his strongest language to date on the Supreme Court review of the federal health care overhaul, cautioned the court Monday against overturning the law—while repeatedly saying he’s “confident” it will be upheld.
The president spoke at length about the case at a joint press conference with the leaders of Mexico and Canada. The president, adopting what he described as the language of conservatives who fret about judicial activism, questioned how an “unelected group of people” could overturn a law approved by Congress.
“I’m confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress,” Obama said.
Wow. He just oozes contemptuous stupid from every single pore. Don’t you just love how he implies that shooting down his ramrodded law, crammed down the throats of the American public against our wishes and without our votes, would be tyrannical? Oh, and I’ll get to the “democratically elected” part in the next post, since YET AGAIN it’s turned up that the Dems have been caught red handed rigging the ballots back in 2008.
Unelected judges overturning a law passed by an elected legislature ... gosh, that’s just so wrong. Um, wait. Um, no. Asshat. That’s what the damn Supreme Court is FOR. It’s what their job is. Now, then, and since forever. Did this Indonesian pretender even attend one of these law classes? Did he pass any of the exams, or just mark them “present”? My head is spinning. What nerve. What blatant stupidity. What a douche.
The Supreme Court spent three days hearing arguments last week in four separate challenges to the health care law, which stands as the president’s signature domestic policy accomplishment. A central challenge was over the individual mandate—the requirement that Americans buy health insurance. Critics say the mandate is unconstitutional, and that the federal government cannot force people into the insurance marketplace.
Obama on Monday said that without such a mandate, the law would not have a mechanism to ensure those with preexisting conditions get health care.
“I’m confident that this will be upheld because it should be upheld,” Obama said, describing the law as “constitutional.”
Republican lawmakers slammed the president for his Supreme Court comments. Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, accused the president of misrepresenting the implications of a ruling against the law.
“It must be nice living in a fantasy world where every law you like is constitutional and every Supreme Court decision you don’t is ‘activist,’” he said in a statement. “Many of us have been arguing for nearly three years that the federal government does not have the power to dictate individuals’ purchasing decisions. After a national debate on the subject, more than two-thirds of Americans agree that the Obamacare insurance mandate is unconstitutional.”
Nice word Senator Hatch, but like Ron Paul said of Newt Gingrich, you haven’t gone far enough. The entire mandate is based on an extraordinary bending of the already overly bent reed called “the power to regulate interstate commerce”. And the ENTIRE problem of unchecked, unlimited, overbearing federal government is based on that one single decision back in 1937 when Obama’s predecessor, his mentor, his role model, and the other Communist president, FDR, strong armed the Supreme Court by threatening to pack it with another half dozen justices that would toady to him. Because they were old, and thus slow witted, so he was going to help them. Seriously, that was FDR’s publicly stated reasoning. And two justices capitulated, and it’s been downhill ever since. All that “regulate interstate commerce” ever meant was to normalize it. To keep it tuned, and running evenly. Like a clock. Regulated. Look it up, Mr. Scholar. Read the words of the founding fathers, The Federalist Papers, and the Congressional Minutes up to that point in time.
But no. To Obama, this law is constitutional because he says it is. And any decision other than that ... well, let’s see how that Joe The Plumber tar brush works on Scalia. Or we could try to Palinize Roberts. Hey, let’s get Spike Lee to Tweet Kennedy’s home address and the NBPP to put a bounty out on him.
PS - Notice that a certain Ivory Tower justice has NOT recused herself from sitting in judgment on legislation that she had a significant hand in creating. Solicitor General at the time, no? Ethics much? ¡Cállate, no es nada!
UPDATE: under the overleaf, a take of a far darker geometry:
Posted by Drew458
on 04/03/2012 at 07:08 AM
Filed Under: • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • Obama, The One •
• Comments (6)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Wednesday - March 28, 2012
this is the result of not belonging to a pc religion or color. jail for nasty tweets.
No surprise that there is one law for foul, miserable Somali nigger sluts, and another for de white folks.
You may recall this episode from last year and these skanks, these filthy black slags, who beat the hell out of a girl for the crime of being white, and the idiot judge who let them off. Remember that?
Well if you don’t, here’s a damn reminder.
James Bide-Thomas, prosecuting, said Ambaro Maxamed, who started the violence, had called Miss Page a ‘white bitch’ during the incident.
The women, who are all Somalian Muslims, were not charged with racial aggravation.
Victim Miss Page said: ‘I had gone for a drink after work and then I met my boyfriend for a couple more before heading home.
‘We didn’t want to stay out too late so we went to get a taxi and all of a sudden I heard these women shouting abuse at me.‘We were just minding our own business but they kept shouting “white bitch” and “white slag” at me.
‘When I turned around one of them grabbed my hair – she literally wrapped her fingers in my hair – then threw me on the ground. That’s when they started kicking me.‘They were taking turns to kick me in the head and back over and over. I was lying on the ground the whole time, crying and screaming. It was terrifying. I thought they were going to kill me.
‘Eventually the police came but it felt like ages. Afterwards I was covered in blood and hair.
‘I had a bald patch on my head where they had yanked my hair out and I was black and blue all over.
Now then …. this unfortunate (cos he’s a white boy) is going to jail. Did he beat up anyone?
No
His crime was racial abuse on Twitter.
What he said was uncalled for. The things he wrote were hateful, there is no excusing his actions. However, because he’s the wrong race and or color, he is in handcuffs and off to jail. And even his college has dropped him.
The whole fuckin episode makes me see red. I am not saying he shouldn’t be called to account if the charges are true. He’s accused of inciting hatred, the bad boy. Oh, like ppl who ordinarily don’t hate anyone, are suddenly going to become haters based on his words. I think the judgement against him might incite more hatred then his ill chosen words. Worse yet, the charge of “racially aggravated harassment” hardly matches racially aggravated assault. But in his case, he has been sent to prison to, “reflect the public outrage at his comments.”
Well shit. There ya have it. Outrage over nasty words trumps a nasty vicious physical beating by a gang of filthy criminal scum who happen to possess the politically correct color and religion. Hey, come to think about it, there wasn’t much outrage over the beating of that girl and her boyfriend. Yeah there were many angry people, but not on this scale. And that is damned bothersome.
There are folks and conservatives among them, who have joined the bandwagon in the judicial lynching of this guy. They demand equality and an end to race hate, but play right into the hands of ppl who are haters, by this lopsided lack of punishment. Or in the case of the somali slags, no punishment at all. Bet ya they didn’t even lose their benefits.
This fellow may have acted stupidly, but he tore out no hair, kicked nobody, sent nobody to the hospital.
His crime was, “vile racist tweets.”
I have long thought the system in the USA was pretty well fucked up, especially after the OJ trial and even before that.
But this takes the prize for sure for a double standard, which the right is always being criticised for.
Posted by peiper
on 03/28/2012 at 01:36 PM
Filed Under: • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • Justice - LACK OF • Racism and race relations •
• Comments (4)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Tuesday - March 27, 2012
somali pervert to sue brits and obl’s right hand man alive and happy at txpyer xpense
Idiots. Absolute and totally irredeemable too late to save legal eagle idiots bowing and scraping to the human rights court of Europe while England sinks further into the world of pc make nice and lets try and be fair to all.
Never mind the duty to protect the law abiding and the overall security of the country.
Heaven help the USA if the libtard fools who pray (it seems to me) for a one world lets all hold hands and kiss have their way. As they often seem to. If this were an isolated thing we could write it off and hope it wouldn’t happen again. But that is not the case. This case is one of many.
Oh and btw …. as long as I’m ranting about the bizarre and stupid, that Qatada fellow (pictured here with his lovely bride) that the govt. just couldn’t deport (his human rights) even though the govt. says he is a danger and a terrorist.
Just so you readers know who I am referring to.
Only a man described as Bin Laden’s right hand man in Europe is all. Right now, he’s the happiest man in England.
The man who owns the property this vermin was living in (at taxpayer expense) did not know who was living in the property until the news broke about him. When he found out he blew his top and told the powers that be here to take the scum out of his property. He wanted no part of him. Soooooo …. said terrorist was moved and is he pleased, according to his brother.
He now has an even larger abode and a more expensive too. With compliments of the taxpayer as usual.
His deportation was halted by European judges.
What a fracked up world I tell ya.
The Brits gave their all and stuck it out all through the blitz. They were brilliant with code breaking and propaganda and a never say die attitude.
And that was just the women.
They could beat Hitler at his own game, they helped save Europe and now without firing a shot they’re occupied by a Euro-weenie liberal court.
ANGER AS SOMALI PERVERT WINS RIGHT TO SUE BRITAIN
By Anil Dawar
A SOMALI sex offender who sidestepped Home Office attempts to deport him yesterday won the right to sue the Government for failing to release him quickly enough.
Bashir Barrow, 51, was originally allowed to stay in the UK after fleeing his war-torn homeland.
But instead of repaying the favour he ended up costing the country hundreds of thousands and went on the run to avoid being sent home.
Now the pervert – who once turned up to an immigration hearing so drunk it had to be abandoned – could be in line for a cash payout after the Court of Appeal gave him permission to continue a taxpayer-funded bid for compensation.
The UK Border Agency paid out £4million in compensation in 2010 for 152 cases – including many unlawful detention claims – at an average of £26,600 each.
Ukip Euro-MP and home affairs spokesman Gerard Batten hit out at the farcical situation. He said: “It is getting crazy. Not only can we not deport foreign criminals we don’t want here, but we are finding we have to pay them for the privilege of staying in the country.
“This is exactly the kind of reason that we have to get rid of the Human Rights Act.” Yesterday the Court of Appeal heard how Barrow arrived in the UK in 1995. He was refused asylum but was granted exceptional leave to remain that year and indefinite leave to remain in 2002. Within a year he was jailed for indecent assault, theft and breaching a community order. He went on to commit a string of driving offences and returned to jail in 2007.
Home Office staff had wanted to deport Barrow after his first jail term but he went missing.
By the time of the second deportation attempt, in May 2008, he had written to the European Court of Human Rights pleading for help.Strasbourg judges then ruled that sending the criminal back would violate his human rights. He was later granted bail from an immigration centre in September 2009, when a judge ruled that – although he was “a pest” – he had to be released.
Barrister Shivani Jegarajah told the appeal judges her client’s criminal record was “not serious” and he should have been released soon after the European Court ruling. Lord Justice Davis, Sir John Thomas and Mr Justice Black ordered a High Court review of Barrow’s case.
Posted by peiper
on 03/27/2012 at 10:41 AM
Filed Under: • CULTURE IN DECLINE • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • EUro-peons • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • Justice - LACK OF • muslims • Outrageous •
• Comments (0)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Wednesday - March 21, 2012
A Supreme Bitchslap for the EPA
The Supreme Court handed down a major win for both property rights and due process rights today in the case of Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency. At issue was the EPA’s use of so-called administrative compliance orders, which are government commands that allowed the agency to regulate the use of private property without also subjecting its actions to judicial review. In a 9-0 ruling, with the majority opinion written by Justice Antonin Scalia and separate concurring opinions filed by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Justice Samuel Alito, the Supreme Court declared that these EPA actions must be subject to judicial review.
Four years ago, Mike and Chantell Sackett bought property to build a home near a lake in Bonner County, Idaho. After obtaining local permits the Sacketts began work, pouring in some land fill. But their work came to a screeching halt when they were visited by officials from the Environmental Protection Agency. The couple was slapped with a compliance order asserting that the land is subject to the Clean Water Act and that they had illegally filled protected wetlands. They were told to stop filling in the lot, and to restore it to its pre-construction condition or face thousands of dollars in potential liability.
The Sacketts sought to challenge the EPA’s finding in court, but were told that that they needed to go through a permitting process first, and only after the EPA moved to enforce the order could they seek judicial review.
Today, a unanimous Supreme Court reversed a lower court decision and found that the Sacketts may bring a civil action under the Administrative Procedure Act, which provides for judicial review of “final agency action for which there is no other adequate remedy in court.”
Justice Alito, concurring:
The position taken in this case by the Federal Government—a position that the Court now squarely rejects—would have put the property rights of ordinary Americans entirely at the mercy of Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) employees.
The reach of the Clean Water Act is notoriously unclear. Any piece of land that is wet at least part of the year is in danger of being classified by EPA employees as wetlands covered by the Act, and according to the Federal Government, if property owners begin to construct a home on a lot that the agency thinks possesses the requisite wetness, the property owners are at the agency’s mercy. The EPA may issue a compliance order demanding that the owners cease construction, engage in expensive remedial measures, and abandon any use of the property. If the owners do not do the EPA’s bidding, they may be fined up to $75,000 per day ($37,500 for violating the Act and another $37,500 for violating the compliance order). And if the owners want their day in court to show that their lot does not include covered wetlands, well, as a practical matter, that is just too bad. Until the EPA sues them, they are blocked from access to the courts, and the EPA may wait as long as it wants before deciding to sue. By that time, the potential fines may easily have reached the millions. In a nation that values due process, not to mention private property, such treatment is unthinkable.
Volokh Conspiracy: “He urges Congress to clarify the scope of the CWA so that property owners will at least have a clearer indication of the scope of EPA authority over their land. Despite these limitations, the decision is a significant victory for property rights, and a rare case of unanimity on an important property rights issue.”
It’s just as upsetting to me that the government would allows such an Act to be written in the first place as it is that they would, showing an utter lack of either common sense or common decency, take the Act all the way to the Supreme Court TO GET THEIR WAY. This is NOT what the federal government of the US of A is supposed to be like. I call for a general flogging of the case’s lawyers, the dingbats at EPA who went on an uppity hissy fit forcing their crap down citizen’s throats, and a double lashing for the rat bastards in the Legislature who authored this crap. Writing and enforcing law should not be “We’ll do whatever we want, and we’ll get away with it until the Supremes shoot it down, in half a dozen years or so, maybe.” Tar, feathers, horsewhip; some user creativity required. The next bunch gets the tree and the rope.
Perhaps I am remembering the details wrong, but I think the Sackett case was one where the EPA forced them to quit building because they had a “wetland” on their property, which was caused by a drainage culvert being jammed up? And then when they cleaned out the culvert and all the water drained away, and then they put in some fill dirt to level the ground off, and the EPA condemned them for destroying a “wetland”. Asshats. But I may be thinking of some other case, and some other outrageous action by the EPA. Lord knows they’ve got plenty of that to go around.
The Clean Water Act prohibits “the discharge of any pollutant by anyperson,” 33 U. S. C. §1311, without a permit, into “navigable waters,”§1344. Upon determining that a violation has occurred, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) may either issue a compliance order or initiate a civil enforcement action. §1319(a)(3). The resulting civil penalty may not “exceed [$37,500] per day for each violation.” §1319(d). The Government contends that the amount doubles to $75,000 when the EPA prevails against a person who has been issued a compliance order but has failed to comply. The Sacketts, petitioners here, received a compliance order from the EPA, which stated that their residential lot contained navigable waters and that their construction project violated the Act.
The Ninth Circuit affirmed, concluding that the Clean Water Act precluded preenforcement judicial review of compliance orders and that such preclusion did not violate due process.
Ok, rope and tree for that bunch. Extra high and springy branches, so they dance better for our enjoyment. It’s their DAMN JOB to know better. “precluded preenforcement judicial review” means “do as the government says, right now, or get fined. You DO NOT have a right to a hearing.” and that this DID NOT violate due process (which means “you get a hearing"). If it weren’t a “green” issue, the loonies on the left would be screaming “NAZIS!!!!111!!” and they’d be right for once.
Justice Scalia does a big old eyeroll on his keyboard at the audacity of the EPA’s actions here in the first place: the Wetlands Act is limited to “navigable waterways” (although it doesn’t say navigable by what - perhaps a duck, or a miniature canoe?) and the adjacent wetlands that feed them directly. The Sackett’s gigantic 2/3 of an acre is several pieces of property away from Priest Lake in Idaho, and those properties already have houses on them. So step off, eh?
However, this is a limited decision. All that SCOTUS ruled on is that the Sackett’s do have the right to a hearing. They did not rule that the EPA is completely full of shit in this case, nor that it is run by uppity enviro-nazi bastards with powers unchecked, nor that their Acts and Rules are tyrannical. But I’m pretty sure Scalia knows it. Today at least, they blunted one of it’s fangs. Slightly.
Oh, how I long for the day when SCOTUS will grow a big hair pair and render decisions like “Go piss up a rope. PS, we’ve decided that your entire agency is unconstitutional, so you’re all fired and your rules are completely void. Have a nice day. The end.” All the more reason to get any flavor of Conservative into the White House, because some of those Black Robes are really getting ready for the big forever dirt nap.
Posted by Drew458
on 03/21/2012 at 03:56 PM
Filed Under: • Environment • Government • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • Miscellaneous •
• Comments (1)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Saturday - February 25, 2012
Sharia In PA
Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright
Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
- Dylan Thomas, Do Not Go Gentle Into That Good Night
A CALL TO ACTION
Peiper’s post yesterday about the judge in Pennsylvania who threw out an assault charge against a muslim because, as a mulsim himself, he apparently feels that mocking MoHamHead is a crime, isn’t drawing the kind of response I thought it would. Maybe Peiper writes too gently. Maybe he didn’t use quite the right quotations. I don’t know. Maybe it’s just too hard to leave a comment on this blog; I’ll try again to see what I can do about that.
My point is it that this is the most outrageous thing that has come down from a judge’s bench in quite a while, and you ought to be LIVID. What we had here was a simple case of assault, complete with a confession. Open. Shut. What we got was Sharia Law, one muzzie covering for another, denying that a crime even occurred, and a castigation of the complainant. This is no different than throwing out a rape case and reviling the woman because the way she dressed “was asking for it”. Do not stand for it. Not for a second.
What we have here is a judge who broke the rules:
- He is denying the priority of the 1st Amendment while paying scant lip service to it, and is setting boundaries on it that do not exist. We have Piss Christ as art, but Zombie Mohammed is an outrage and a crime? No way.
- He denied video tape evidence of the assault
- He denied testimony of the police officer involved
- He ignored the un-coerced confessional testimony of the assailant who freely admitted attacking the parade participant Mr. Perce (no relation to me, different spelling too)
- He ruthlessly castigated the aggrieved party in court, calling him a “dufus”
- He repeatedly refers to the act of physically satirizing the prophet as a crime, which in other lands is punishable by death.
- Foreign law has no business in an American court
- Such a satire is in no way shape or form a crime in the USA
A judge’s first duty is to the Constitution. Even if he’s just a little judge, a low level magistrate like this guy, Mark Martin, is, a man without a law degree.
Furthermore, now Mr. Perce is being threatened with a contempt of court charge by this same judge, for releasing an audio transcript of the trial, even though he said he had permission from the court to do so, and such a tape would be in the public domain anyway, because trial transcripts of any form are a matter of public record. WE DO NOT HAVE SECRET TRIALS IN THIS NATION.
People, it’s torches and pitchforks time. Judge Martin has to go. He has to be fired, de-benched, un-robed, and de-gaveled. I don’t care that the guy is a Repulican or if he’s a Marine veteran. The guy has no business being a judge. It isn’t even that he himself is a muslim. But at the very least, if his views on his religion are that skewed and that intense, then he ought to have recused himself. This is a gross and blatant miscarriage of justice; Strike One - you’re out!
There is no appeal for Mr. Perce, because that’s not how our judicial system works. The plaintiff doesn’t get a second shot, even when there is blatant impropriety. It’s only the accused who can appeal. But public outcry can demand an investigation, and a blackrobe who is in fact a greenrobe can get disrobed.
“That a Muslim immigrant can assault a United States citizen in defense of his religious beliefs and walk away a free man, while the victim is chastised and insulted by a Muslim judge who then blamed the victim for the crime committed against him is a horrible abrogation,” the posting reads. “ … I can promise you this, you have not heard the last of this issue. Not by a long shot.”
PLEASE read more about this case:
http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2012/02/warning-to-atheists-in-pennsylvania.html
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2012/02/pennslyvania-judge-enforces-sharia-muslim-attacks-chokes-moe-parade-goer-muslim-judge-rules-against-.html
http://juniperinthedesert.blogspot.com/2012/02/us-judge-applies-sharia-law-in.html
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/02/24/pennsylvania-judge-reportedly-dismisses-harassment-charge-against-zombie/
http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2012/02/23/pennsylvania-muslim-admits-attacking-atheist-muslim-judge-dismisses-case/#comment-70337
http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/211241.php
http://www.examiner.com/atheism-in-scranton/zombie-mohammad-ernest-perce-threatened-with-jail-for-releasing-audio-of-trial
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/02/why-we-need-anti-sharia-laws-muslim-judge-enforces-sharia-in-case-of-muslim-attacker-on-mocker-of-mu.html
Watch the videos and listen to the transcript. If you think that a gross wrong has been committed and that this judge has to go, then put your feelings into polite but firm words, checking the appropriate categories on the official form, and send them in:
complaint form: http://judicialconductboardofpa.org/filing-a-complaint/
Here is the address where you mail it:
The Court of Judicial Discipline of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
Pennsylvania Judicial Center
601 Commonwealth Avenue, Suite 5500
P.O. Box 62595, Harrisburg, PA 17106-2595
Phone: (717) 772-3771 • Fax: (717) 772-3774
It is time to draw a line in the sand. It is time to push back. Fight the cultural terrorism at all levels. Do not go gentle into that not so Good Night.
And the left and their MSM running dogs mock the red states who push for anti-Sharia laws. Eff that.
Posted by Drew458
on 02/25/2012 at 12:09 PM
Filed Under: • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • RoPMA •
• Comments (11)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Friday - February 24, 2012
muslim judge in USA upholds sharia …
H/T Doc Jeff and thanks for the heads up to the Gates of Vienna link.
Doc sent along a few items and it is timely indeed, since I also received the latest Pat Condell video on islam as cultural terrorism.
There is not a thing for me to add to Condell. He’s always right on this subject.
The link Doc Jeff sent is quite interesting. Seems a judge with a very American name who is muslim, has given the nod of approval to sharia law not so much in words as in actual deed. There is a video at the Gates ov Vienna.
Take a look at this. A good look.
If you do, you’ll find out that laws against assault no longer apply to any offended Muslim who might physically attack you.
There’s a word for this, and I think we all know it: Sharia.
Muslim Admits to Attacking Atheist; Muslim Judge Dismisses Case
By Al Stefanelli
The Pennsylvania State Director of American Atheists, Inc., Mr. Ernest Perce V., was assaulted by a Muslim while participating in a Halloween parade. Along with a Zombie Pope, Ernest was costumed as Zombie Muhammad. The assault was caught on video, the Muslim man admitted to his crime and charges were filed in what should have been an open-and-shut case. That’s not what happened, though.
The defendant is an immigrant and claims he did not know his actions were illegal, or that it was legal in this country to represent Muhammad in any form. To add insult to injury, he also testified that his 9 year old son was present, and the man said he felt he needed to show his young son that he was willing to fight for his Prophet.
The case went to trial, and as circumstances would dictate, Judge Mark Martin is also a Muslim. What transpired next was surreal. The Judge not only ruled in favor of the defendant, but called Mr. Perce a name and told him that if he were in a Muslim country, he’d be put to death. Judge Martin’s comments included,
“Having had the benefit of having spent over 2 and a half years in predominantly Muslim countries I think I know a little bit about the faith of Islam. In fact I have a copy of the Koran here and I challenge you sir to show me where it says in the Koran that Mohammad arose and walked among the dead. I think you misinterpreted things. Before you start mocking someone else’s religion you may want to find out a little bit more about it makes you look like a dufus and Mr. (Defendant) is correct. In many Arabic speaking countries something like this is definitely against the law there. In their society in fact it can be punishable by death and it frequently is in their society.
Judge Martin then offered a lesson in Islam, stating,
“Islam is not just a religion, it’s their culture, their culture. It’s their very essence their very being. They pray five times a day towards Mecca to be a good Muslim, before you die you have to make a pilgrimage to Mecca unless you are otherwise told you can not because you are too ill too elderly, whatever but you must make the attempt. Their greetings wa-laikum as-Salâm (is answered by voice) may god be with you. Whenever, it’s very common when speaking to each other it’s very common for them to say uh this will happen it’s it they are so immersed in it.
Judge Martin further complicates the issue by not only abrogating the First Amendment, but completely misunderstanding it when he said,
“Then what you have done is you have completely trashed their essence, their being. They find it very very very offensive. I’m a Muslim, I find it offensive. But you have that right, but you’re way outside your boundaries or first amendment rights. This is what, and I said I spent about 7 and a half years living in other countries. when we go to other countries it’s not uncommon for people to refer to us as ugly Americans this is why we are referred to as ugly Americans, because we are so concerned about our own rights we don’t care about other people’s rights as long as we get our say but we don’t care about the other people’s say”
Posted by peiper
on 02/24/2012 at 11:40 AM
Filed Under: • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • muslims • PAT CONDELL • RoPMA •
• Comments (5)
•
Trackbacks(0)
Permalink • Five Most Recent Trackbacks:
Once Again, The One And Only Post
(4 total trackbacks)
Tracked at iHaan.org
Thｅ advantage to having a guide with you is thɑt an expert will haѵe very first hand experience dealing and navigating the river with гegional wildlife. Tһomas, there are great…
On: 07/28/23 10:37
The Brownshirts: Partie Deux; These aare the Muscle We've Been Waiting For
(3 total trackbacks)
Tracked at head to the Momarms site
The Brownshirts: Partie Deux; These aare the Muscle We’ve Been Waiting For
On: 03/14/23 11:20
Vietnam Homecoming
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at 广告专题配音 专业从事中文配音跟外文配音制造，北京名传天下配音公司
专业从事中文配音和外文配音制作，北京名传天下配音公司 北京名传天下专业配音公司成破于2006年12月，是专业从事中 中文配音 文配音跟外文配音的音频制造公司，幻想飞腾配音网领 配音制作 有海内外优良专业配音职员已达500多位，可供给一流的外语配音，长年服务于国内中心级各大媒体、各省市电台电视台，能满意不同客户的各种需要。电话：010-83265555 北京名传天下专业配音公司…
On: 03/20/21 07:00
meaningless marching orders for a thousand travellers ... strife ahead ..
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at Casual Blog
[...] RTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPL [...]
On: 07/17/17 04:28
a small explanation
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at yerba mate gourd
Find here top quality how to prepare yerba mate without a gourd that's available in addition at the best price. Get it now!
On: 07/09/17 03:07
DISCLAIMER
THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.
Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:
It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.
- Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
- Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
- Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
- Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere
THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.
Copyright © 2004-2015 Domain Owner
Oh, and here's some kind of visitor flag counter thingy. Hey, all the cool blogs have one, so I should too. The Visitors Online thingy up at the top doesn't count anything, but it looks neat. It had better, since I paid actual money for it.
RSS 2.0 
Atom 
