political commentator * author * publisher * bookseller * radio presenter * blogger * Conservative candidate * former lobbyist * Jack Russell owner * West Ham United fanatic * Email iain AT iaindale DOT com
Thursday, December 09, 2010
Deporting's Too Good For Him
So the son of a Tunisian diplomat has been given a suspended six week jail sentence of kicking and punching a labrador puppy more than twenty times.
Some may hope the same thing happens to him, so he then knows how it feels.
But the real question is why is this lame excuse for a human being still in the country? Why isn't he being deported?
Because U-turn Dave won't act on his manifesto promise to get rid of the human rights act that allows all manner of unwanted scumbags to remain here ad infinitum.
Time and time again, the thing that sickens me the most is not the things that evil people do necessarily. It’s the meek ‘punishments’ handed out by the so called justice system.
Having been the victim of crime before I can confirm I will never bother calling the police again. The perpetrators will get token fine or an imaginary sentence. It’s just not worth pretending we have a justice system. Next time I will just sort out the matter privately, another middle class person who has lost all faith in the system and would now rather pay for things to be settled by ‘freelance enforcement consultants’ shall we call them.
Of all the ministers (including Vince Cable) the one I really can’t stand is Ken Clarke. Hang the deficit; I would be prepared to see my insane taxes remain high for several years yet, if we tripled the number of prisons and got some proper policing done. Alas, the criminal classes get to run wild while the liberals in our ‘justice system’ wring their hands.
You cannot deport anyone under human rights acts. Extradition is another thing altogether. If another European country wants you, they get you thanks to Dave.
Cultural differences Iain. Afterall we do have to bend over backwards to accomodate the diverse cultures that inhabit and enrich this country. Also I suspect a touch of diplomatic immunity might have had an influence in decisions. Not that the FCO couldn't have made a declaration of "persona non gratia". As ever we are seen as easy and malleable and suspectable to bullying and threats, if not indifference and a casual disregard.
Frankly I refer us all to:- Dick the butcher in Henry VI Part 2Act 4, scene 4 71-78.
"U-turn Dave won't act on his manifesto promise to get rid of the human rights act that allows all manner of unwanted scumbags to remain here ad infinitum."
"You cannot deport anyone under human rights acts."
"Its 'is 'uman rights ... innit?"
Has anyone got any evidence at all that the Human Rights Act has been mentioned or cited by anyone involved in this case? Has the Government tried to deport him and been prevented from doing so by the HRA? Has Mr Scumbag's lawyer said "you can't deport him because of his human rights"? Did the magistrate say "Gosh, I wish I could chuck you out of the country but my hands are tied by the human rights act"?
Anyone?
Didn't think so.
Iain, if you really want to know why he's not being deported a good place to start would probably be the Home Office press office. I imagine they'd respond to a question from yourself far more quickly than one from a regular member of the public. If they won't discuss individual cases, perhaps you could find out whether diplomatic immunity rules prevent the deportation of diplomts' offspring.
Or are you not actually interested in the truth and just wanted to stir things up a bit?
If he is at as a son of a Diplomat serving in this country or the EU he would have been subject to Diplomatic Immunity so all credit to the Tunisians in presumably waiving his protection.
All the Foreign Office needs to do is to declare him persona non grata
I assume he does not have diplomatic immunity, otherwise he couldn't have been brought to court and sentenced. The magistrates say it was because he is in full-time education, but apparently Manchester University may suspend him anyway as he now has a criminal conviction. This doesn't have anything to do with human rights legislation - it must be a typical sentence for this type of offence presumably, or else the mags are just (as they so often are) a bit soft up there.
I would be interested to hear though why as Conservatives some of you are against human rights in general terms? Quite strange. Or are you just a bit confused? Which human rights specifically do you want to see withdrawn?
I can never understand why people doinmg things like this animals get banned fror keeping a pet for a few years, surely there should be a life ban on ever having a pet or working with animals? There could be some appeal system so they could get it cancelled after many years but they would have to make a very good case (and cover all legal costs of the appeal).
Because as the child of someone with diplomatic immunity he has diplomatic immunity and thus cannot be deported (yes, children still in full time education are routinely assigned their parent's diplomatic status).
He could be declared "persona non grata" but that's something of an escalation.
Do not forget one very important point: given that he's already got diplomatic immunity it shouldn't have been possible to prosecute him in the first place. In order to do so he has (or more likely the Ambassador has waived on his behalf) waived his immunity and it's entirely common again in such cases that the punishment will be whatever is right an proper in court for a national of that country: but then no further action be taken.
As an example, I was had up for a driving offence (trivial but still) while a teenager with diplomatic immunity in the US. I could have, if I really really wanted to, insisted that "you can't touch me". This would have led to the persona non grata bit, my never being able to go to the US again (nor, likely, ever work for the UK govt) and very much a block on my father's career.
Or, I could go to court, get points on my licence, pay the few $ hundred fine and that would be that, I would NOT have a deportable or visa influencing offence on my record.
That's really part of the deal: we don't deport people with immunity after conviction because getting them to waive immunity in the first place, so they can be tried, is done by threatening them with exclusion from the country.
No explicit mention that he's a muslim, I notice. They hate dogs; well, they hate everything. But this is just another example of these 'people' behaving worse than animals.
john in cheshire said: "No explicit mention that he's a muslim, I notice. They hate dogs; well, they hate everything. But this is just another example of these 'people' behaving worse than animals."
I loathe this individual and his cowardly actions. I wouldn't lose any sleep if he received the battering of his life. However, explaining this behaviour by the rather insidious 'they hate everything' says more about you than it does the dog beater.
I feel obliged to point out that not all Muslims are extremist, women hating dog bashers. I'd goes as far to say that there are more instances of animal cruelty carried out in the UK by us whiteys than by Muslims.
Iain, I don't mean to be a politically correct ar5e, but I'm surprised you let the ravings of a blatantly racist hater through moderation.
I saw a reference to his father travelling TO this country for the trial; my impression is that while this offender is the son of "a diplomat", he is not necessarily the son of someone currently holding diplomatic immunity here. He may well be here on a regular student visa, unconnected to his father's job, in which case diplomatic immunity doesn't come in to it.
I'd be more than happy to see him kicked out of the country immediately; indeed, I'd like to see that made automatic for any crime of violence or carrying a custodial sentence. We have plenty of our own criminals without importing more from other countries, thank you!
So you'd prefer to pick me up on the semantics of racism/bigotry/prejudice/xenophobia than object to 1 billion muslims being described as 'worse than animals'? I think that tell us all we need to know about your moral position.
And what is it about my objection to the above that makes me a "far left ultra PC dhimmi wingnut"? I'm a Tory - that's why I read this blog. I just can't stand the mindless intolerance expressed in 'john''s comment. It's because I'm a Conservative that I find prejudice, in whatever guise, offensive.
May I politely suggest that I am not the wingnut here.
Because U-turn Dave won't act on his manifesto promise to get rid of the human rights act that allows all manner of unwanted scumbags to remain here ad infinitum.
ReplyDeletewho is the scumbag lets out him and put his name out there, id like to kick and punch him 20 times... and i hurt when i punch.
ReplyDeleteDiplomatic immunity?
ReplyDeleteTime and time again, the thing that sickens me the most is not the things that evil people do necessarily. It’s the meek ‘punishments’ handed out by the so called justice system.
ReplyDeleteHaving been the victim of crime before I can confirm I will never bother calling the police again. The perpetrators will get token fine or an imaginary sentence. It’s just not worth pretending we have a justice system. Next time I will just sort out the matter privately, another middle class person who has lost all faith in the system and would now rather pay for things to be settled by ‘freelance enforcement consultants’ shall we call them.
Of all the ministers (including Vince Cable) the one I really can’t stand is Ken Clarke. Hang the deficit; I would be prepared to see my insane taxes remain high for several years yet, if we tripled the number of prisons and got some proper policing done. Alas, the criminal classes get to run wild while the liberals in our ‘justice system’ wring their hands.
Come on, Iain, you aren't naive. You know why.
ReplyDeleteYou cannot deport anyone under human rights acts. Extradition is another thing altogether. If another European country wants you, they get you thanks to Dave.
ReplyDeleteLet's see if he is subjected to the same chorus of moral indignation as Mary Bale.
ReplyDeleteNot holding my breath.
Let's see if he's subjected to the same chorus of moral outrage as Mary Bale.
ReplyDeleteI'm not holding my breath.
"Some may hope the same thing happens to him, so he then knows how it feels."
ReplyDeleteIdeally if he could be punched by a giant labrador, that would be particularly memorable.
Its 'is 'uman rights ... innit?
ReplyDeleteAt the end of your post you ask "why isn't he being deported?" The title of your post is "Deporting is too good for him!"
ReplyDeleteEr????
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1336796/Diplomats-son-Mohammed-Abou-Sabaa-battered-labrador-puppy-CCTV.html
ReplyDeleteName, pictures, location, which is handy.
Cultural differences Iain. Afterall we do have to bend over backwards to accomodate the diverse cultures that inhabit and enrich this country.
ReplyDeleteAlso I suspect a touch of diplomatic immunity might have had an influence in decisions. Not that the FCO couldn't have made a declaration of "persona non gratia".
As ever we are seen as easy and malleable and suspectable to bullying and threats, if not indifference and a casual disregard.
Frankly I refer us all to:-
Dick the butcher in Henry VI Part 2Act 4, scene 4 71-78.
"U-turn Dave won't act on his manifesto promise to get rid of the human rights act that allows all manner of unwanted scumbags to remain here ad infinitum."
ReplyDelete"You cannot deport anyone under human rights acts."
"Its 'is 'uman rights ... innit?"
Has anyone got any evidence at all that the Human Rights Act has been mentioned or cited by anyone involved in this case? Has the Government tried to deport him and been prevented from doing so by the HRA? Has Mr Scumbag's lawyer said "you can't deport him because of his human rights"? Did the magistrate say "Gosh, I wish I could chuck you out of the country but my hands are tied by the human rights act"?
Anyone?
Didn't think so.
Iain, if you really want to know why he's not being deported a good place to start would probably be the Home Office press office. I imagine they'd respond to a question from yourself far more quickly than one from a regular member of the public. If they won't discuss individual cases, perhaps you could find out whether diplomatic immunity rules prevent the deportation of diplomts' offspring.
Or are you not actually interested in the truth and just wanted to stir things up a bit?
If he is at as a son of a Diplomat serving in this country or the EU he would have been subject to Diplomatic Immunity so all credit to the Tunisians in presumably waiving his protection.
ReplyDeleteAll the Foreign Office needs to do is to declare him persona non grata
I assume he does not have diplomatic immunity, otherwise he couldn't have been brought to court and sentenced. The magistrates say it was because he is in full-time education, but apparently Manchester University may suspend him anyway as he now has a criminal conviction. This doesn't have anything to do with human rights legislation - it must be a typical sentence for this type of offence presumably, or else the mags are just (as they so often are) a bit soft up there.
ReplyDeleteI would be interested to hear though why as Conservatives some of you are against human rights in general terms? Quite strange. Or are you just a bit confused? Which human rights specifically do you want to see withdrawn?
I can never understand why people doinmg things like this animals get banned fror keeping a pet for a few years, surely there should be a life ban on ever having a pet or working with animals? There could be some appeal system so they could get it cancelled after many years but they would have to make a very good case (and cover all legal costs of the appeal).
ReplyDeleteBut, as a foreigner, he should be deported.
Because as the child of someone with diplomatic immunity he has diplomatic immunity and thus cannot be deported (yes, children still in full time education are routinely assigned their parent's diplomatic status).
ReplyDeleteHe could be declared "persona non grata" but that's something of an escalation.
Do not forget one very important point: given that he's already got diplomatic immunity it shouldn't have been possible to prosecute him in the first place. In order to do so he has (or more likely the Ambassador has waived on his behalf) waived his immunity and it's entirely common again in such cases that the punishment will be whatever is right an proper in court for a national of that country: but then no further action be taken.
As an example, I was had up for a driving offence (trivial but still) while a teenager with diplomatic immunity in the US. I could have, if I really really wanted to, insisted that "you can't touch me". This would have led to the persona non grata bit, my never being able to go to the US again (nor, likely, ever work for the UK govt) and very much a block on my father's career.
Or, I could go to court, get points on my licence, pay the few $ hundred fine and that would be that, I would NOT have a deportable or visa influencing offence on my record.
That's really part of the deal: we don't deport people with immunity after conviction because getting them to waive immunity in the first place, so they can be tried, is done by threatening them with exclusion from the country.
Sounds as if the country is going to the dogs.
ReplyDeleteNo explicit mention that he's a muslim, I notice. They hate dogs; well, they hate everything. But this is just another example of these 'people' behaving worse than animals.
ReplyDeleteBecause Dave and his cronies are just as feeble as their predecessors at dealing with the law, rather than justice.
ReplyDeletejohn in cheshire said: "No explicit mention that he's a muslim, I notice. They hate dogs; well, they hate everything. But this is just another example of these 'people' behaving worse than animals."
ReplyDeleteI loathe this individual and his cowardly actions. I wouldn't lose any sleep if he received the battering of his life. However, explaining this behaviour by the rather insidious 'they hate everything' says more about you than it does the dog beater.
I feel obliged to point out that not all Muslims are extremist, women hating dog bashers. I'd goes as far to say that there are more instances of animal cruelty carried out in the UK by us whiteys than by Muslims.
Iain, I don't mean to be a politically correct ar5e, but I'm surprised you let the ravings of a blatantly racist hater through moderation.
"Has anyone got any evidence at all that the Human Rights Act has been mentioned or cited by anyone involved in this case?"
ReplyDeleteSince when has that been a prerequisite? You'll be insisting they read it next.
"Iain, I don't mean to be a politically correct ar5e, but I'm surprised you let the ravings of a blatantly racist hater through moderation."
ReplyDeleteAs has been pointed out countless times by countless people MUSLIM ISN'T A RACE.
Perhaps he should also moderate the ravings of far left ultra PC dhimmi wingnuts.
I saw a reference to his father travelling TO this country for the trial; my impression is that while this offender is the son of "a diplomat", he is not necessarily the son of someone currently holding diplomatic immunity here. He may well be here on a regular student visa, unconnected to his father's job, in which case diplomatic immunity doesn't come in to it.
ReplyDeleteI'd be more than happy to see him kicked out of the country immediately; indeed, I'd like to see that made automatic for any crime of violence or carrying a custodial sentence. We have plenty of our own criminals without importing more from other countries, thank you!
@Norton Folgate
ReplyDeleteSo you'd prefer to pick me up on the semantics of racism/bigotry/prejudice/xenophobia than object to 1 billion muslims being described as 'worse than animals'? I think that tell us all we need to know about your moral position.
And what is it about my objection to the above that makes me a "far left ultra PC dhimmi wingnut"? I'm a Tory - that's why I read this blog. I just can't stand the mindless intolerance expressed in 'john''s comment. It's because I'm a Conservative that I find prejudice, in whatever guise, offensive.
May I politely suggest that I am not the wingnut here.
We have enough dross of our own. WHY do they keep on allowing the dross of every other nation to stay here?
ReplyDelete