The Aged P

A deeply unpleasant and worrying story emanating from Burnley and Lancashire County Council.

Receptionist Mahdiya Khan accessed a computer database 60 times to get details of a child sex victim. She was jailed for eight months, but details have only just emerged. Three men have also been found guilty of interfering in the case.

She happened to be the “girl friend” of Mohammed Imran Amjad, 26, who was under investigation for grooming and abusing a 14 year old girl and lending her out for others in his circle to sexually assault.It’s a shocking story but merely the latest in a whole series of cases where Muslim men, usually of Pakistani descent, have groomed underage white schoolgirls and turned them into sex slaves.

However, apart from the obvious tragedy of a serious sex crime  there are a number of other issues arising from this story that give cause for concern.

This case was decided quite a while ago but the details have only come out in the last few days – now why would that be?

It also appears that of the national media only The Daily Mail and BBC published the story – did the others think it of less importance than Simon Cowell’s “lovechild” or Miley Cyrus’s “twerking?

Apart from Amjad several other men were brought to trial but they were freed after the girl said the sex was consensual. But by definition children under 16 cannot give their consent for sex –  it is automatically a form of rape. So why did the courts allow these men to walk away?

A receptionist (not a social worker) can access highly sensitive data sixty times with nothing being flagged? Why were there no safeguards in place – and what does this tell us about all the other databases used by public services? No wonder people are getting so concerned about who will have access to our files.

This information was then used to intimidate the girl and her family into keeping their mouths shut.

Three other people connected to Amjad had also attempted to interfere with the case.His cousin Waqas Khalid threatened to rape the victim and her mother. His friend Qasim Hussain persuaded her to change her statement. His brother, Furqan Amjad, contacted the victim 350 times

Attempting to pervert the course of justice by intimidation and/or bribery show a contempt for the law that deserves exemplary punishment – yet Furqan Amjad was jailed for 15 months, Khalid was fined £300 and Hussain will be sentenced next week.

Oh, and remember receptionist Mahdiya Khan was given eight months in prison – which means she is probably out already.

There is a nasty smell about this whole affair….

Abu Qatada, the Jihadist hate preacher who hates our country and its culture of democracy so much is still fighting his deportation order to Jordan despite even the Kafa-esque European Court of Human Rights saying he could go. He is making an appeal to the ECHR via a very expensive lawyer (naturally – after all he is one of our privileged elite, living on benefits and thus subsidised by we the taxpayers) and asked for bail.

IT WAS REFUSED!!!!!!!

I’d love to say that Theresa May, the Home Secretary, backed by a former PR man for a failed TV company (aka David Cameron) had suddenly discovered spines and said don’t give him bail because we are going to bundle him onto a military plane and fly him to Amman, economy class with handcuffs within two hours at the same time we send the ECHR a message saying “Whoops, sorry but you can stuff your decisions where the monkey keeps his nuts….come back in a thousand years when your legal system is as mature as ours”

Unfortunately that wasn’t the reason..

It was because if he was given bail it might upset the Olympics…

That’s right folks – we have to allow these Britain haters plenty of elbow room to facilitate their “rights” to encourage vicious scumbags to blow us up but when it comes to interfering with a festival of sweaty over hyped narcissists strutting their stuff at the public ‘s expense (and that’s just the politicians and celebrities) even an al Qaeda groupie must stay banged up.

No wonder they despise us and think we lack the will to resist – I sometimes think they may be right…..

Bruce McQuain at Hot Air posted an eloquent and powerful deconstruction of a recent decision of the Indiana Supreme Court

Overturning a common law dating back to the English Magna Carta of 1215, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Hoosiers have no right to resist unlawful police entry into their homes.
The author of the story reporting this is right – somehow the ISC managed, in one fell swoop, to overturn almost 900 years of precedent, going back to the Magna Carta.
In a 3-2 decision, Justice Steven David writing for the court said if a police officer wants to enter a home for any reason or no reason at all, a homeowner cannot do anything to block the officer’s entry. [emphasis mine]

Although Magna Carta (1215) did not stop subsequent medieval kings of England from sometimes acting in a coercive way it was important in that, for the first time, an English king signed a document publicly recognising that his powers were limited by the law.
Of course the barons and prelates who gathered on Runnymede to force King John to sign were mindful of their own privileges and had little concern for the ordinary folk. Nevertheless, from the 16th century, as the position of the commons in parliament became more influential, the rights enshrined in Magna Carta began to have greater resonance. By the time of the early 17th century, in the decades leading up to the English Civil War between King and Parliament the document had assumed a degree of symbolic significance far beyond the original intentions of the baronial clique that had authored it.

Most of the original clauses no longer remain statute law, having been replaced or updated as an adaption to changing circumstances but three clauses still remain as statutes, including this, probably one of the most stirring and majestic proclamations of freedom of all time – not because it burns with fierce oratory but it’s plain matter of fact bluntness in setting out the boundaries of executive authority

No freeman is to be taken or imprisoned or disseised of his free tenement or of his liberties or free customs, or outlawed or exiled or in any way ruined, nor will we go against such a man or send against him save by lawful judgement of his peers or by the law of the land. To no-one will we sell or deny of delay right or justice.

Perhaps a visit to Runnymede would give the justices of the Indiana Supreme Court an opportunity to reflect on the reason why the framers of the US constitution were men who had the imagery of Magna Carta burnt into their very souls…

Magna Carta memorial at Runnymede