asylum seeker sex attacker goes down at last

#1
Asylum seeker sex attacker jailed

Mohammed served two years of a four year jail sentence
A Somali asylum seeker who was jailed for several sex attacks but was allowed to stay in Britain has been jailed indeterminately for a further attack.
Sadiq Mohammed, 32, was found guilty of abducting and sexually assaulting a girl of seven in Bristol in May 2006.

Mohammed, of Barton Hill, was jailed for four years in 2000 for indecently assaulting a 55-year-old woman and trying to attack two others.

He assaulted the girl four years after being released from jail.

Mohammed approached the girl as she was standing outside a corner shop with her eight-year-old sister.

He gave her sister £1 to go and by some sweets so he could be alone with the younger girl.

He then took her back to his flat where he sexually assaulted the girl and told her not to tell anyone or he would "beat her".

The victim only told her parents when she spotted him near a supermarket and said he was a "very bad man".

'Justice served'

He denied one charge of child abduction and assault, but the jury at Bristol Crown Court took just under an hour to find him guilty on both counts.

Speaking after the hearing the victim's father, who cannot be named for legal reasons, said he was relieved.

He said: "Justice has been served today. We are very glad about the verdict."

Mohammed arrived in Bristol from Somalia in 1990 and applied for asylum.

He was jailed for four years in 2000 for attacking three women including a 14-year-old girl, but was released halfway through his sentence.

At the time, Judge Lester Boothman recommended that he was deported after describing him as a danger to women and his "presence was detrimental to the country".

Commenting on why Mohammed had not been deported, a Home Office spokesman said: "Each case is considered on its individual merits in accordance to our international obligations and taking full account of conditions in the country concerned as they impact on the individual.

"We will only enforce return where we are satisfied that the individual concerned will not be at risk."
*****************************

so he wasn't at risk eh? Well, that's the main thing then. Shame about the rest of the community and his victims, of course.
 
#2
The problem here is not just the lack of deportation. There are rules for that and they are there for a reason, although sometimes I do not agree with them whole heartedly.

What strikes me is why he was let out half way through his sentence. I always thought this should only be done if they have been well behaved and are no longer a threat to society. Surely he had a psychiatric assessment?? This procedure really needs to be tightened especially in cases where the risk of attack is against a vulnerable person.

and ffs only 4 years in the first place for 4 sexual assaults including one on a child. The government really need to start reviewing their sentencing guidelines.
 
#4
The so-called threat to the safety of this disgusting individual, were he to be returned from whence he came, should be ignored when assessing his behaviour and the threat he poses to our population.
With this befuddled government acting as a farmyard of headless chickens, we, the tax-payers, are now saddled with tens of thousands of pounds to pay for the keep of this worthless criminal, instead of paying for a one-way ticket to Mogadishu. :frustrated:
 
#6
Barton Hill is the sort of place where I would like to take "do-gooders" and social workers. They would see a traditional working class ICD into which the powers that be injected a monolithic ethnic minority in considerable numbers. To add insult to injury they injected them predominantly into one tower block. Talk about "Instant ghetto, add water"...

Now walking the streets there is a bit hazardous if you are white, female and infirm either through age or disposition. My ganger lives there and last summer while he was making tea at five, heard a woman being attacked by three..yes..you've guessed it...Somalis. She was on her way to work, decent girl from Poland. big Tommy andf his equally large son Paul wired into these guests in our fair land.

They threatened to come back with an AK as they ran off. Less the one that Tom and Paul detained for later transfer to police custody...
 
#7
This is disgusting. Anybody who claims asylum should be deported on being sentenced or completing a sentence for certain (if not any) criminal offence. I don't give a damn about the criminals safety or risk if returned to their country of origin! If someone is truly in need of asylum the least they can do is obey the laws of the country that is kind enough to take them in and offer them the safety they seek. If they can't manage to behave they were obviously not that bothered and deserve no sympathy or mercy!
 
#8
Apparently this geyser has never even seen Somalia, some of his family originally came from there, he is from Kenya. but he knows that Somalia is a much better place to claim asylum from..........
 
#9
Horridlittleman said:
This is disgusting. Anybody who claims asylum should be deported on being sentenced or completing a sentence for certain (if not any) criminal offence. I don't give a damn about the criminals safety or risk if returned to their country of origin! If someone is truly in need of asylum the least they can do is obey the laws of the country that is kind enough to take them in and offer them the safety they seek. If they can't manage to behave they were obviously not that bothered and deserve no sympathy or mercy!
seems fair ...it could well be that he is in danger in his own country for committing the same crime there
(can't be bothered with grammar but you should get the drift ...)
 
#10
Brads_REME said:
Apparently this geyser has never even seen Somalia, some of his family originally came from there, he is from Kenya. but he knows that Somalia is a much better place to claim asylum from..........
Either way if he's committed a crime and were to be deported to Somalia he could just have signed his own death warrant - what a shame, oh diddums! The dirty filthy rapist should have thougght about that before he abused the hospitality of his host country. Unfortunately our waste of space government won't do anything for fear of upsetting all of the hand wringing do gooders!
 
#11
Yes but the leftie hand wringers will ensure he cant be deported do to his "country" being unsafe just how long will he serve then back out to do it again lets just hope he gets the beating of his worthless life inside
 
#12
brettarider said:
Yes but the leftie hand wringers will ensure he cant be deported do to his "country" being unsafe just how long will he serve then back out to do it again lets just hope he gets the beating of his worthless life inside
As a convicted child rapist I don't think he'll be making any friends - apart from in the nonces wing!
 
#13
Horridlittleman said:
This is disgusting. Anybody who claims asylum should be deported on being sentenced or completing a sentence for certain (if not any) criminal offence. I don't give a damn about the criminals safety or risk if returned to their country of origin! If someone is truly in need of asylum the least they can do is obey the laws of the country that is kind enough to take them in and offer them the safety they seek. If they can't manage to behave they were obviously not that bothered and deserve no sympathy or mercy!
Seconded
 
#14
Thirded, but the bleeding hearts always come out with the argument that "he was forced into criminal activity because the hand-outs he got weren't sufficient for him to live on". The problem is that the bleeding hearts are always more vociferous and have the ear of the politicos and the fuzzy minded society which years of social experimenting has produced.
 
#15
Horridlittleman said:
Either way if he's committed a crime and were to be deported to Somalia he could just have signed his own death warrant - what a shame, oh diddums! The dirty filthy rapist should have thougght about that before he abused the hospitality of his host country.
I absolutely agree. Any foreign criminal should be deported on completion of their sentence. No exceptions and no appeal, even if they are considered to be in danger in their home country.

If that is made clear to all immigrants and asylum seekers, then by committing a crime they can be deemed to have accepted all the potential consequences of their actions, even if it means going back to a country where they might be killed. Then the principle of volenti non fit injuria (to a willing person, no injury is done) would apply, which means that a person who knowingly and willingly puts himself in a dangerous situation has no legal recourse against the consequences.
 
#16
Boy,he was from Barton Hill eh! Must have changed a bit since the days that I visited the Bristol side of the family who lived in Corbett Street. All highly polished red doorsteps with polished black stones to keep the front door open in warm weather. Greeted with "'Ow bist then Plymouth?"
 
#17
Compare the case of the child rapist with that of a family who were seeking asylum but not committing any criminal activity - BBC news story about a family being deported to Pakistan.

Now while I am sure the IND and the home office have their reasons to remove this family but why is the oxygen thief child raping "Somalian" still here!

Please don't believe that I am going all soft and fluffy, after all the father of the Pakistani family was a human rights lawyer and we don't need any more of them here! However it does show that we have our priorities wrong when we keep criminals here who will be nothing but a drain on society yet remove those who will more than likely have a positive input to our economy!
 
#18
Horridlittleman said:
... after all the father of the Pakistani family was a human rights lawyer and we don't need any more of them here!
Horridlittleman said:
... However it does show that we have our priorities wrong when we keep criminals here who will be nothing but a drain on society yet remove those who will more than likely have a positive input to our economy!
Bit of a contradiction there. You're saying we don't need any more human rights lawyers, but that they'll have a positive input to our economy. Since when did any lawyer have a positive effect to anyone's economy other than their own and the people they represent?
 
#19
SC, it was a tongue in cheek remark. As much as we may dislike the way some human rights lawyers go about their business they are not generally child rapists! He will have earned his money in a legal manner without sticking his bits inside a young girl. He will have probably even paid his TV licence instead of being given one for free in prison!

The be all and end all is a lawyer will generally pay more into the country than they receive in benefits. They will certainly contribute more financially and morally than a child raping asylum seeker! Although in a cruel twist of fate may well end up defending the very rights of the scum we would rather have deported!
 

Top