7.12.13 The Latest Example - Somali Rapist

Here's yet another example, as if one were needed, of how completely fucked up the UK is.  Mustafa Abdullahi held a knife to a pregnant woman's throat while he repeatedly raped her in 2007.  He was jailed for ten years for the rape, during which he threatened to kill the woman.  Ten years is hardly much good. The 31-year-old in effect got a five-year sentence, though, because no one serves any sentence in full these days.

As awful as the attack itself has been the utter uselessness of the system, and in the UK today, there seems to be no real sense of justice, proper outcomes or an ounce of common sense - let alone what the people of the UK expect from institutions.  It is against this backdrop and these flaws that individual judges absolutely delight in coming up with pathetic and cuntish rulings that challenge government and stick a finger up at the rest of us.  Some of these judges get their kicks from pissing about on purpose, and deciding that a criminal has greater rights than victims.

So, will the Somali rapist be deported?  No.  Judges have ruled that he can't be kicked out of the country because that would breach his right to a private and family life.  Yes, despite having no children, he has a mother and siblings in the UK, so that is seemingly a basis for him to be allowed to stay.  I'd suggest that he can fuck off, and that his family members will either blank him (which would surely be a sensible approach, and which they may do anyway) or visit him back in Somalia if they are inclined to have anything to do with him.  Why does Abdullahi have to stay in the UK then?  He has abused the opportunity offered to him after arrival in the UK in 2003, so why does the UK fail to take proper action?  All down to EU law and cuntish judges, that's why!

He refused to accept his guilt, and made the woman in yer twenties go through the ordeal of the trial.  He was quick enough to engage when the Home Office stated the process of deporting him, claiming asylum.  It seems the rejection of the claim was challenged under human rights legislation by lawyers.  I have no time for lawyers who have no morals or conscience; yes, I know people are supposed to have an advocate and a right to a lawyer, but so often it's simply about cunts getting paid for getting cunts off of a charge and/or out of prison. There seems a basis to appeal for just about everything, until the target result is achieved.  The system also seemed to thing that while Abdullahi was on probation, smoking cannabis was not worth bothering with in terms of the breaking of bail conditions, and so a £60 fine was okay.

Mustafa apparently needs antidepressants and therapy (from the NHS of course) and so sending him back to Somalia would be unfair.  This together with the need to stay in contact with family members and receive emotional support seems to have been the main thrust of the argument under Article 8 of the Human Rights Act.  In allowing him to stay, the perverse judgement included the comment: "Although he has committed serious offences, he has at last faced up to what he has done and has taken significant steps to put behind him that type of criminal behaviour."  WTF?  So all's well in the end then, eh?

PS: As an aside, I saw in the news a couple of days ago a woman (coincidentally also from Somalia) who'd claimed £91,000 in benefits totally fraudulently, after producing false identity details upon arrival in the UK.  It was evidently her right to fleece the system of money and housing benefits, but the courts were useless on multiple occasions in dealing with her.  The latest news included the fact that she won't be paying anything back at all, something endorsed by the fucking judge!  This country is cuntin' fucked up!

...