Tuesday, January 08, 2008

Lawyer "Shocked and Distressed" by Magistrate's "Insensitivity and Unacceptable" Treatment of a 'Beniqabbed' Muslimah

For Refusing to Deal with the Case, the Magistrate is to Be Reprimanded and Given ‘Sensitivity Training’!

PhotobucketPhotobucket
Photos courtesy of the BBC

BBC: A magistrate has been reprimanded for refusing to deal with the case of a Muslim woman because she was wearing a veil covering her face.

Ian Murray walked out of court when Zoobia Hussain, 32, first appeared at Manchester Magistrates' Court in June.

Ms Hussain, from Crumpsall, who was accused of criminal damage, was wearing a veil covering her entire face.

The Office of Judicial Complaints said Mr Murray had been given a formal reprimand and further training.

He left the hearing without explaining why, but said later he felt the way Ms Hussain was dressed, in a niqab, raised identity issues.

The mother-of-five's lawyer, Judith Hawkins, said she was "shocked and distressed" by Mr Murray's "insensitive and unacceptable" treatment. Veil row magistrate reprimanded >>>

Mark Alexander (Paperback)
Mark Alexander (Hardback)

11 comments:

John Sobieski said...

It is beyond stupid to pay any respect for Islam and its stupid macabre treatment of women. You know I have zero respect for a woman who believes this veiling is guided by god. It is beyond stupid.

Mark said...

It is indeed beyond stupid! I couldn't agree with you more.

Anonymous said...

the irony is they are getting shorter end of the sticks back in their own muslim countries but they want to test human or religious rights in western courts.For example,in turkey veil/scarf is banned.

Of course it's about identity issue, the judge has the right to ask her to reveal identity .

Fred Savvy said...

Most women DO NOT wear the veil in Pakistan.
Why do they want to do it in UK?
This all started as a womens political statement as imposed by the male fraternity, within six months of 9-11 happening.
Before this time, it was quite rare to see even the hijab let alone the face veil.
Make no mistake, they are sticking atwo fingers up at the Western way of doing things, and our stupid human rights/PC laws protect them.
H.R is major study favorite at University, so we provide them with both the tools and the means to tell us to go to hell.
A Christmas prank got a young cop in Bedfordshire UK, sacked (forced to resign)when he gave a Muslim colleague a sealed packet of bacon and a bottle of booze at the Christmas party.
Instead of taking the joke, he got the copper kicked out!
Yet, go into any Muslim owned corner shop, and they will sell you any amount of alcohol and pork products. See, money out ways religion when a profit can be made.
We are dim-witted fools to take it.

Mark said...

Yes, Anonymous, the magistrate was QUITE right to ask her to remove her full veil. I agree 100%. Things are going from bad to worse in the UK these days; and not only in the UK too. The same phenomena can be seen everywhere in Western countries. It's as if we have lost our soul, lost our will to survive. It saddens any sane person's heart.

Mark said...

Fred Savvy:

You are so right in your assessment. And as you say, we are "dim-witted fools" to take it.

It's time we started saying NO, NO, NO to these people who are giving us the two fingers. We need to get TOUGH with them. We need to start making life uncomfortable for them. Then, they'll either shut up or beat it.

Anonymous said...

Magistrates are public spirited individuals who give up their own time to serve on the bench. It is becoming more and more difficult to recruit them, and this fiasco will not help.

During any hearing, the first duty of the court is to establish the identity of the accused. This is not possible if the accused is hidden from view.

During the course of the hearing, eye-witnesses are required to confirm their testimony by citing recognition of the accused. This also is not possible if the accused is hidden from view.

And it must be borne in mind, that subsequent to the hearing the accused will be in a position to claim that she was never in court at all, and the law has no means of proving otherwise. The result would be a mistrial.

The whole thing is just risible. I wouldn't be surprised if many magistrates resign from the bench.

Monty

Mark said...

Anonymous, I can only agree with you. I really do not understand what the authorities are thinking about with all of this nonsense. This is taking 'cultural sensitivity' to the Nth degree.

dave said...

if you can't wear a 'hoodie' in a shop or even on the street how can you wear a full face veil to court?

dave said...

when she was arrested for this offence did they take her picture?

dave said...

i'm going to walk about town with a letter box in front of my face, you know it makes sense. anyone who says it doesn't is being 'insensitive' and i will be 'shocked and distressed' at their 'unacceptable' point of view.