A foreign rapist branded a 'danger to women' has been allowed to stay in the UK – because he might not be given proper medical treatment in his home country.
Joachim Cardos, 43, was an illegal immigrant in Edinburgh and dealing drugs when he raped a woman at knifepoint and left her fearing for her life. After serving a jail sentence for what a judge described as a 'violent and persistent' attack that had a 'devastating' impact on his victim, he was ordered to be sent back to his native Gambia.
But of course, there's always a 'human rights' argument to be made, with taxpayer money, of course!
In a move that justice campaigners have called 'an insult to his victim', an immigration tribunal ruled in favour of letting Cardos remain in the UK. Last night critics said the case showed the immigration system was putting the rights of foreign criminals ahead of public safety or the feelings of victims.
I think they believe that's their actual role...
The Home Secretary appealed the decision but the challenge was rejected last month. Justice Dame Henrietta Hill said: 'The Secretary of State for the Home Department fails to establish any proper basis to interfere with the decision.'
Wouldn't it be terrible if the judges who take these decisions were refused service everywhere, and shunned by the people who pay their wages? If they won't protect society, why should society protect them?
5 comments:
Who says there's no profit in crime? A man who raped a woman and put in fear of her life only served half of his sentence as it was reduced FOR GOOD BEHAVIOUR as soon as the prison van went through the gates. A (tax payer funded) brief persuaded some legal numpty that the taxpayer (you know, that group with the bottomless pockets) now has to fund his life style, pay for his accommodation, his money from Universal Credit, and the services of some left wing social worker who will spend her time telling him he's the victim (though don't wear short skirts, love).
This government has turned into the Frankfurt School twinned with the Monster Raving Loony Party. No wonder these invaders keep wanting to come here.
Penseivat
I'm always amazed that victims of crimes have no relatives who are prepared for vigilante action.
" . . twinned with the Monster Raving Loony Party"
I think you're being rather unfair to the MRLP. Nothing in their manifestos plumbs the depths of utter craziness reached by the Frankfurt School.
Have a look sometime at the reports from the Asylum and Immigration tribunal cases and despair - there are a lot of cases where the home sec is trying to deport people (in one case a rapist given over 9 years in jail) but the cases always seem to fail as the courts got concerned as to whether the criminal will have somewhere to live or be destitute or have the appropriate care for their mental health issues - although of course some have children and apparently deporting the criminal (according to the independent social worker) will have a bad effect on the child who has hardly seen the parent in several years and often "human rights" under section 8 get invoked as a magical talisman
You'd think with such a large majority it would be relatively simple to get a simple process - single sentence (actual or suspended) of 3 or more years or accumulate 4 or more years in 20 and deportation is automatic - no court intervention
"Who says there's no profit in crime? "
Not me, anymore.
"I'm always amazed that victims of crimes have no relatives who are prepared for vigilante action."
I'm amazed we never saw any at the height of the covid madness, frankly.
"I think you're being rather unfair to the MRLP. Nothing in their manifestos plumbs the depths of utter craziness reached by the Frankfurt School."
Good point!
"you'd think with such a large majority it would be relatively simple to get a simple process..."
Until we rid ourselves of that fifth column we've allowed to infest all out institutiobs, a large majority means little...
Post a Comment