Imagine if you will that you are a Judge and you have before you a scroaty teenager who has admitted entering a mosque at night, smashing the windows,letting off fire extinquishers and scrawling graffiti on the walls? What do you think, putting yourself in the position of a very modern British Judge, the sentence would be?
If the damage was between £5000 and £10,000 then you’d be looking at a minimum of a high level community order or a twelve week custodial sentence. Add in the fact that the offender had committed criminal damage that could be seen as having racial or religious motivations behind it and the starting point for sentencing, according to the sentencing guidelines would be six months gaol.
Unfortunately these sentencing guidelines seem to be thrown out of the window when the boot is on the other foot and the offender is a Muslim and the criminal damage is done to a church. In that case the well known and much despised ‘Muslim double standard’ comes into play with regards sentencing. This is what we have seen in a recently reported case of a Muslim teenager who has been sentenced for desecrating a church in Bradford. The Muslim in question, Muhammed Mughal, 18, walked away from Bradford Crown Court with little more than a 12 month community order for his part in an attack on a church by a gang of youths.
The Bradford Telegraph and Argus said:
A teenager who was warned by a judge that he was at risk of going to custody for his part in “mindless vandalism” that desecrated a church has been sentenced to a 12-month community order.
Muhammed Mughal, 18, pleaded guilty at an earlier hearing to criminal damage at All Saints Church, Highfield Lane, Keighley, on December 3 last year.
Mughal, of Cliffe Street, Keighley, was one of a group of youths who did £200 damage to the church, prosecutor Philip Adams told Bradford Crown Court.
This sentence is to me plainly not enough. As I said if the boot was on the other foot and it had been a mosque that was attacked in a similar manner then this savage would have been looking at significant gaol time. I also don’t buy the prosecution’s claim that only £200 damage had been done. £75 – £200 is what it costs for someone qualified to come out to repair one window and the cost of cleaning up the fire extinguisher damage and graffiti would add much more to that bill. I would not be surprised if the prosecution suppressed the amount of damage to take it out of the level that would put it into the custodial level in order to avoid a trial. £200 damage – my arse it is.
The Telegraph and Argus added:
The damage included daubing graffiti on the walls, damaging doors, breaking windows and letting off fire extinguishers. A machete the intruders found in the church kitchen was used in course of the offence and found to have Mughal’s DNA on it, Mr Adams said.
As I said earlier, the level of damage here looks much more than £200.
The teenager’s barrister, Peter Byrne, stated at the previous hearing that he was 17 at the time with no previous convictions.
If the situation was reversed and it was a non-Muslim teen with a clean record admitting vandalising a mosque, do you think that in that situation the person would be walking from court? I don’t think so.
Mughal had been on a college course last year, but health problems had forced him to leave his studies.
I wonder what ‘health problems’ they were? After all he was healthy enough to engage in a bit of vandalism.
Mr Adams said that the vicar, the Rev Jonathan Pritchard, wanted some form of restorative justice from those responsible. He was keen to sit down with the perpetrators to discuss their crime.
I also can’t help but wonder where the Reverend Pritchard’s motivation for ‘restorative justice’ is coming from? Is it from his Christian faith or is it that he is worried that if he goes too hard on the Muslims by not going down this route and not calling for ‘restorative justice’ then his church will be targetted again? We do not know but the Rev Pritchard does seem to be to be a bit of a liberal although he has recognised that Muslim grooming gangs are a problem for Keighley.
This vandalising savage should have been locked up, just as would be the case if someone had vandalised a mosque, it would have sent a message to the Muslim community that they cannot behave in Britain as they do in shitholes like Pakistan. That he has walked from court with a mere community sentence does not deter Muslims from attacking other churches, but merely shows them that they can get away with it. This looks like yet more pro-Islam double standards in sentencing and for the sake of justice this pandering to Muslims that we saw in this case must stop.
If it really cost £200, I would love to know the numbers of the Glazier and paint decorator who did the repair work.
I agree there. I can’t help but wonder whether the prosecutor or rather the CPS itself deliberately underestimated the cost of the repairs in order to let this savage walk?
Of course they did – I work in the industry, and no graffiti-removal specialist would remove graffiti from stonework for under £200 let alone there being enough left over to fix the windows….
(And don’t forget – for leaving bacon outside a mosque – which is little more than a littering offence – Kevin Curran ended up dead in prison. And does anyone believe that the police would turn out and spend the night on their hands-and-knees in a synagogue picking up bits of bacon as they did when a mosque claimed that an intruder scattered bacon across the interior ? (- which I suspect they did themselves anyway for the pleasure of seeing the dhimmi police grovel to them…..))