About a week ago I wrote about how the stabby savage who carried out a knife jihad attack in Reading, Southern England was going to appeal his whole life tariff prison term and how that it was an appeal without any justification or merit whatsoever. I did wonder whether our courts would entertain this savage’s appeal but I’m pleased to report that appeal by the violent and vile savage in question, Khairi Saadallah, has been refused.
The BBC reported:
A terrorist who murdered three men in a Reading park has been denied permission to appeal his whole-life jail term.
Khairi Saadallah, 27, stabbed James Furlong, 36, David Wails, 49, and 39-year-old Joe Ritchie-Bennett in June last year in Forbury Gardens.
He was sentenced in January after admitting to the murders and three attempted murders.
The Court of Appeal ruled there was “no substance” to Saadallah’s criticisms towards the judge who sentenced him.
Mr Rossano Scamardella QC, representing Saadallah, had suggested the degree of premeditation and level of ideology did not reach the threshold for the whole-life order.
He told the court: “We say the judge erred in that respect.”
Mr Scamardella suggested the judge should have given a life sentence with a minimum prison term, and argued the attacks were not terror-related.
The defence counsel here is to put it bluntly speaking utter bollocks. His savage client deliberately and knowing what he was doing was wrong, picked up a knife, chose his victims and murdered them. As for the claim that this was not a terror attack then that’s also bollocks. There were plenty of witnesses who said that this savage was shouting out the Islamic war cry of Allah hu Akbar whilst carrying out the attack. The shouting of the Islamic war cry during a multiple stabbing is pretty good evidence of motivation for the attack.
It’s good to know that the appeal court has refused to entertain this savage’s excuses. The only bad part of it is that a) he was allowed into the UK in the first place as a ‘refugee’ which gave him the opportunity to commit murder and b) we have to pay for the upkeep of a man who by rights should have been dangling on the end of an executioners rope which is how Britain dealt with various terrorists in the past.
