Interpretation of "race crime"
Discussion
Has anyone any doubt that if three white youths kicked an Asian graduate to death and then bragged, "We killed an Asian" that it would most-likely be treated as "racially-aggravated murder"? And I'm not suggesting that it shouldn't be so.
Despite their apparent concerns that kicking a white graduate to death and bragging "We killed a white man", would be treated as a 'race crime', three Asians face unadorned murder charges at the CCC.
The Crime and Disorder Act 1998 (s28) provided a definition of "racially aggravated":
[i][if] at the time of committing the offence, or immediately before or after doing so, the offender demonstrates towards the victim of the offence hostility based on the victim's membership ( or presumed membership ) of a racial group ...[/i].
Do you think that simple definition is satisfied in the above case?
There are seldom strict parallels in offences, but there are many examples that appear to demonstrate an unwillingness on the part of the CPS to prosecute with a "racially-aggravated" tag unless the alleged aggressor is white. I would be pleased to hear of cases that contradict this view.
Pakistani battling Kurd on Bradford's streets is racially-aggravated. Afro-Carribean fighting Indian on a London bus is racially-aggravated. Chinaman cleaving Maori in Manchester is racially-aggravated. Dubliner thumping Tynesider is racially-aggravated.
Why? Because [b]I[/b] say so! The Stephen Lawrence Report tells me I can - "[i]A racist incident is any incident which is perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person.[/i]" - and the Report has underlain the police response to such crimes ever since.
But then again, I'm not the CPS ... and they are the arbiters. Mind you, they are not the "Man on the Clapham Omnibus" ... but then again, maybe they are, whilst I take the Tube.
Discuss ... but mind how you tread!
Streaky
Despite their apparent concerns that kicking a white graduate to death and bragging "We killed a white man", would be treated as a 'race crime', three Asians face unadorned murder charges at the CCC.
The Crime and Disorder Act 1998 (s28) provided a definition of "racially aggravated":
[i][if] at the time of committing the offence, or immediately before or after doing so, the offender demonstrates towards the victim of the offence hostility based on the victim's membership ( or presumed membership ) of a racial group ...[/i].
Do you think that simple definition is satisfied in the above case?
There are seldom strict parallels in offences, but there are many examples that appear to demonstrate an unwillingness on the part of the CPS to prosecute with a "racially-aggravated" tag unless the alleged aggressor is white. I would be pleased to hear of cases that contradict this view.
Pakistani battling Kurd on Bradford's streets is racially-aggravated. Afro-Carribean fighting Indian on a London bus is racially-aggravated. Chinaman cleaving Maori in Manchester is racially-aggravated. Dubliner thumping Tynesider is racially-aggravated.
Why? Because [b]I[/b] say so! The Stephen Lawrence Report tells me I can - "[i]A racist incident is any incident which is perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person.[/i]" - and the Report has underlain the police response to such crimes ever since.
But then again, I'm not the CPS ... and they are the arbiters. Mind you, they are not the "Man on the Clapham Omnibus" ... but then again, maybe they are, whilst I take the Tube.
Discuss ... but mind how you tread!
Streaky
that case looks even stranger when you compare it to the similar one that is on the go up here just now of Kriss Donald.
It is vry much beig pushed as a race crime.
possibly the first ever extradition from Pakistan for a case in britain as well i think.
why do we need to identify racial attacks? surely all violent crime is bad.
is it so ideological arguments can be made at the same time? or is it just an identifier for the motive?
It is vry much beig pushed as a race crime.
possibly the first ever extradition from Pakistan for a case in britain as well i think.
why do we need to identify racial attacks? surely all violent crime is bad.
is it so ideological arguments can be made at the same time? or is it just an identifier for the motive?
Surely that wording covers the Pakistani fighting the Kurd.
The very apparent friction between the Muslim and Indian community in certain parts of Slough could be very easily covered by what is written in that particular law.
It is some of the most brutal racism I have witnessed.
Though I agree with the sentiment that violent crime is violent crime and enforced segmentation is proving that there is a percieved difference between creeds
The very apparent friction between the Muslim and Indian community in certain parts of Slough could be very easily covered by what is written in that particular law.
It is some of the most brutal racism I have witnessed.
Though I agree with the sentiment that violent crime is violent crime and enforced segmentation is proving that there is a percieved difference between creeds
As you say it comes from MacPhersons idiocy.
I think that whilst the Police should have respect for culture when dealing with the community - all of it - when it comes to the "doing the criminals" bit of the job then everyone is equal.
The problem with that stupid definition of racism is it (i) gives people an out by squawking racism (ii) terrifies BiB when dealing with racist criminals (iii) is thoughtcrime, meaning an identical crime is treated differently because someone "thinks" something.
Racism is a moveable target anyway. One of my colleagues was addressed by a confused black young lady with "I don't like racists you white b*stard".
I think that whilst the Police should have respect for culture when dealing with the community - all of it - when it comes to the "doing the criminals" bit of the job then everyone is equal.
The problem with that stupid definition of racism is it (i) gives people an out by squawking racism (ii) terrifies BiB when dealing with racist criminals (iii) is thoughtcrime, meaning an identical crime is treated differently because someone "thinks" something.
Racism is a moveable target anyway. One of my colleagues was addressed by a confused black young lady with "I don't like racists you white b*stard".
BliarOut said:
Try complaining to the CRE about it.... They simply aren't interested if you're white. Now that's an institution that's racist if ever I have seen one 
It would appear that the laws protecting against racism only protect those who aren't caucasian
Used to think they were a complete waste of oxygen but Trevor Phillips has spoken some sense recently.
How do minorities expect to integrate if they can't speak the language.
That ethnic diversity is pushing us apart and not pulling us together.
Keep this up and they may get my respect.
Racial motivation is racial motivation. I have seen the most racist of behaviour from ethnic minority communities towards other ethnic minority communities and towards our white communities.
It is the CPS that hasn't got the commitment to prosecute because proving racial motivation in court is an additional responsibility that they don't want. Sometimes, its just easier to get an assault charge etc and get a result. Although a racially motivated assault for instance is suppossed to have a higher punishment than just assault.
It's not right but as always,in particular 'white' people, find it difficult to challenge this in fear of being branded racist. This need not be the case.
It is the CPS that hasn't got the commitment to prosecute because proving racial motivation in court is an additional responsibility that they don't want. Sometimes, its just easier to get an assault charge etc and get a result. Although a racially motivated assault for instance is suppossed to have a higher punishment than just assault.
It's not right but as always,in particular 'white' people, find it difficult to challenge this in fear of being branded racist. This need not be the case.
One of the worst racist expressions is caucasian! No white british northern europeans are caucasians. The Caucasus is in the southern part of Asia where all these istans meet, and the population is olive skinned moustasched (both sexes) and the majority islamic. How the Ferk can a white brit be called that!!!!
and as for the CRE... a bunch of racists! always were, and even have a court ruling to prove it!!!from 1971!
and as for the CRE... a bunch of racists! always were, and even have a court ruling to prove it!!!from 1971!
Where to begin?
Has anybody had dealings with the race abuse police?
Two black cops came to my apartment a couple of years back and gave me the choice of entertaining their tyrade of abuse, or acompanying them to the station, for my wife shouting out the window at youths throwing eggs at it "you Bl#%K B@$T@RD$"
They then interogated us for nearly an hour, about the incident, and scolded us like school children, asking if we thought this behaviour acceptable. At the time we felt guilty and scared and my wife to this day is still scared to even look at a black guy the wrong way. Note nothing was said about the eggs aspect of this.
I on the other hand thought about the incident afterward, and reallised they were only trying to get us to admit to something or make another coment in front of them so they could make an arrest. I then voted for the BNP, at the last election, and will do in future, much to my wifes protest, as "I will be labelled as an anachist or something" she says.
Has anybody had dealings with the race abuse police?
Two black cops came to my apartment a couple of years back and gave me the choice of entertaining their tyrade of abuse, or acompanying them to the station, for my wife shouting out the window at youths throwing eggs at it "you Bl#%K B@$T@RD$"
They then interogated us for nearly an hour, about the incident, and scolded us like school children, asking if we thought this behaviour acceptable. At the time we felt guilty and scared and my wife to this day is still scared to even look at a black guy the wrong way. Note nothing was said about the eggs aspect of this.
I on the other hand thought about the incident afterward, and reallised they were only trying to get us to admit to something or make another coment in front of them so they could make an arrest. I then voted for the BNP, at the last election, and will do in future, much to my wifes protest, as "I will be labelled as an anachist or something" she says.
streaky said:
Has anyone any doubt that if three white youths kicked an Asian graduate to death and then bragged, "We killed an Asian" that it would most-likely be treated as "racially-aggravated murder"? And I'm not suggesting that it shouldn't be so.
They should just cut the crap, and say "They murdered a graduate" and be done with it.
Whats the difference if they killed an asian, african, chinese, russian, american, basically they killed a guy, and that should what they are tried for, and hopefully convicted, and put away for a very long time.
Absolutely. And it should be the same irrespective of whether it was black on white, white on black, green on brown and whether or not the person was a racist, or other people thought he was a racist.
Murder is murder.
I think these laws (and the religious censorship ones) are simply sops to the Muslim community to buy a few votes.
Murder is murder.
I think these laws (and the religious censorship ones) are simply sops to the Muslim community to buy a few votes.
autismuk said:
Absolutely. And it should be the same irrespective of whether it was black on white, white on black, green on brown and whether or not the person was a racist, or other people thought he was a racist.
Murder is murder.
I think these laws (and the religious censorship ones) are simply sops to the Muslim community to buy a few votes.
Absolutely, a crime is a crime.
lord summerisle said:
i thought it was well known that the only racists in Britain where white and English.
Indeed!
After living in Bradford, Huddersfield and London this is how I perceive Multiculturalism in the UK to be (quote from another forum):
---------------------------------------------
Us white-folks are all racist bigots who want to dominate & subjugate other races.
WASP culture is all based on slavery and exploitation of non-whites. This is why non-whites from all over the world don't want to live in Europe.
Non-whites are all peaceful, tolerant multi-culturalists.
Just look to Africa, the Middle-East & the sub-continent, where tribalism and ethnic conflict are unknown and all races live together in harmony.
Anyone who says otherwise must be an evil white racist.
----------------------------------------------
Vipers said:
Absolutely. And it should be the same irrespective of whether it was black on white, white on black, green on brown and whether or not the person was a racist, or other people thought he was a racist.
Murder is murder.
I think these laws (and the religious censorship ones) are simply sops to the Muslim community to buy a few votes.
Absolutely, a crime is a crime.
Unfortunately, I believe MacPherson has effectively terminated what used to be called 'colour blind policing', because it's racist.
Quite how this works I do not know.
Treating different races and religions differently because of their colour seems to be a good definition of racism.
lord summerisle said:
i thought it was well known that the only racists in Britain where white and English.
Exactly. Just as sex discrimination laws are only for discrimination against women. At least for government ministers offering jobs to their friends.
The trouble with these anti-discrimination initiatives is that they start off well-meaning but seem to get hijacked. They end up doing way more harm than the good they were intended to do, and eventually you could imagine a public backlash.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff