THE victim of a savage, unprovoked attack by a gang of Muslim women has described the lenient sentences they received from a Leicester judge as “disgusting”.
Rhea Page, the victim of the attack
Sisters Ambaro Maxamed, 24, Ayan Maxamed, 28, and Hibo Maxamed, 24, along with their cousin Ifrah Nur, 28, were convicted of causing actual bodily harm to 22-year-old Rhea Page, but were spared jail sentences by Judge Robert Brown, who was told that the women were not used to drinking alcohol.
Page was set upon while walking to a taxi rank with her boyfriend in June last year. The attackers, shouting “kill the White slag”, dragged her to the ground by her hair then kicked and punched her.
Page’s boyfriend, 23-year-old Lewis Moore, was also attacked as he tried to fend off the four women.
During the trial Leicester Crown Court heard that Maxamed called Page a “white bitch” then pulled the hair, forcing her to the floor.
The judge decided that the attack was not racially motivated.
The attackers faced up to five years in jail, but Judge Brown handed down six-month suspended sentences instead after hearing mitigating evidence that the women were not accustomed to drinking alcohol due to their religion.
During the trial, Maxamed’s defence council said:
They’re Somalian Muslims and alcohol or drugs isn’t something they’re used to.
After the trial, Page said:
They were taking turns to kick me in the head and back over and over. I thought they were going to kill me. I honestly think they attacked me just because I was white. I can’t think of any other reason.
According to a report in The Telegraph, which has a video of the fracas, Judge Brown – who also sentenced the three sisters to 150 hours of community work – said he accepted that they may have felt victims of unreasonable force from Mr Moore.
But Miss Page insisted her boyfriend had only been trying to protect her.
If he hadn’t been there, I’m sure they would have killed me.
Hat tip: Diesel Balaam
The Freethinker was founded in 1881 by GW Foote, an outspoken critic of religion. After the publication of 
December 7th, 2011 at 7:01 pm
Sad to say tgese people are no better and. no worse than countless other women and men in this country who go out, get pissed then beat the crap out of someone. But to say the attack was defensible because, as a result of their religion, they weren’t used to alcohol is palpable nonsense.
December 7th, 2011 at 7:24 pm
Doesn’t work if the boot’s on the other foot:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worl.....udi-arabia
December 7th, 2011 at 7:31 pm
http://www.compassdirect.org/e.....23726.html
December 7th, 2011 at 7:31 pm
“described the lenient sentences they received from a Leicester judge as “disgusting”.”
Ya Right!!
If the attackers had been 3 skinhead footballers….the sentence would be what ?? …..5 years at The Queens pleasure in the tower to be sure.
This incident takes political correctness to new heights.
December 7th, 2011 at 7:34 pm
Well chavscum who get fucked out of their faces and go out and attack people for no real reason always get lenient sentences so it’s no surprise that these got a slap on the wrist.
But if calling someone a white bitch isnt racism then what is?? if it had been four drunken white girls who had attacked a muslim girl it would have been instantly recognised as a hate crime before we knew all the details and it’s hypocrisy like this which is feuling the EDL and BNP
December 7th, 2011 at 7:39 pm
It follows now then that as these women admitted to drinking alcohol, they will be punished by the full and un-challengable might of Islamic law.
December 7th, 2011 at 7:48 pm
A quote from the telegraph story
“He said he accepted the women may have felt they were the victims of unreasonable force from Miss Page’s partner Lewis Moore, 23, who tried desperately to defend her from the attack.”
Unreasonable force?? it was four of them picking on one girl and this guy potentially prevented a murder from taking place, seriously fuck this country it’s a safe haven for criminal types wether it’s your fucking street level neds/chavs or orginised criminals, I myself have been a victim of crime more than once and got no support and no justice whatsoever so stories like this really get my back up.
December 7th, 2011 at 7:53 pm
On a different day with a different judge, they might have got the full five years. Some judges get a thrill out of locking someone away for taking a bottle of water. There is something seriously wrong with any justice system that has such broad discretion to ignore or accept mitigating factors and where one person’s impulses are used to determine what justice a victim sees and what might affect the entire rest of a defendant’s life.
It’s just baffling yet far from uncommon to see a judge look at an assault where race is screamed about and decide it was not racially motivated. It is also baffling yet far from uncommon for a judge to decide that kicking someone in the head when they are down is not attempted murder as so many other judges would see it.
Personally, I wouldn’t have sent them to jail either, because alcohol can have a very unpredictable effect on people. Drinking too much one night and doing something vicious and stupid is certainly a problem, but I don’t think locking people away from society for a few years would do anything but make an idiot into a hardened criminal. This judge, however, does not seem to even be acquainted with reality. Still, I don’t know what the solution might be. American style minimum sentencing regardless of circumstances would be just as damaging as having judges who can pretty much do what they feel like.
December 7th, 2011 at 8:10 pm
“I don’t think locking people away from society for a few years would do anything but make an idiot into a hardened criminal”
A bit off topic here but the only reason prison doesn’t work is because the prisoners control the prisons, I’m all for rehabilitation and ssecond chances and all that (I’ve seen it work with my own eyes in the voluntary work which I do which involves working with (among other groups) young offenders) but prison should be for punishment and these four vile bitches should have been sent there or at the very least sent back to somalia.
December 7th, 2011 at 8:20 pm
” the only reason prison doesn’t work is because the prisoners control the prisons”
Citation needed.
“prison should be for punishment”
Citation needed.
“and these four vile bitches should have been sent there”
Should by what criteria? Vile bitches by what criteria? You’ve never encountered somebody drunk acting in an uncharacteristic fashion? They might well be terrible people but that would be difficult to prove on the face of a drug-induced first offense.
“or at the very least sent back to somalia.”
Where will we send the white people who commit heinous crimes? Back to Saxony?
December 7th, 2011 at 8:48 pm
the fact that gangs operate freely within prisons and in the case of orginised criminals are able to still run their criminal empires from behind bars and the fact that prisoners are able to arrange for drugs to be delivered to them wether on prison phones or on mobile phones which have been smuggled in to the prisons.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-15193149
There’s one example look to the bottom of the article to see the point I’m making there, the gaurds and wardens do what they can but there’s only so much they can do it’s ultimately the hardest cons who run the jails a more extreme example would be the aryan brotherhood in America which despite being a prison gang makes a profit of 3 million dollars a year and I seem to remember an article on the freethinker not so long ago about muslim gangs in british jails.
And prison should be for punishment well not sure how I can cite that but the way I see it if you do the crime you do the time, I do agree that there neds to be better funding support for drug/alchohol rehabllitation and mental health services which would definetly help steer a lot of people away from the criminal justice system which would releive a lot of strain on the prison system which does seem to be used as a warehouse for people which the system doesn’t know how to deal with.
And the criteria by which these vile bitches should be in jail is the fact that they attacked an innocent for no reason whatsoever while under the influence and made racist comments at her and could have killed her were it not for the actions of her boyfriend if it had been four white girls who had attacked one of them this story would have received a lot more attention and there would have been prison sentences all round no questions asked and yes maybe they should be deported because we have enough home grown thugs and arseholes of all races and colours in this country do we really need more coming in??
Oh and I like I said in an earlier post I have been a victim of crime more than once and on a couple of those occasions the perpetrators were under the influence of booze and/or drugs so I know all too well what it’s like thank you very much.
December 7th, 2011 at 8:59 pm
On the subject of muslims, check this out;
http://www.buzzfeed.com/gavon/.....agellation
December 7th, 2011 at 9:10 pm
Sounds like the English judicial system is infected with the usual pc disease that only ‘Ethnic Europeans’ are racist.
There seems to be a rather patronising racist attitude underlying pc’s double standards.
‘The attackers faced up to five years in jail, but Judge Brown handed down six-month suspended sentences instead after hearing mitigating evidence that the women were not accustomed to drinking alcohol due to their religion.’
I wonder if traffic offenders could use the defence— “Well I wasn’t used to travelling at high speed,so the crash wasn’t my fault”
Pythonesque.
December 7th, 2011 at 9:24 pm
These people actually committed an assault, the lady on the tram, whatever you may think of her views, did not actually assault anyone. So, which ones will be spending xmas in prison?
December 7th, 2011 at 9:54 pm
“These people actually committed an assault, the lady on the tram, whatever you may think of her views, did not actually assault anyone. So, which ones will be spending xmas in prison?”
Completely agree, intuition tells me both should be locked away, naturally the assault case for longer. However I think John’s concerns are valid ones, and that properly enforced (and far more hours than was given) community service is a fair punishment.
AshDev – There are festivals not dissimilar to the one you cited from every religion. For example, during easter in the phillipines 20 or more men are nailed to a cross to remember the pain Jesus went through at the crucifixion. Let’s not use the mis-judgement of the PC brigade as a segway into an anti-muslim campaign shall we?
.
Oh, here’s the link for the babaric “Christian” festival:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42.....t_f-7KIk8k
December 7th, 2011 at 10:20 pm
Now would this not be the perfect occasion for these ‘moderate muslims’ to step forward and speak up against this? Or, like Santa, they are also just a myth?
December 7th, 2011 at 11:09 pm
As David Anderson has said, these miscreants will undoubtedly receive the punishment prescribed by Mohammed, which far surpasses in its applicability and effectiveness anything that our ungodly courts in their ignorance might administer:
Drinking alcohol is definitely prohibited in Surat al Maida verse 90. However the punishment is set through Mohammad’s (sallallahu aleyhu vesellem) application and hadith. Mohammad (sallallahu aleyhu vesellem) and Ebû Bekir (rad?-yallahu anh) has punished the violators with 40 times beating with a stick. During the time of Omar (rad?-yallahu anh) when alcohol drinkers were getting more and more he consulted his friends and decided to punish the violators with 80 beatings with a stick which is the lightest form of Hadd punishment. (Dârimî, Hudûd,10; A. b. Hanbel, IV, 389).
A man who drank alcohol was brought to Mohammad’s (sallallahu aleyhu vesellem) presence, Mohammad (sallallahu aleyhu vesellem) beat him, they brought him again, he beat him again, they brought him again and he beat him again. (Ebû Dâvûd, Hudûd 35-37).
http://www.questionsonislam.co.....nk-alcohol
December 7th, 2011 at 11:24 pm
This case is a clear case of pc stupidity, assault should equal jail, as an almost non drinker myself, if i sudenly went to excess and got steamingly drunk ,that would not excuse me from assaulting someone, if they were non white, its a fair bet they would pull out the race card as well.The judge here wants flogging in public,the 4 muslim women want the same treatment as any other offenders would get.
December 8th, 2011 at 1:24 am
I was astonished when I first read this story. In the mind of this judge at least, there is already one law for Muslims and another law for the rest of us. When you consider all the fuss over a few reprehensible racist remarks by the footballer, John Terry (allegedly), as well as the silly woman on the Croydon Tram, it seems extraordinary that you can get away with physically assaulting someone and calling them a “white slag”, providing you’re a member of some ethnic minority and a follower of some creepy religion. I wonder if the defendants in the Stephen Lawrence murder case will be likewise excused – after all, being quite young at the time, they probably weren’t used to carrying knives.
December 8th, 2011 at 1:57 am
Imagine if someone called a black man/women “A black slag”…
Seems judges and politicians need to wake up and see white people fall victim to racism to…
December 8th, 2011 at 3:46 am
Wait…what?
They swarm and attack a woman while making anti-white slurs. They get a slap on the wrist. Meanwhile the guy who merely defends his girlfriend is somehow using ‘excessive force’?
They’re Somalian Muslims and alcohol or drugs isn’t something they’re used to.
So if I try crack for the first time then go out and kill someone can I get off because crack isn’t something I’m used to?
December 8th, 2011 at 6:27 am
This case, combined with that of the “My Tram Experience” lady, show just how deep the rot of pc cultural marxism/post-modernism has infected our society, judges who come out with drivel like this from their ivory towers should be sacked.
These muslim women’s actions were vile, and they should have been imprisoned with hard labour and then deported back to Somalia as they obviously view both Britain and it’s people with contempt.
December 8th, 2011 at 7:49 am
When I was in the Army, if a soldier committed a crime while drunk, the offence was mostly reduced to “Was Drunk”. However the sentence was based on that alone. It did, however not stop the offender from going to the slammer for a couple of weeks. It strikes me that a couple of weeks in a highly regimented gaol might have discouraged these “ladies”. I do hope that the victim’s boy friend broke the odd nose (accidentally of course) while he was defending her.
December 8th, 2011 at 9:06 am
I hope the victim appeals against this non-sentence and get this scum incarcerated.
December 8th, 2011 at 9:18 am
I wold if I was the victim use the Human Rights to take them back to court or tribunal. They may be entitled to compensation. I would also see if they are citizens and if not ask for their deportation because they fail to meet the character test. We all have enough criminals of our own we don’t need to import them.
December 8th, 2011 at 9:38 am
As we non-believers are often told we lack any moral code, perhaps we could use this as an excuse next time we’re up before a judge (though I trust most of never will be in such a position).
“We’ll you see, your honour. God made me an atheist so it’s his fault, really.”
December 8th, 2011 at 9:59 am
If a gang attacked my wife – no matter what sex, race, colour or creed, I would certainly defend her, to the point of putting them in a position as to no longer be a threat. Perhaps that may require me to break their limbs – to prevent the attackers from further being able to use them to injure a member of my family in an unprovoked racist gang attack.
As I am not used to the situation of having my wife being attacked by a racist gang – no matter what sex, race, colour or creed the attackers where.
This whole thing stinks – it’s deeply offensive to any equality-minded individual. It reminds me of the Muslim who came out of Friday prayer and attacked a man in a shop, breaking his nose, and who was let off by Cherie Blair, because he was obviously a peaceful, religious man. (Although how that conclusion was drawn – is frankly anybody’s guess!)
Well. I am not a religious man. And I have never attacked, and broken the nose of a fellow human being, because frankly, unless it is in self-defense, that level of incivility, is barbaric, and belongs in the middle ages… oh I see now….
December 8th, 2011 at 10:18 am
Buffy: I agree with most of what you say, as usual, except for this -
So if I try crack for the first time then go out and kill someone can I get off because crack isn’t something I’m used to?
It would, in fact, be taken into account when sentencing. I agree that this case is bizarre, though!
December 8th, 2011 at 10:58 am
I wonder if Barriejohn has hit the nail on the head? Could the judge have been taking into account the likelihood that the women would also be punished by a Sharia court for boozing? Not that we’d ever know, if they were.
December 8th, 2011 at 9:10 pm
I often hear of seemingly perverse judgements that have been given at court hearings and thought ‘what the hell were they thinking?’. But when you think of how our court system actually works, with highly trained and experienced advocates putting forth arguments that even a highly trained and experienced judge might find convincing, I wonder if, had we actually been present at the hearing, even the most thoughtful of us may have found the verdict to be reasonable at the time? Would we maybe have only found the verdict to be perverse after giving it some thought or after reading only part of the story in a newspaper?
Reading this story brought to mind another one that received a lot less publicity than I thought that it deserved. Cherie Booth presided over a case involving a Muslim man who committed a serious assault on another man in a queue at a bank. CB basically let him off because, as a religious man, he was aware that assaulting people was out of order. As a result she brought down the ire of the National Secular Society upon her head. The powers that be gave her a right bollocking and informed the NSS that they had done so. They also stated that they were also going to tell the Mainstream Media that she had been exonerated and threatened the NSS with legal action if they said otherwise. The NSS, after taking legal advice, went public with the story and the MSM totally ignored it, to their eternal shame. People whose job description involves uncovering the truth, were lied to, told that they were lied to, decided to report those lies instead of the truth.
December 9th, 2011 at 12:19 am
“Could the judge have been taking into account the likelihood that the women would also be punished by a Sharia court for boozing?”.
I hope not, any punishment the members of a sharia “court” could inflict, should be irrelevant in a civilised legal system. Once the courts start treating sharia “law” as some sort of complementary system the barbarians have broken through the gates.
December 9th, 2011 at 12:10 pm
Not that it should have been taken seriously as an excuse, but I doubt that the women were ‘not used to’ alcohol in the way that the defence got the courts to believe. Take a look at the pictures that were printed in the Mail (Yeah, probably selected for that reason especially but still) – low-cut tops and heavy make-up – yes, they look JUST the types to live in strict accordance to Muslim must dos.
December 12th, 2011 at 4:06 am
The British version of “multiculturalism” is slowly but surely destroying your country. This case is an example where basic principles of justice and reason are forsaken in favour of not “offending” people whose presence in the country is largely negative in its effects on British society.
I expect (and hope) that a case like this coming before an Australian court would be seen as an obvious case of racist assault, and judged accordingly.
December 12th, 2011 at 5:02 pm
They each got 150 hours community service plus a 6-month suspended sentence. Surely that’s appropriate for a first offence of this nature. These are not hardened, serial criminals. What’s the point in sending them to jail?
What’s wrong with you people?
December 13th, 2011 at 12:54 am
Stupid ninny bastard judge, he should be sacked.
December 13th, 2011 at 1:00 am
@Tom Rees: Hellooo, they tried to do serious harm to someone purely because she was the “wrong race”, surely they’re a serious danger to the public. What is wrong with YOU?
December 14th, 2011 at 4:14 pm
It’s wrong to send people to jail for a first offence of assault while drunk. It doesn’t work to prevent more crime, and it’s expenseive to boot.
Community service and a suspended sentence is a typical punishment, for good reasons: it’s effective. These women didn’t get special treatment. All the judges comments were about was the fact that this is not typical behaviour for them.
Daily Fail readers are getting all in a lather because these women are muslim and foreign. You’ve all fallen for their propaganda because you’re not engaging your brains.