News

Muslim faith school’s misogyny led to teen’s rape conviction

THE failure of an Islamic faith school in the UK to provide a pupil with any knowledge about sexual relations, other than to teach him that women were “no more worthy than a lollipop dropped on the ground”,  led to the trial of an 18-year-old who was charged with raping a 13-year-old girl.

But, according to this report, instead of being jailed, the “naïve” Birmingham teenager, Adil Rashid, was handed a suspended sentence in Nottingham Crown Court by Judge Michael Stokes, who said:

Although chronologically 18, it is quite clear from the reports that you are very naive and immature when it comes to sexual matters.

Adil Rashid

Adil Rashid

The judge added that because Rashid was “passive” and “lacking assertiveness”, sending him to jail might cause him “more damage than good”.

Rashid admitted having sex with the girl, saying he had been “tempted by her” after they met online.

After they had had sex, Rashid returned home and went straight to a mosque to pray. He was arrested the following week after the girl confessed what had happened to a school friend, who informed one of her teachers.

He told police he knew the girl was 13 but said he was initially reluctant to have sex before relenting after being seduced.

Earlier the court heard how Rashid had “little experience of women”due to his education at an Islamic school in the UK, which cannot be named for legal reasons.

After his arrest, he told a psychologist that he did not know having sex with a 13-year-old was against the law. The court heard he found it was illegal only when he was informed by a family member.

In other interviews with psychologists, Rashid claimed he had been taught in his school that:

Women are no more worthy than a lollipop that has been dropped on the ground.

When Judge Stokes said Rashid “must have known it was illegal, unless he was going round with his eyes shut”, defence lawyer Laban Leake said reports suggested Rashid had a “degree of sexual naivety”.

The school he attended, it is not going too far to say, can be described as a closed community and on this occasion this was perpetuated by his home life. It is not too far to say that he may not have known that having sex with a 13-year-old girl was illegal.

Judge Stokes sentenced Rashid to nine months youth custody, suspended for two years, along with a two-year probation supervision order.

Describing Rashid, the judge said:

He’s had an unusual education, certainly in terms of the sexual education provided. Comparing women to lollipops is a very curious way of teaching young men about sex.

But he said that Rashid knew what he was doing was wrong.

It was made clear to you at the school you attended that having sexual relations with a woman before marriage was contrary to the precepts of Islam.

The judge added:

I accept this was a case where the girl was quite willing to have sexual activity with you. But the law is there to protect young girls, even though they are perfectly happy to engage in sexual activity.

Hat tip: John C & BarrieJohn

 

30 Responses to “Muslim faith school’s misogyny led to teen’s rape conviction”

  1. John c says:

    Since when has ignorance of the law been a defence?”Im sorry oficer, i didnt know there was a 30 limit.” never got me out of a speeding ticket, yet if you up the ante to rape, it suddenly works?
    Once again the justice system had selective myopia where religion is involked, his sentence is a pathetic joke.

  2. keith pogson says:

    Has British law gone completely crazy? Is the judge in this case in touch with reality – is he fit to be a judge? An 18 year old man raped a 13 year old girl! Aren’t adults responsible for their own actions any more -are they not expected to know right from wrong any more? This sentence is ludicrous and utterly inadequate for the dreadful offence committed.

  3. Ivan says:

    Putting aside that ignorance is no defence, surely if he were ignorant of UK age of consent law because of the strictness of his religious upbringing then there can be no doubt whatsoever that he would be fully aware that under Sharia the penalty for sex outside of marriage is death. Nevertheless, he committed the offence.

    So which law would he rather recognise and be tried then sentenced under? Does he accept that he should now be stoned to death?

  4. Ivan says:

    And another thing, this “school” now needs to be hunted down.

  5. remigius says:

    Ivan, sharia law regarding adultery only applies to, er, adults. Child rape is perfectly legal in Islam.

  6. Ivan says:

    @remigius

    Damn my non-religious and therefore depraved assumptions about sexual conduct.

    Oh, and yet another thing, if he were that sheltered, how come he knew about condoms?

  7. remigius says:

    Ivan, t’internets.

  8. Buffy says:

    Comparing women to lollipops is a very curious way of teaching young men about sex.

    This is typical fare in Christian “abstinence only” sex ed. Religion is poison, and a menace to society.

  9. RabbitOnAStick says:

    Nice to see that defence mechanism of twisting the fault to women is alive and well.
    Opp silly me, sorry I meant child.

    “He told police he knew the girl was 13 but said he was initially reluctant to have sex before relenting after being seduced.”

    Is there a difference between cafflicks and is-lamos ?

    Seems not.

  10. tony e says:

    ‘After they had had sex, Rashid returned home and went straight to a mosque to pray,’ would suggest a degree of guilt, and you can’t feel guilt unless you know it is wrong.

  11. Daz says:

    Earlier the court heard how Rashid had “little experience of women”due to his education at an Islamic school in the UK, which cannot be named for legal reasons.

    Well it bloody well should be named. It falls woefully short of providing anything like a proper education, as should any school which teaches that “Women are no more worthy than a lollipop that has been dropped on the ground,” whatever ideology the idea comes from.

    Saying that, as several people here have already said; since when did (alleged) ignorance of the law become a defence?

  12. RabbitOnAStick says:

    when a human being has to go to a place of worship FIVE times a day;
    has to live a life entirely based on a system of utter subservience to a non-existent gawd;
    believing in a ‘book’ written not by the camel dung shoveller who allegedly ‘wrote’ it, but others;
    from a ‘profit’ who married a 9 year old;
    flew about on a winged horse;
    getting his ‘orders’ from someone in the clouds;

    but still cannot control their sexual emotions with a child speaks volumes.

  13. Harry says:

    It sounds like he is a victim of serious child abuse himself and that this 13 year old is an additional victim of the people who raised him in this manner.

    We can prosecute parents for giving their children fuckwitted names, surely we can also prosecute the people who raised him? I only hope that the reason his school cannot be named is that it is under investigation.

  14. Matt Westwood says:

    “Comparing women to lollipops is a very curious way of teaching young men about sex.”

    My boy lollipop
    You make my heart go giddy-up
    You are as sweet as candy
    You are my sugar-dandy …

  15. RabbitOnAStick says:

    An Islamic regime must be serious in every field. There are no jokes in Islam. There is no humour in Islam. There is no fun in Islam. AYATOLLAH KHOMEINI

    Bt there is child rape at every level.

  16. Broga says:

    Well, how nice it must be to be a judge sitting on high delivering these gobbets of wisdom. I know nothing about this judge, no doubt a very fine man, but judges come from a tight little world themselves: upper middle class, very clubable – Inner Temple dinners and all that, public (i.e. very expensive private) schools and, I suspect, a flawed knowledge and questionable experience of women themselves.

    They get to be QCs first. Not, of course, from passing something as inconvenient as an examination to be a QC, but because they are decided on by other legal big wigs to be the right sort of person. I speculate, but I suggest that having a pronounced Liverpool, Glaswegian or Newcastle accent is going to be one hell of a bar to becoming a judge. And best not to have been reared in a Council House. A Cantab degree also helps. An O.U. degree may be harder to get but that’s not the way the system works. As the man said, “We are all in this together.”

    Anyway, that’s the way I see it. If any of the above is wrong I’m happy to be corrected.

  17. sailor1031 says:

    Different laws for different people these days. Isn’t this just what certain people have been trying to achieve?

  18. Matt Westwood says:

    @Broga: For a moment I thought I was reading a rant from my mate on facebook.

    @sailor1031: the concept is “privilege”, whose linguistic root identifies it as meaning “private law”, so yes, exactly correct.

  19. Broga says:

    Hey Matt, I’m flattered. I don’t do facebook.

  20. Trevor Blake says:

    Thank goodness that the UK government has invested £30m into community outreach to Muslims to let them know raping children and setting off bombs is not part of British culture.

    Oops – sorry – I meant to say that the UK government has invested £30m in the legal defense of the July 21 bombers.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2266198/Al-Qaeda-bomb-plot-gangs-handed-30m-legal-aid-fund-defence.html

  21. Marky Mark says:

    (‘After they had had sex, Rashid returned home and went straight to a mosque to pray,’ would suggest a degree of guilt, and you can’t feel guilt unless you know it is wrong.)

    …Yep, he knew and didn’t care.

    (So which law would he rather recognise and be tried then sentenced under? Does he accept that he should now be stoned to death?)

    …If he is using his religion as an excuse he should be punished according to that belief he is using as the excuse. We should declare that it is now justifiable to throw stones at him when he is seen in public.

    As for the lollipop statement…who the heck throws a perfectly good lollipop on the ground? They should be licked until completion!

  22. John A says:

    Some believe that a suspended sentence is hanging over his head, ready to be implemented at a later date if he should re-offend within the specified two year time period. Surely though, behaving within the law should be expected of every citizen and not just hoped for; in which case being handed a suspended sentence is being let off with no punishment full stop. As for the two years probation supervision order, well that’s just a mild inconvenience for a few hours whilst Rashid pops into their office and says what they want to hear; shouldn’t take even him that long to suss out how that game works. Who really was the most naive, Adil Rashid or the Judge who fell for his bullshit excuse? If Rashid still attends a mosque regularly then he is still frequenting an environment where an acknowledged wrong un, Old Mo, is held in the highest esteem and praised for his conduct just because he never shagged his favourite wife until she was old enough to bear his weight at nine years of age. The fact that from when she was six years old he took regular baths with her, the mind boggles as to what that involved, only confirms that a mosque is not going to be a great place for a paedophile to see the error of his ways. The Probation Service is completely wasting its time if it thinks it can have an impact on his outlook with a chat over tea and biscuits; the competition has too early an advantage.

  23. Ian says:

    “Sorry I didn’t know blowing up a building was wrong: I’ve been taught that the infidels are not worthy to live.”

    Abrogating responsibility by using religion as a defence is just bullshit. While sending him to jail might not actually serve any purpose, somebody has to be made accountable. Make him do community service in a shelter – preferably one for abused women, so he can learn what has been taught really means and perhaps he’ll come to understand that women are indeed worthy of respect.

  24. RabbitOnAStick says:

    It used to be the case that only barristers would become judges. But this has changed. Now solicitors can become ‘career’ judges.
    In fact in Britain about 90+% of all crime ‘judged’ is carried out by lay magistrates. In your local magistrates court. So these cases are in fact rare, being reserved for very serious crimes. However, in our minds the punishment is not serious.

    Stokes is interesting.

    Stokes was appointed a Circuit judge in 2001.
    He is the Recorder of Nottingham which is the highest appointed legal officer of the Crown within the Nottingham City and Nottinghamshire County areas.
    He was appointed to the position in 2007.

    Some Sun newspaper stuff about what an idiot he is deemed for his light sentencing.

    http://www.solicitorsfromhell.com/judgestokes.htm

    Article that explains how much he sentenced the rioters to long prison terms.

    http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/Resources/JCO/Documents/Judgments/curtis-de-jean-others-sentencing-remarks.pdf

    He gave a black rapist illegally in Britain ten years. But the man did expose himself to Stokes. So that probably angered Stokes.

    http://news.naij.com/9388.html

    And of course here is his Debretts profile.

    http://www.debretts.com/people/biographies/browse/s/6865/Michael+George.aspx

  25. Broga says:

    ROAS: Fascinating profile. Thanks.

  26. barriejohn says:

    Judge Stokes does seem to have a bit of a reputation:

    http://www.solicitorsfromhell.com/muckyjudges.htm

  27. barriejohn says:

    I see that ROAS links to that site already! He seems more astute in other cases:

    http://www.thisisnottingham.co.uk/Judge-warns-CPS-grubby-compromises/story-12219616-detail/story.html

  28. […] Muslim faith school’s misogyny led to teen’s rape conviction […]

  29. Rick says:

    But it wasn’t a muslim girl I take it? The school made sure they taught him that bit right? Phew! That’s ok then.