People like this should be deborted

Yes but the evidential burden is different and that's what is worrying. As I said she has not been found guilty of a criminal offence where the burden of proof is beyond reasonable doubt.

Agree heartily with other fellow first, and further, gens above that this shitshow is making our lives more difficult.

Fun fact, it sometimes massively confuses people when immigrants are pro criminals deportations and stricter immigration...

Does rape bore you? How privileged of you.

I think she is our problem. She is being housed and fed by people who her husband was busy torturing and killing while she happily sewed bomb vests and made him a packed lunch. She should be thrown into prison here. Bangladesh have said they would execute her if she went there. It seems unfair that her victims (the kurds) are having to deal with her.

Both the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court upheld the decision to strip her of citizenship.

And like I said three are still in jail. One left the UK and has been banned from ever returning, and one has pretty much exhausted his legal options and will be deported. You implied the Conservative government were acting unlawfully by stripping them of UK citizenship. They weren’t. The appeals were thrown out.

I agree with you. Unfortunately erring on the side of caution in this instance means potential harm to actual children.

I'd rather err on the side that if someone looks like a fully grown man, it's probably close enough - I don't think many actual 17 year olds will be harmed by being treated as adults a few months ahead of their birthdays.

People tie themselves in ridiculous knots though - I pointed out on here that one Afghani "child" was both balding and wrinkled but apparently that was just proof of all he had suffered at his tender age, not the fact that he was a full-on 40 year old man.

That is a terrifying thought.

Wouldn't airing on side of caution equally mean not putting adult men pretending to be children into children's services surrounded by and with access to actual children? In fact I would argue it is saver to mistakenly put a child in with adults who haven't lied about their age for self advantage than to put an adult man who has deceived, pretending to be a child in with actual children. We can disagree on this though.

It's very worrying that a person could be stripped of their citizenship without having been found guilty of any offence in an English court. It's the type of behaviour we see in despot countries.

It certainly isn't comparing apples and pears. The same laws are applicable to all parties.

I think Cuba did similar, opened its prisons and shipped off all its prisoners to the US.

I’m still laughing about this post. So high and mighty. I guess nobody ever taught you about ad hominem attacks in your precious higher education? Appeal to authority ring any bells?

Instead of dismissing me personally, why not engage with the actual Home Office data I linked? If you spot bias or manipulation in it, feel free to point it out specifically rather than vaguely waving at academic papers. I’d love to hear your expert breakdown!

I think generally people serve prison time in the country where they committed their crime. They should be deported after, with no return, no question.

I take your point but I think you need to compare whether we as a nation take back our child rapists after they have served their sentences abroad as to whether Afghanistan should. If we don't, then is it unreasonable for other countries to accept theirs?
Begum is a completely different situation. The two shouldn't be compared.

No the point I am making is that people can be quite fickle as to how they view people who should and shouldn't not serve sentences in the UK.

She is considered a threat so why is Syria having to deal with her, they are considered threat to girls so why are we dealing with them

The threat maybe different but if we want to support criminals returning to their country of origin we should be doing the same

Or if we are wanting to take into account they are children (which SB was she was 15) we should again be doing the same

You are not comparing like for like.
Are we to stop deporting Jamaican child rapists as they are a threat to Jamaica?

And they are not a threat to girls in Afghanistan ?

Or is that not our problem? And if so is Shamima Begum, who was born and raised in the UK, is she then not a threat in Syria a country she also went to as a child

So not proven in any court of law. The first priority of any Government is National Security - to protect its citizens from threats.
You are comparing apples with pears, are the child rapists a national threat to Afghanistan?

You don’t just suddenly become a rapist or murderer. It’s built over time, and in these cases that would’ve been back home for them

Very likely, @OnTheNiceishList, but not all countries have the same attitudes to rape as the UK, and in some cases this has even led to migrant offenders going free because "they didn't know it was wrong"

For the sake of everyone - decent migrants included - this farce needs stopping, but there isn't the political will to actually do it so here we are

There is a very strong argument that Shemima Begum was a trafficked child and was groomed, and many women see her as a victim of men rather than a perpetrator.

Because she is a threat to our national security and they are child rapists?

Yes that is true, the previous government made it clear that they felt she was a threat to our security and if she did return she would be likely face charges.

My guess is the majority of those who support her not being able to return to the uk also support the afghan offenders being deported back to their country of origin, so why one but not the other

You don’t just get off a boat and start committing crimes. You have to be a wrongun in the first place. My theory is that many of these men are on some kind of wanted list back home. Maybe they’ve pissed someone off, maybe they have been threatened with the law or someone is after them for attacking their daughter or sister. Maybe their lives are in danger back home and their option is; get your legs broken or be killed back home, or flee to Europe.

That, or people are opening their jails and pointing them in the direction of Europe as a way of getting rid of the problem. Or families are sending over their problematic members - get them out of the way plus possibly a remittance sent back if you're lucky.

I've also read that Putin deliberately sends foreign criminals to destabilise Eastern Europe.

It seems plausible to me - I mean I've lived in the Gulf where citizens are minorities in their own countries, yet crime rates overall are extremely low. Why? They allow in the cream - hard working, law abiding people who aren't drawn by soft-touch laws and generous benefits - and we get... well, the opposite of that.

The government are going about this all wrong.

If they were confined to closed quarters with little in the way of luxiries until they have been fully assessed then the number coming over here will soon drop off. Yet the government think that putting them in a hotel free to walk with the general population as they please is the best solution. Jesus wept!

If you arrive at an airport without any documention you will rightly be held. Why is arriving in a little boat treated any differently?

They didn’t rape a woman—it was a girl.