Violent rapist allowed to stay in UK to rape again

That's completely wrong - the ONLY reason that we could deprive her of citizenship was that she would NOT be made stateless, because she had the option of taking up Bangladeshi citizenship by descent to which she was automatically entitled until the age of 21 or 24, I can't recall which.

She chose not to take that up and is now stateless. The reason we have allowed back other adult male ISIS fighters deported from Syria is that they were over the age to take up that citizenship and therefore could be entitled to no other citizenship but British.

So yes, it's directly comparable. Person with Nationality A is in Country B and commits a crime. Country A strips them of citizenship and they can't be deported to Country A despite having (originally) had nationality of that country. If Nigeria were to strip Oladele of citizenship (or question whether he really is a citizen - people are not always truthful about their nationality) then he couldn't be deported there. I don't know what their laws on deprivation of citizenship are though.

@Birdsongisangry
You write,
I don't think that we should be sent to a country we've never known because our DNA is from there. Referencing Odele being Nigerian
This man was a criminal. He is 24 . He could have applied for British Citizenship at anytime. He chose not to do so. In his heart he was Nigerian or he would have bothered with British citizenship. He has had plenty of time. His mother and presumably lots of relatives are Nigerian. The UK law is quite clear on foreign criminals. Yet, you want to protect him and keep him here. In between his first conviction and the second, did he apply for British citizenship?
Odele wants it all ways and that is not fair. It is completely unfair on his victims.

The Begum case is not comparable. She has no other citizenship except British. This man is not a citizen of Britain but IS a citizen of Nigeria. No other country was obliged to take Begum because she had no other citizenship to enforce that right.

It does demonstrate though how inconsistent the law can be though.

Begum was considered such a threat she could be made stateless. This man at least has another country he can be sent to as he has the right to live there via citizenship.

Indeed. As he had his formative years growing up in the UK, it's likely that it's our culture who has at least had an influence on his behaviour than anything else. This is not an argument about growing up in misogynistic cultures abroad but what we grow here, what we put up with here.

That's what I think people are missing.

I think this case highlights serious flaws in the way we deal with dangerous violent men within our CJS. This is a hugely important issue.
I think it is wrong to use cases like this to prop up anti immigration agendas because it perpetuates the falsehood that if we deport people the problem will go away.
Had this man been simply deported he would have posed a threat to women in his country of origin. I don't think its any more acceptable for Nigeran women to be raped than British ones.
Had this man been deported, it would have made no difference to the fact that our system permits dangerous men to rape women. We would have been safe from this one man, but just as much at risk from the white British men who rape.
Making this about immigration rather than about how the UK deals with dangerous men in general is trying to fit a problem into your preferred solution which is short sighted and ineffective.

I don't think male judges should be able to preside over rape cases.

Considering the miniscule amount of prosecutions, I don't think this is a big ask.

The trouble is when public opinion is constantly put down as 'you really don't know what you're talking about', it comes across as so smug and patronising. That keeps happening on this thread. The public vote is clear, 95% of voters on this thread think Odele should have been deported first time around.
I voted against Brexit and I still think Brexit was a huge mistake but you could see it happened as a protest vote. Most people didn't want Brexit but they felt they were not being listened to. It is the same on this thread. There seem to be a number of posters who are not focusing on this particular case which is the subject of the thread but instead are defending the rapist's right to remain in the UK. THere is a lot of whataboutery, white men rape too. However this thread is about this case. There are posters who are defending Odele's right to remain in the UK. It comes across as foreign criminals cannot be removed from the UK because it is against their wellbeing, rapist or not. There is also a measure of racism that foreign countries such as Nigeria do not have a legal system that can cope with a returned violent rapist and so he should be left in the UK for us to deal with.
This attitude is so unhelpful to everyone. I cannot imagine what his victims would think of the posters arguing that he should be allowed to stay.

I don't think male judges should be able to preside over rape cases.

Considering the miniscule amount of prosecutions, I don't think this is a big ask.

The trouble is when public opinion is constantly put down as 'you really don't know what you're talking about', it comes across as so smug and patronising. That keeps happening on this thread. The public vote is clear, 95% of voters on this thread think Odele should have been deported first time around.
I voted against Brexit and I still think Brexit was a huge mistake but you could see it happened as a protest vote. Most people didn't want Brexit but they felt they were not being listened to. It is the same on this thread. There seem to be a number of posters who are not focusing on this particular case which is the subject of the thread but instead are defending the rapist's right to remain in the UK. THere is a lot of whataboutery, white men rape too. However this thread is about this case. There are posters who are defending Odele's right to remain in the UK. It comes across as foreign criminals cannot be removed from the UK because it is against their wellbeing, rapist or not. There is also a measure of racism that foreign countries such as Nigeria do not have a legal system that can cope with a returned violent rapist and so he should be left in the UK for us to deal with.
This attitude is so unhelpful to everyone. I cannot imagine what his victims would think of the posters arguing that he should be allowed to stay.

How does 'send them back' work if it's sending to a country that he's never been to?

It works in exactly the same way as someone who has lived there, you pop them on a plane and send them back. Or was your point more that we should think about how hard that would be for the poor rapist?

The trouble is when public opinion is constantly put down as 'you really don't know what you're talking about', it comes across as so smug and patronising. That keeps happening on this thread. The public vote is clear, 95% of voters on this thread think Odele should have been deported first time around.
I voted against Brexit and I still think Brexit was a huge mistake but you could see it happened as a protest vote. Most people didn't want Brexit but they felt they were not being listened to. It is the same on this thread. There seem to be a number of posters who are not focusing on this particular case which is the subject of the thread but instead are defending the rapist's right to remain in the UK. THere is a lot of whataboutery, white men rape too. However this thread is about this case. There are posters who are defending Odele's right to remain in the UK. It comes across as foreign criminals cannot be removed from the UK because it is against their wellbeing, rapist or not. There is also a measure of racism that foreign countries such as Nigeria do not have a legal system that can cope with a returned violent rapist and so he should be left in the UK for us to deal with.
This attitude is so unhelpful to everyone. I cannot imagine what his victims would think of the posters arguing that he should be allowed to stay.

Indeed. As he had his formative years growing up in the UK, it's likely that it's our culture who has at least had an influence on his behaviour than anything else. This is not an argument about growing up in misogynistic cultures abroad but what we grow here, what we put up with here.

That's what I think people are missing.

Indeed. As he had his formative years growing up in the UK, it's likely that it's our culture who has at least had an influence on his behaviour than anything else. This is not an argument about growing up in misogynistic cultures abroad but what we grow here, what we put up with here.

That's what I think people are missing.

Yes but my point is it's missing the point.

His immigration status is a bit murky because of where he was born and then by stating his nationality is Nigeria, it's essentially a country he has no links to. It's deporting him based on his parent's nationality, not his. It's entirely likely Nigeria would have refused (much like the Begum case).

But immigration status aside, there are plenty of men as violent, as dangerous but white and British. Nowhere to deport them to and as others have pointed out, deporting him just moves the issue for him to rape others.

Rapists often commit a lot of crimes before being caught if they're caught at all. And when they are caught, they almost always get away with it. That's a problem with our justice system and with the men who commit rape more than it's a problem with our immigration system.

How would screening have assisted here?

He was born to Nigerian parents in Italy and moved to the UK as a child. I haven't seen it reported what age that was, though it's been reported he went to school here.
His only link to Nigeria really is that his mum is Nigerian, and that's how he has Nigerian citizenship. The argument used in court for deportation was that Nigeria wouldn't feel foreign to him because he has been brought up in a Nigerian family. The judge who made the ruling said that in reality he had no more link to Nigeria than any other resident of Manchester, where he was living.

I've said up thread that I think if an adult makes an active decision to move to a country and then commits a crime there, they should be deported. I don't think this is the same though, however horrific his crimes. I don't think deporting to a country someone has never visited, let alone lived in, should be a thing. Deporting in my view should be returning someone, not sending them somewhere new.

We have enough rapist in the UK without allowing more to be imported. Far better screening is needed for immigrants.