Violent rapist allowed to stay in UK to rape again

I agree with this to an extent. I would not be opposed to him being removed now.

I do agree with the broader point that deportation should generally be to where somebody is from.

I have known people who’ve been through decades of therapy and it’s made no difference, so how the hell is a ‘rehabilitation’ course going to cure a violent rapist!!? The left are so f-ing insane that I just know there will be people defending him and calling those who want him deported ‘far-right’.

The judge and everyone involved in helping him stay should be forced to meet his victims and their loved ones. They should face up to the consequences of what they’ve done. I’m sick of the way the left pose as morally superior. Their smugness drives me mad. In my experience, they are every bit as callous and hate-filled as those on the far-right. They will angrily defend this man and his rights, but they won’t give a sh*t about his victims, just as they don’t care about the Jewish people who were stabbed.

Wow.

As someone who has been the victim of rape by three different men I'm incredibly offended by your comment.

Wanting to apply the law and recognising that this case is incredibly complex and not as simple as being portrayed in some of the red tops is not the same as "seeing the world through the violent rapist's eyes". I can feel your anger. And I'm angry too. But being angry still doesn't mean this guy has any right, legally, to be deported to Nigeria. It all looks incredibly complicated on that front.

What isn't complicated to the same degree is the low conviction rates and low sentencing for men who commit violence against women and girls and the low bar that those men have to meet by the probation service to be released from prison. And they're all nationalities of men that commit VAWG. Not just immigrant men.

She is seeing the world through the violent rapists eyes, instead of the eyes of the violently raped women. This attitude is why the UK is in peril. When women are concerned not for other women, but for the violent bastards who ruin women's lives forever.

Be ashamed if you give this man one iota of sympathy. Consider why you are concerned about him and not your fellow women and children. Have you been manipulated?

Start putting yourself first.

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.

there is a massive problem with diversity of judges in this country. Not only are they mainly men, the are virtually all privately educated

it would take may years to attract enough women to the bench though

What sort of screening would have picked this offender up given that he came to the UK as a small child?

Why can an immigration judge overrule the law and the Home Office and allow a convicted foreign rapist to remain in the UK

1. the judge applied the law, he didn't overrule it
2. Oladele was not a convicted foreign rapist at the time of the immigration hearing because he had not at that time been convicted of rape

It is overwhelmingly likely that the deportation order will now be upheld, because he is now a convicted foreign rapist and the law is different for those with a sentence of over 4 years.

Absolutely agree we should deal with home grown rapists and sex offenders. I have not stated anywhere we shouldn’t.

But the current system fails again and again in dealing with these particularly egregious criminals, and protecting women.

That does not preclude utilisation of all levers available in these fewer cases where deportation is an option, which can better protect us.

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

I'm really interested in your view that the law is clear. It's incredibly complicated!

The Home Office don't give "advice," they make a decision which is appealable.

The deportation decision was made on the strength of the 2 year sentence for false imprisonment. At this stage he had not been convicted of rape and nobody knew that he would be in future.

The law is that there is a presumption in favour of deporting a foreign criminal who has received a sentence of more than 1 and less than 4 years, unless certain exceptions apply. One of them is that the person is "socially and culturally integrated" AND that there would be "very significant obstacles to their integration in the country to which they would be deported."

The HO in this case appear to have argued that the appellant wasn't socially and culturally integrated even though he had been here since infancy. You might think that's a pretty weak argument and that they might have done better to focus on the material realities of how he would integrate to Nigeria.

Very significant obstacles to integration are clearly in play when it is proposed to deport someone to a country they have never even visited.

The HO didn't turn up to cross examine him about his attitudes to women, the extent of his rehabilitation or whether he had any extended family ties in Nigeria, or even whether his UK based family would send financial support, all of which would be relevant to the "very significant obstacles". He said that he was rehabilitated and more importantly, Probation supported that and assessed him as being at a low risk of reoffending (plainly this turned out to be wrong with the benefit of hindsight).

It may be that the judge would have come to a different conclusion if the evidence before him had been that the appellant was at high risk of serious sexual reoffending and / or there had been evidence in cross-examination about how he would practically live in Nigeria. But the judge can only make the decision on the evidence that is available to him.

@ColinOfficeTrolley and @Backedoffhackedoff I would agree with that idea and if there aren't enough then change it.

In my case, there was a male CPS barrister, male defence barrister, male judge. Some of the judge's comments were clueless. Absolutely ridiculous. I can't go into detail here due to reporting restrictions but he discounted something which to any woman would have been obvious to be an impossibility.

But also there is a place for legislation and sentencing guidelines to change. And probation service to be more cautious for offenders who have committed VAWG.

As it is, now victims have the right to make statements to parole hearings, however instead of making it more just it means victims end up feeling the weight of having to keep dangerous offenders in prison.

This is a really interesting idea, but there aren’t many female judges 🙄

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.

He wasn't deported after the first offence because he appealed the deportation order and the tribunal judge sided with him - seemingly after the Home Office failed to attend the hearing.

I'm well aware of that hurdle but presumably the HO applied for him to be deported because he could be deported to Nigeria, he is apparently a Nigerian citizen.
The Govt has already imposed sanctions and visa restrictions on countries that refuse to take back their citizens.

Laws can always be changed

I'm also baffled he was not deported.

But I also worry about articles like this. I think it portrays immigrants as a significant factor in VAWG and the fact is it's men. Men of all ethnicities. I've been raped by three different men. All white. Only one of the cases made the press because he was a Z list celebrity who attacked a lot of of women but it only made the press in a tiny way. You wouldn't remember it.

Fact is yes, violent offenders even those who have been brought up in the UK but were not born here should have their status revoked. But the much bigger issue is appallingly low conviction rates and sentences for men who commit rape and other violent crimes against women. I really wish those on the hard right wing of politics could get as passionately angry about that.

I am generally in favour of deporting foreign criminals, but let's not pretend doing so in this case would have stopped women from being raped. He would just have raped Nigerian women instead.

Yep and why does the entire system make it less safe to women and girls? Obviously given backlash on here whenever system criticism comes up not even all women mind, in fact it bothers them more that women speak up about it.

He wasn't born in this country. He was born in Italy and is a Nigerian citizen by birth. Of course he can be deported, regardless of whether or not he has any links with Nigeria.

And hopefully he will be at the end of this sentence - it seems that the HO really screwed up with the previous deportation event and didn't even send their own lawyers to the tribunal.

This does massively complicate things (and before anybody starts - NO it’s not because I have sympathy for criminals).

It seems he’s Nigerian only insofar as he has a passport and a parent from there. But actually not Nigerian in any meaningful sense.

I understand the previous decision a little more now.

That said I would have no issue with him being deported after his current sentence. I think arguing for a human rights consideration requires a commitment to being a decent citizen on his part which clearly he is not willing to do.

(I also recognise deporting him doesn’t keep women safe, only some women safe. Locking him up for life no parole keeps all women safe - I would support that too.)

Even if it is (and I don't think its long enough) he won't actually be locked up for 17 years.

They could have attended the hearing and cross-examined him.