Change law to kick out Rochdale rapist, No 10 urged

That doesn't excuse it or make it ok.

We shouldn't be allowing anyone into the country who needs to be "instructed" not to rape. The wellbeing of the women and some men who are already here must come before the wellbeing of anybody from another country.

We do not know who will act like this and sometimes there have been men on a temporary basis who have done this. For example, another nation's military cadets thought it was ok to sexually assault here.

We shouldn't be giving salvation/ home to people who need to be instructed not to rape.

I find it upsetting that this country is seen as a soft target for sexual assaults. It has sometimes been used as an excuse by someone from a 'stricter' country when they have assaulted UK citizens.

The Ethiopian sex offender, in Epping, said that he did not think it was so strict here which is obviously appalling when there was a girl in school uniform, but I have heard and witnessed this sort of thing myself. It would be good if there was basic instruction given to everyone who comes here regarding the fact that women are equal citizens, etc.

Of course it won't, we're far too late. That boat sailed a long time ago.

Yes!

Exactly.

I think they deserve that but would never want a return to the death penalty. I think they should be locked up. If you're that much of a risk you should never see freedom

I don't think prisons should promote diversity either , they should be no islam or any other religions other than christianity in our jails. No segregation at all.

That proves it is not easy to just change laws as the Telegraph is suggesting.

But all within a culture which held that some girls didn’t matter and could be abused with impunity.

The traffickers in white, black, brown gangs of all and every culture and ethnicity also grew up in families and a community. There is no culture which is immune to this problem of organised crime and specifically organised sex trafficking. Well no culture which includes men.

Fellow pakistani
Giving my view, most poeple i know loathe these men and want the goverment to throw away the bloody key. And it isnt just white girls its also pakistani girls however in the 90s alot of pakistani families were stricter so opportunity was limited, ie staying out late and weekend we had stricter curfews- they were still targeted.
Also chemical castration and much longer than 20 years.
The issue with Pakistan is the right money and the right contacts could give him an easy life. However if he commited this crime in pakistan AND became an example the sentence would be much harsher and no human rights for monsters like this.

Alot of pakistani communitys breathed a sigh of relief when these men got locked up.
Me personally i think the family members covering for them and complicit should have been locked up as well, thats one way to hit them were it hurts.

Me personally im happy for the government to throw some money towards Pakistan to take them.

His immediate family will have had an influence. Plus a community if it was closed off.

British policing, social work, schools and politicians all reinforced the idea that these girls were worthless and unimportant. That was British culture at the time. The police even prosecuted some of the girls for soliciting before sending them back to be abused. Many of the customers were white.

That was normal British culture he grew up with - authorities who ignored what was going on or even participated in it so long as the girls were of a class or category which didn’t matter to those in authority. Social workers and police routinely described the men keeping the girls out of school as “boyfriends”, despite the men being much older and the girls under age.

Mirpuri girls were also victims, whatever the resident naysayers keep repeating. Grooming gangs are part of organised crime - their race/cultural characteristics will be whichever group is organising large scale crime in the area. PP is correct - they are overlooked partly because they are even more fearful of coming forward than the white girls. In Rochdale and some other areas its Muslim men, in other areas its East Europeans, the long established local white crime family, sectarian white groups - the targets are always the more vulnerable girls in the area or trafficked in from other areas.

This man was born in '53, came to the UK in the 60s when he was under age - mid teens roughly according to one of the Beeb reports. He was enabled by successive British authorities. I see no reason why Pakistani women should be subject to him just because he was born there.

It appears that Patel made that promise but then discovered it was impossible.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-61970644?app-referrer=deep-link

Sorry I don't know.

So did Patel agree to it or was it just a request from Burnham?

It’s not going to work here.

I recall the London mayor explained how communities need to live near their shops, places of worship, schools.

People tend to stick to what’s familiar, even after having moved for a better life.

That's what the victims were promised, they've all said so. It probably came from the home office because Andy Burnham wrote to Priti Patel about it.
https://www.greatermanchester-ca.gov.uk/news/mayor-and-deputy-mayor-of-greater-manchester-call-for-rochdale-grooming-gang-deportations-to-be-complete/

You do what the Danish do and stop there being large communities of their native culture in which they can live without integrating at all. They have laws against to many people of non Danish culture living in one area.

Who made that promise? Clearly someone who didn’t understand it was impossible.

How do you know???

Your post says so much about you.

We are not global, we are the UK.

I care about our UK girls.

If he goes to Pakistan and abuses a child then Pakistan can deal with him. He should not be our problem.

Thank you for the reply.

One did go back to Rochdale after release. I don't know if he's still there now. The other is believed to be in Pakistan.

There's also the issue of concurrent sentences. They don't make any sense to me; if a woman is raped, and the rapist is sentenced to ten years punishment, he should serve ten years for that crime. If he also happens to have raped someone else, and gets another ten year sentence, surely that should be served separately? If it's just bundled into the existing ten years, he's not actually being punished at all for the second rape. With concurrent sentences, he could rape dozens of women, and serve no extra time at all; so once he's raped one person, he may as well keep on raping until he's caught as he won't suffer any further punishment. Which seems completely disgusting to me.

This creature should have served separate full terms for each and every crime he committed, and as he reached the end of a sentence and started a new one, he should be reminded of exactly what - and who - this new stretch would be for.