Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To be so upset that the leader of the Rochdale grooming gang has been allowed to stay in the UK!

252 replies

vermicello · 28/06/2022 09:02

www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/ringleader-rochdales-infamous-sex-grooming-24336978

Those poor girls. It is like they have been abused twice, first by him and his fellow groomers and secondly by the UK justice system, police and social workers. It is sending them a big message that their right to feel safe and protected is not a concern. I can't imagine how traumatic it must be to know you could bump into your abuser at any time and nothing can be done about it. Our justice system is a disgrace.

To top it all off, he has apparently received hundreds of thousands of pounds in legal aid courtesy of taxpayers. I really don't want my taxes wasted on people like him. So upsetting and infuriating!

OP posts:
Indiaorigin · 28/06/2022 21:12

The leniency of the sentences is dreadful. I hope (but not confident) that release conditions include not going to particular areas. Women deserve better.

I have no intention of committing any crimes. I was born in UK, always British, but it’s almost accidental. My parents were Indian citizens when I was born in the UK before 1983 so I had a right to British citizenship. You can’t be a dual Indian national. My parents opted for British citizenship for me because a passport would come through a lot quicker. That’s it. I’ve spent short holidays in India.

So should I be able to be deported on ancestry if I did commit a crime? How much different if I led exactly the same life but my parents got me an Indian passport and I became British a few weeks or a year later or when they did a few years later?

What if I was born after 1983 exactly the same life - no choice but to be Indian then British citizenship when my parents became British.

I don’t usually feel “other” on MN, I do tonight.

ancientgran · 28/06/2022 21:16

JemimaPuddlegoose · 28/06/2022 20:37

My abuser was white English. What do you propose is done with him?

I committed minor crimes such as shoplifting while homeless after fleeing abuse, and my mum's grandparents were immigrants, meaning the new legislation overruling the Human Rights Act means even though I was born in England to parents who were both born in England (and a dad whose family have lived in England since the middle ages) I could absolutely be deported to a country I've never been to where I don't speak a word of the language. Hell two years I was nearly arrested at the Sarah Everard vigil, now the Tories are making protest arrested, only a matter of time before you can be deported for attending a protest or a vigil.

Would you be happy to see a vulnerable teenage girl deported to a strange country for shoplifting, or attending a peaceful protest? Because that's the precedent that's being set.

The other thing they haven't thought through is would the other country accept you? You likely don't have a right to citizenship, or residency, in the country your great grandparents came from so they would effectively be making you stateless.

My husband is descended from slaves in the Caribbean but his ancestry goes back to Africa, no idea which country though. I wonder where he'd go?

JemimaPuddlegoose · 28/06/2022 21:16

Indiaorigin Flowers

HRTQueen · 28/06/2022 21:18

I would have had no issue with him being deported to serve a prison sentence in Pakistan of course he gave up duel citizenship

his sentence has been far to lenient

cases such as these are treated individually and should be

ancientgran · 28/06/2022 21:19

Florenz · 28/06/2022 20:21

"Would you be happy for criminals and pedophiles in other countries with any kind of tenuous connection through ancestry to the UK to be deported here??"
No I would not be happy but if we were also deporting criminals to their ancestral homelands it would be fair for other countries to do the same. Of course they would go straight to prison here and remain there.

So they'd go straight to prison without a trial? What if what they did in another country was a crime there but not here, would we have someone in prison for doing something perfectly legal in the UK?

ancientgran · 28/06/2022 21:22

MintJulia · 28/06/2022 15:08

I don't agree with the decision. He had alternative citizenship at the time of the offences. That should be what counts. He chose to sign it away. That makes statelessness his problem, not the UK's.

He should be deported, as should his co-perpetrators.

So do you think the British govt should have stripped Shamima Begum of her citizenship? It seems hypocritical if a criminal isn't allowed to change their status but it can be changed for them.

Scianel · 28/06/2022 21:33

Firstly, his sentence was a joke and the whole handling of the situation an absolute disgrace. He should still be under lock and key.

The rest of it is making my blood run cold. I'm a naturalised British citizen who was born elsewhere. I am law abiding but what if I do put a foot wrong? Say the wrong thing on twitter about transwomen that brings Police Scotland to my door, or attend a peaceful protest?
I guess I need to make sure I have no political engagement or express any public opinion, to keep myself safe.

ProfessorFusspot · 28/06/2022 21:46

SarahShorty · 28/06/2022 12:03

YANBU. HRA1998 is an Anthony Lionel Blair brainchild and came into force in 2000. It should have been put through a shredder. The paedophilic pile of human detritus should have been <something that can't be published>.

Who is this? Some relation of former UK PM Anthony Charles Lynton Blair, possibly?

Sn0tnose · 28/06/2022 22:18

He should of never been allowed to give up his other citizenship

I’m so interested in your opinion on exactly how the UK could have stopped him. Should we have barred him from contact with the outside world? Refused to let him speak to his solicitor? Or maybe just have hidden all the pens so he couldn’t sign any paperwork?

I don’t know how much power you think the UK government has, but if we told Pakistan not to allow him to give up his citizenship, we’d have very firmly been told to mind our own business. It’s between him and Pakistan. Funnily enough, we don’t get a say.

LeoOliver · 28/06/2022 22:21

PonyPatter44 · 28/06/2022 21:04

Bizarrely thats not true. I was recently dealing with a man who was born in London, has never even been outside the UK, and is liable to deportation because there is some doubt over his parents' immigration status when he was born.

I said it is largely dependent on place birth of but can also include your parent place of birth. It not unheard for people who are born and bred here to be deported due to technically not being a British citizen.

Florenz · 28/06/2022 22:21

Regardless of whether he could be stopped from giving up his Pakistani citizenship, it could have been recognised that he gave it up after he'd been arrested and it was a reasonable assumption that he did this to avoid deportation to Pakistan.

Fancydancer1934 · 28/06/2022 22:38

isadoradancing123 · 28/06/2022 19:43

The sooner the human rights act is abolished the better. He should either be in prison or deported

Yup!

Sn0tnose · 28/06/2022 22:39

Florenz · 28/06/2022 22:21

Regardless of whether he could be stopped from giving up his Pakistani citizenship, it could have been recognised that he gave it up after he'd been arrested and it was a reasonable assumption that he did this to avoid deportation to Pakistan.

Of course he did. And I’m sure nobody was stupid enough to think he’d given it up for any other reason.

But when that leaves his sole nationality as British, and we can’t force him to reinstate his Pakistan citizenship, what other option is there other than to treat him as a British citizen? We can’t make him stateless. And we can’t put him on a plane and send him to a country he’s not a citizen of. It’s all very well people saying we managed it with Shamima Begum, but we didn’t. We just refused to take her back. Nobody in her family had renounced citizenship of any other country and we didn’t actually have to try and convince any other country to accept her because she’d already made herself Syria’s problem. We effectively changed the locks while she was out of the house.

Don’t get me wrong, I’d happily agree with whole of life sentences for this type of offence. I think these people are monsters and they will always be a danger. But people believing that the government could have deported him if only they’d pulled their finger out and tried a bit harder, are just wrong.

Anothernamechangeplease · 28/06/2022 23:26

Personally, I'd like to deport all racists, fascists and idiots. I'm sure that most of them will probably have some foreign blood in their ancestry...Irish, maybe, or French or Viking. Can we start sending them back to their ancestral homelands tomorrow, please? There are a few on this thread that we could get started with..

Sirius3030 · 29/06/2022 00:29

Florenz · 28/06/2022 20:22

"Yes but you aren't only talking about citizenship, which I understand even if I don't agree with. You are talking about ancestral links. So how many generations of a family have to live here before you don't think someone should be deported?"
No limit. If there is a possible reason to remove a paedophile from this country it should be taken. Why on earth should it not?

Because the other company won’t accept them. And in practice no airline would fly them.

Sirius3030 · 29/06/2022 00:29

Country

Florenz · 29/06/2022 00:38

The easy solution is just to keep them locked up in prison.

HeddaGarbled · 29/06/2022 00:53

4 years! And Ghislaine Maxwell’s getting 20.

AmaryIlis · 29/06/2022 08:15

isadoradancing123 · 28/06/2022 19:43

The sooner the human rights act is abolished the better. He should either be in prison or deported

It has absolutely nothing to do with the Human Rights Act. He's not in prison because his sentence has come to an end, and he can't be deported because he's a British Citizen and there is no country that would accept him. The reasoning would be exactly the.same if we had never had an HRA at all.

AmaryIlis · 29/06/2022 08:18

Florenz · 28/06/2022 20:21

"Would you be happy for criminals and pedophiles in other countries with any kind of tenuous connection through ancestry to the UK to be deported here??"
No I would not be happy but if we were also deporting criminals to their ancestral homelands it would be fair for other countries to do the same. Of course they would go straight to prison here and remain there.

How could they go to prison here if they have not committed any crime in this country?

AmaryIlis · 29/06/2022 08:24

Florenz · 28/06/2022 20:22

"Yes but you aren't only talking about citizenship, which I understand even if I don't agree with. You are talking about ancestral links. So how many generations of a family have to live here before you don't think someone should be deported?"
No limit. If there is a possible reason to remove a paedophile from this country it should be taken. Why on earth should it not?

Because it cannot work. If we are going on a "no limit" ancestral links basis that means deporting people whose ancestors were Vikings or ancient Romans. Do you seriously imagine the Scandinavian countries and Italy are going to agree to that?

And where are the limits? Why just paedophiles? How about murderers and rapists, serial burglars and fraudsters, kidnappers, those guilty of assault? Shall we set up a full time ancestry research department to explore the antecedents of everyone convicted of a crime here so we can send them abroad?

And then we have to think about our colonial past. The reality is that under this system we would end up taking many more criminals than we export, with all the fun of running prisons for people who have never lived here and don't speak English. What on earth would be the point?

AmaryIlis · 29/06/2022 08:27

Clavinova · 28/06/2022 20:35

AmaryIlis
Absolutely NO-ONE receives hundreds of thousands of pounds in legal aid

2012
Abu Qatada runs up £500,000 legal aid bill to stay in UK

www.theguardian.com/world/2012/dec/15/abu-qatada-legal-aid-bill

He was deported in 2013 -

www.gov.uk/government/speeches/home-secretary-addresses-parliament-on-abu-qatada

But he didn't receive it, did he? The lawyers who worked bloody hard did.

You really need to read posts properly before going on one of your cut and paste expeditions.

Squareflair · 29/06/2022 08:29

The real injustice is that his sentence was so lenient.

AmaryIlis · 29/06/2022 08:31

IWanderedLonely · 28/06/2022 21:04

Florenz · Today 09:36

The "Human Rights Act" can go to hell. If someone commits a serious crime like this and has citizenship or ancestral links to another country, of course we should deport them. Why should the "human rights" of a convicted rapist take precedent over the rights of girls and women not to be raped?

The sooner the HRA is abolished in this country and we start looking out for the rights of the law abiding citizen over the rights of the criminal, the better.

Totally agree.

Both you and Florenz need to educate yourself on the law. This is not happening because of the Human Rights Act. It is happening because this person's sentence is completed, and because he is a British citizen. We have had the concepts of finite sentences and citizenship since way before we even set up the European Human Rights Convention.

PetraBP · 29/06/2022 08:57

To all those banging on about ancestry- this case, and others, are not about people born in the UK.

If a person has come to the UK and committed horrific crimes, why should they be allowed to stay?

This is not about colour, ethnicity or religion.

A white person born in Sweden should be deported if they have committed crimes like this.

Swipe left for the next trending thread