UK Muslim Spared Jail After Belt Buckle Assault on Schoolgirl for ‘Not Praying’
Sharia in action in South London
Another loony-tunes British Judge kowtows to Islam:
A Streatham Vale [suburb of South West London - Ed.] Muslim who whipped a schoolgirl with a belt buckle because she had not prayed has been spared jail.
Somalian Abdikarim Abdirahman’s violent attack on March 5 last year left the 12-year-old girl with a bad cut to her head.
The 46-year-old, of Abercairn Road, delayed taking the girl to hospital after the attack and then asked her to lie to doctors about how she received her injuries.
He told police he felt justified in punishing the girl but later admitted it had been wrong.
At Inner London Crown Court on Friday he was handed a 24-week prison sentence, suspended for 12 months, and 80 hours community service for the violent attack.
He will also be subject to a supervision order for 12 months.
Judge Mark Bishop told him: “You must understand that to hit a child with a belt, particularly with a buckle, is not only very dangerous but a completely unacceptable way for someone to behave.
“Courts in this country will protect children from this kind of abuse.”
The court heard how Abdirahman had gone into a rage in the girl’s Brixton home after she told him she did not want to pray.
He hit her with a sandal before the girl fled to her bedroom. He followed her, took off his belt and brought the buckle crashing down on to her head.
He then dragged her by the leg out of the room before the girl’s mother ordered him to stop.
He pleaded guilty to causing actual bodily harm at a hearing in February.
He admitted the assault but said he had intended to whip the belt down on to the bed to scare the girl.
He claimed she had moved her head at the last minute, which is why the belt buckle struck her.
Judge Bishop told him if he committed another offence in the next 12 months he would go straight to prison.
“Courts in this country will protect children from this kind of abuse.” – Judge Mark Bishop, sentencing Abdikarim Abdirahman
We would dearly like to know in what way the Judge in this case felt he was ‘protecting the child’ by leaving Abdirahman on the streets?
We are familiar with the effects that the influx of a large Somali community in this part of London has had over recent years – and it could hardly be characterised (as it will inevitably be by the left-wing multikulti crowd – who should perhaps speak to the area’s existing residents before spouting their usual hollow rhetoric); as ‘enriching’ or ‘vibrant’: High crime rates, widespread unemployment, hundreds of women walking the streets in full burkas; and antisocial behaviour problems associated with the use by Somali men of ‘khat’ – a narcotic plant which has amphetamine-like stimulant properties – now characterise a part of London where such problems were non-existent before it was ‘Islamised’.
It appears here that the appalling beating of a child has, to all intents and purposes, gone unpunished – possibly for fear of the usual victimology uproar from the facilitators and enablers of Islam in Britain.
The sentence should have been custodial immediately and measured in years, not weeks.
[Source: Streatham Guardian]
Please consider supporting Un:dhimmi by making a small donation to the site, in order to show your support and help us with our work.
Get Your Copy of The Documentary the Iranian Régime Doesn’t Want You to See
Posted in Britain, Enablers, EUrabia, Multiculturalism, Sexual Apartheid, True Islam, Useful Idiots, Women in Islam | 
Tags: Crackpot Judges, Immigration Lunacy
The article reveals much about the psychology and moral character of the ordinary, average, non-terrorist Muslim:
(1) He initially tells the police that he had been perfectly justified in his actions. One can imagine that he was genuinely bewildered as to why he had been arrested in the first place: to him, as a devout Muslim, the meting out of violent punishment is not only lawful but mandatory in such situations.
(2) He flew into a rage: the natural, inevitable reaction of any devout Muslim when confronted with the slightest challenge or slight to his “religion” or “prophet”.
(3) Hauled before a kuffar court of law he has no qualms about lying (the belt-buckle blow to the head was supposedly “unintentional”). To the Muslim (the devotee of the False Prophet possessed by the unclean spirit of the Father of Lies, a.k.a. Allah) mendacity not is not only instinctive but also, again, a religious duty.
Very well summed up. But you left something out – the possible epilogue:
4) Aided by multiculturalist liberal friends, claims that he was denied his ‘Human Rights’ to religious expression and to follow Sharia, instead of kuffar, law. “It’s Islamophobia™”, they cry. Goes to court – gets compensation.
In a postmodern-liberal-progressive-multicultural “human rights” narrative, Abdirahman is, of course, the victim, merely by virtue of his being a devotee of Mahomet. It is no longer real persons that have rights (to life, liberty, freedom of conscience etc.), but only ideological constructs (e.g. the inviolable dignity of the “prophet” Mohammed) and those groups that have attained privileged, a priori victim status within the neo-Marxist narrative of the postmodern class struggle (Muslims, the Third World).
In a multicultural society, Caliban/Abdirahman is the hero and Prospero/western civilisation the villain.
“Sharia in action in South London”
Hey I thought it was a free country of free actors, no. Oh I guess they’re only free if they conform to your particular Western/feminist notion of “freedom”. You’re full of sh*t, and you know it.
Helpful tip: If you’re going to call someone names, you may find it helps your credibility if you:
a) Don’t use profanity
b) Substantiate your argument – don’t just call someone names
c) Don’t provide fake email addresses/IPs
Buh bye now.