Judge Dread and the Taliban
A group of girls returning home from school in Afghanistan’s Logar province recently did not for a moment expect what lay ahead. As they walked down a dirt track, insurgents sprang out of the parched farms and began firing on them. Some of them fled into the farm, but two girls, one aged 13, the other 10, were killed in the ambush. Three of their friends were wounded.
Ah, and finally: now we see Muslim crowds protesting against this outr… ; oh, so sorry. No, those are still the same ones calling for the blood of some writer.
God, but they look stupid, and ugly. Give them red shawls and tattoos instead of beards and they could pass for drunken Liverpool supporters any time of the day.
Still, this is not an anti-Muslim rant. No, no, it’s not.
So, picture yourself inside a proper English court-room, with a proper English judge presiding over it. Now, those Taliban killers are brought in, to hear their sentence.
The judge stares down at them with paternal sternness and says,
Hey, guys, what you did was wrong, you know. Sure, you were provoked. Those damn girls were carrying books openly, for goodness’ sake. They were practically begging for it, if you ask me. Still, think of their mothers, lads. I’d suggest you dish out some cash to them, so they can go to the barber – oh no, sorry, this is Afghanistan. Right, so give them some money, so that they can buy a new veil or even a whole new hijab. That will cheer them up in no time, I’m sure.
Far-fetched? Not really.
This week, in an English court judge Julian Hall gave a two-year prison sentence to a man who had attacked and raped a ten-year-old girl in some park. With time already served, this means the man will walk free in a few weeks time.
So, why this astonishing leniency? Let’s hear it from the judge,
Here is a very young woman of ten who is taken to the park. Within three-quarters of an hour of meeting a 24-year-old man, they have sex together. That is not a good idea. It is an absolute crime because she was only ten.
Then, the court was told that the young girl regularly wore make-up, strappy tops and jeans.
The judge again,
It is quite clear she is a very disturbed child and a very needy child and she is a sexually precocious child. She liked to dress provocatively.
Ah yes. The uncovered meat defence – again. Always a difficult one to counter, that. Said the judge,
In my experience this has been the most difficult sentencing exercise I have ever had to decide on.
Right.
Judge Julian Hall has dealt with paedophiles before, by the way. He once gave a suspended sentence to a man who had put his hands down the trousers of a six-year-old girl. Said the judge to the defendant,
In criminal terms, what you did was quite mild.
The judge also told the guy to give his victim 250 pounds in compensation, stating,
If it buys her a nice new bicycle, that’s the sort of thing that might cheer her up.
Rrriiight…
One would almost be tempted to advice judge Hall to follow his heart and leave the judicial circuit for some paedophile ring – and if not that, then at least to paint his red robes white, exchange his wig for a Kalashnikov and join the Taliban.
He’d fit right in.
If you enjoyed this post, subscribe today to get free updates by email or RSS.
