Iain Hall's SANDPIT

Home » Australian Politics » Victoria the garden state » Almahde Ahmad Atagore, Fido Littlesoul, the bowel’s unfamiliar.

Almahde Ahmad Atagore, Fido Littlesoul, the bowel’s unfamiliar.

What I find bizarre among the more obsessive Latte sippers is their inability to appreciate that you can understand the way that scum-bags think without in any way endorsing their though processes or any disgusting acts that they may  subsequently commit.

Click for source

Now to be entirely honest I think that I am not alone in thinking that a five stretch (with a three year minimum) is by no means enough for this string of assaults and it will only be acceptable, if, at the end of his time in jail, he is immediately deported. After all he is a foreign student and not an arsonist asylum seeker so it should be no problem for the immigration minister to revoke his visa on the basis that he is of bad character.
What I find rather sadly amusing is that the courts seem to have bought a rather shallow Sheik Hilali defence, The man is from Libya for heavens sake, a country where Gadaffi had female body guards  (In tight fatigues) and it has always been a more Marxist state than it is Islamic one, so the claim that he could not help it because of his religious background is just a bit too convenient and that it has been accepted in mitigation should disgust anyone who believes in Justice.

Perhaps what we need is a sentencing judge with a bit of backbone who could just totally reject such spurious arguments in mitigation as the ones offered in this case. A summing up that essentially says “misogyny, no matter what its religious or cultural  origin is entirely unacceptable in this country and as a consequence you shall serve a minimum of ten years with hard labour”  would send the right message…

Cheers Comrades

Advertisements

44 Comments

  1. Ray Dixon says:

    Iain, all barristers will use whatever mitigating circumstances they can lay their hands on to reduce a client’s sentence. I don’t think this guy got any more ‘favours’ or sentence reduction due to his so-called ‘cultural adjustment disorder’. I think he received much the same treatment that any Aussie citizen would have received in the same sort of case. In fact I’m sure of that because your link doesn’t go to the full article and leaves out this rather pertinent piece of information:

    Several of the victims were in court and welcomed the maximum sentence of five years and three months, with at least three years to serve before being eligible for parole.

    Atagore pleaded guilty to five counts of indecent assault, one of assault with intent to rape and one of committing an indecent act with a child.

    Police were unable to check his criminal past due to unrest in Libya.

    But Sen-Det Dion Achtypis said outside court that Atagore’s nationality was not a factor in his crimes.

    ”There are many, many overseas students in this country who are law-abiding citizens,” he said.

    What mitigation?

    Btw, I’d be pretty sure he’ll be deported on release. He was only here on a temporary basis anyway.

  2. Iain Hall says:

    I did note the five year sentence in my citation and the text of my commentary Ray. but the gist of my post is to suggest that 5 years is not enough for this serial sex pest .Further perhaps the victims who were pleased about him getting any Jail-time were just expecting the sort of non punishment of a “community corrections order” that so many lefty Lawyers seem to think more than adequate for theses sort of offences…

  3. Ray Dixon says:

    Iain, the gist of your post seems to be that the judge took the so-called mitigating circumstances into account when dishing out the sentence.

    However, it seems quite clear that he was given the maximum sentence permitted under the law for the offences commited.

    Whether or not that’s adequate is a matter for the legislators but I don’t think you’ll find anyone would think this bloke should have got off any lighter. We don’t know exactly the extent of the assaults but most of it sounds like he groped females in public, although in one instance he was charged with ‘intent to rape’. Yeah, he deserved at least 5 years and maybe more.

  4. Sax says:

    Here we go again.
    5 years ? Should have got bloody twenty !
    Another set of laws demanded by a group of people, hell bent on mass conversion to a religious cult. Don’t fool yourselves, that is exactly what this is.

    I could google a stack of references from the Quran about Muslum abhorrence to violence , but needless to say, again, this looks like an instance of a person picking out the good bits, and leaving out the rest.

    Personal depression does not give anyone permission, to go on their own personal Jihad ? We are not a Muslum country, and never will be no matter how hard they will try/force the conversion upon us. The judge must have had blinkers on. The law is straight forward when it comes to assault, as well as any other tort. Why this creep got away with the light sentence is anyone’s guess, but if he has any semblance of a survival instinct, he should do his time, in silence, in isolation. If he sprouts his theories and beliefs in the slammer, he won’t get out ?

    Being an average Aussie, I feel I am as tolerant as the rest of them, when it comes to religious freedoms, BUT, when it comes to breaking the law, and destroying other people’s lives, due to a misguided belief, then enough is enough.

    Finally, we have allowed millions of immigrants into this country over the years, and never in that time, have we had to allow for such cultural differences, nor have we ever had to pander to such differences on this scale before. Why should we have to start now ? Either these people want to live in this country, under our laws or they don’t. If that is the case, go home ?
    Do our young women, looking simply for a good night out, have to dress neck to knee, just to ensure that they survive these gangs of thugs ?

  5. Sax says:

    how come “bold” doesn’t work anymore Iain ?

  6. Ray Dixon says:

    Sax, he was given the MAXIMUM sentence. This has nothing to do with treating Muslims differently.

  7. Sax says:

    Like hell it’s not. Again, they don’t believe our laws cover them. They again feel that abidance by our laws is not for them. Even Muslum law abhors this type of violence. That is exactly what this is about.
    Wrong on both parts I think Ray.
    I quote ?

    According to NSW Law for the charge of Sexual assault,
    The maximum penalty for the charge of sexual assault (Section 61I of the Crimes Act) is 14 years imprisonment.

    In NSW, a court can impose any of the following penalties for a sexual assault charge.

    Section 10: unregistered firearm proven but dismissed
    Fine
    Good behaviour bond
    Community service order (CSO)
    Suspended sentence
    Intensive correction order (previously periodic detention)
    Home detention
    Prison sentence
    http://www.australiancriminallawyers.com.au/web/page/nsw_sexual_assault

    Note also, that the above is for ONE offence, which makes this multiple case above even more abhorrent.

    This isn’t just “Muslum Bashing” either.
    The majority of Eu and especially Middle East countries historically, don’t value a woman as anything more, than “property”.
    It this still acceptable to our society ?
    I think not !

  8. Sax says:

    BTW, this guy, (if I read the article correctly), had 7 victims ?
    You still think five years is the maximum sentence ? Please tell me, (and the victims as well as their families), that this is some sort of sick joke your playing ?
    If I read the law above correctly, a maximum of 14 years, for each count .
    This means a maximum for seven counts, of nearly 100 years ? He only got five.

    Man, what a powerful message this is sending ?
    Even pickpockets get more than five years ?
    What a bloody joke !

  9. Iain Hall says:

    Sax
    Glad to see that I am not the only one who is no fan of the idea of concurrent sentences, Maybe they do it because judges just can;t add up?

  10. damage says:

    I read an article once where a law reformer wanted to give the judges the power to impose a lowest maximum sentence when the concurrent minimums were more than that maximum.
    That is – if a bloke is guilty of 3 offences where the minimums are 5, 6 and 7 (18 total) years and the maximums are 12, 14 and 19 years then the judge can impose the lowest maximum (12 in my eg) rather than the highest minimum as a concurrent.
    Never went any further though.

  11. Angel says:

    Ray, even if it was groping that is still sick. It is sick to grope a 13 year old. SICK PAEDOPHILE. Now convicted of a child sex offence, that should be enough to deport him. We will never know though will we. The roof top arsonists got their tantrum asylum.
    This is the stuff that builds Cronulla reactions.

    The courts need to grow a set and be representative of the majority of this population, not the over protected minority and their feeble excuses under the banner of Allah.

  12. Sax says:

    There is no reason on this earth, that would permit this sort of behaviour.
    There is no religion on this earth, that would condone this sort of behaviour.

    Problem with judges these days Iain, is that half of them have the problem of staying awake in a court, let alone understand what is being presented to them ?

    One count, perhaps if the reasons were good enough. Such as, perhaps his religion caused him to go on some personal jihad, fighting the loose and immoral ways of the western hoards. (sic) But this cretin had bloody seven !

    The little creep wants to thank Allah that I wasn’t one of the fathers of one of his victims ?

  13. Angel says:

    Didn’t Mohammed marry a child?

  14. Angel says:

    Following the line of a law unto themselves, click the link below for the petition to ban live exports.
    The video is very graphic and upsetting.

    All this in the name of religion, sickening.

    http://www.banliveexport.com/

  15. Ray Dixon says:

    It was in Victoria, Sax, not NSW. According to the FULL article (which Iain did not reproduce in full) he received the MAXIMUM sentence. If it’s not “muslim bashing” why are you carrying on about this case and not all the other cases where people receive same or less sentence for the same crime?

    Angel, I am not supporting this prick. I am saying he got the maximum under the law.

  16. Ray Dixon says:

    Angel, re your last 2 comments, you ARE “muslim bashing” now. Give it a bone, your prejudice is showing.

  17. Angel says:

    Ray, please watch the video and then tell me what is done in the name of Allah doesn’t make you want to throw up.
    He received the maximum sentence as his charges were all faced at once. Had he appeared separately then many maximums would have been more appropriate.

    Lets feel sorry for this guy who seen flesh of a young girl. Lets feel sorry for this guy who could not find a mosque close to go ask what would be appropriate to do.
    I feel sorry for the young girl and her family only.

    If you consider it muslim bashing then fair enough. I consider it beliefs that do not correlate with the Australian way.

    Watch the video please.

  18. Angel says:

    Didn’t Bin Laden marry a child?

  19. Sax says:

    Funny enough Ray, even though the quote was in NSW, the High Court presides over ALL the courts, and of course, our laughing stocks in Canberra over the lot. The sentence structure is fairly similar for all states within Australia.

    I wouldn’t care if this guy were Muslum, even an Aussie. He probably did receive the maximum Ray, but only for ONE count !
    This creep had seven counts !
    Did this tosser get a bulk discount ?

    The laws are there to protect the society at large, and this has been a complaint for many years. Lenient sentences, and large sentences, but once in, get paroled early purely to save costs. This is not a new complaint. These laws must be carried through to the courts, otherwise, why have the bloody laws in the first place ? This sick individual should have got twenty at least. Otherwise, what is the deterrent for anyone thinking of doing the same crime ? Bloody none thats what.

  20. Angel says:

    Ray , if you are refusing to see the muslim influence in this crime read on

    “…That is most convenient, that they should be known (as such) and not molested. ..”
    “…As to why she is required to cover her body in such a way, the answer is that the woman herself is ‘Awrah’ (meant to be covered)..”
    “…to avoid attraction or temptation. The display of the beauty or the part of woman and free mixing with men lead to scandals like that of Mr Clinton & Monica which is not acceptable in Islam which invites for a clean and pure society. …”

    All rulings from the Islamic Sharia Council
    http://www.islamic-sharia.org/general/why-is-it-necessary-for-women-to-wear-an-outer-garment-2.html

  21. Ray Dixon says:

    Angel & Sax, you are both taking swipes at muslims here because of what one muslim has done – even though he was not shown any leniency, it seems. That’s straight out muslim-bashing and prejudiced – where are your protests over Aussies getting reduced sentences for similar crimes by using their backgrounds as a mitigating circumstance? You do realise that people from all cultures and religions commit sexual asault don’t you? Heard about the Catholic priests?

  22. Sax says:

    Yes, and I have also heard of catholic priest being hidden within Vatican City, so as to prevent justice from being handed out. I have also heard of them being placed in jail as well. Geez Ray, the muslum bashing and call of prejudice comment, is full of uninformed crap. You have come up with some dribble over the last months, but that has to be the most uninformed bit of dribble I have ever seen from you.

    Firstly,
    The mulsum religion has little to do with it, other than the fact, that typical middle eastern men don’t respect their female counterparts as we do. (or should !) muslum or not. I was taking a swipe at the leniency of the sentence, and the use of religion, as some sort of lame excuse, or justification.

    This creep, regardless of religion, ethnicity or status, had seven bloody counts ! . What would you consider a fair sentence ? A few muslum equivalent hail marys, to allow for penance, to go off and do the same thing again ? I reiterate below, obviously you didn’t read it.

    You still think five years is the maximum sentence ? Please tell me, (and the victims as well as their families), that this is some sort of sick joke your playing ?
    If I read the law above correctly, a maximum of 14 years, for each count .
    This means a maximum for seven counts, of nearly 100 years ? He only got five.

    Based on the above, how can you justify the opinion, about how this sentence was anything but a bloody gift ? How would you explain your position to the victim’s families Ray ?

    There is no mitigating circumstance for rape, other than being psycho (which btw you would have to be to do the crime in the first place ?), that could justify this amount of discount.

    Certainly people of different religions and cultures perpertrate this crime. As I also quoted above (which you obviously also didn’t read) Muslum law is just as strict against this sort of crime, as ours. Obviously, you didn’t read that either ?

  23. Angel says:

    Maybe that should have been more directed at me Ray,

    The sentence was light. Many sentences are light these days. The punishments are not fitting for the crimes, especially those against the person.

    My reasoning in this example was that the Islamic beliefs that women (and girl children) should not show flesh else they are fair game for the moslem men’s emotions, sexual advances and mistreatment. Maybe, even quite possibly, had this guy been raised under another culture, these sexual predator crimes may not have happened.

    Another reasoning is that maybe if the government was more selective of the cultures fitting to our own with immigration policies, then the crime definitely would not have happened.

    Seeing an Islamic influence in this criminal is not racist. Could it possibly be that this person was actually racist against our Australian culture on our own soil and lashed out in a way that would have scarred a young girl for life. Was he in fact making racist judgements against his victims. Yes he was.

    How was this case not trialled as a hate crime.

  24. Sax says:

    Because that would be seen as being inflammatory by a media circus, and discriminatory by a religion fighting for domination over the rest. This is Australia, at least the last time I looked, and if a crime is perpertrated in Australia, then justice is inflicted by OUR courts, not some imam claiming their laws have precedence. The weird part is, that rape is also a crime under muslum law as well. The punishment should fit the crime, under the law of the land. That land ? Australia, not bloody Mecca ?

  25. Angel says:

    Yes Sharia law views rape as a serious crime and often the punishment is 100 floggings.

    A sole female’s word will only be taken in courts matters regarding such as birth and child rearing, not molestation or rape. It will not be enough for a woman to proclaim that a male raped her. The requirement is that 4 males are needed to witness to prove the allegation. How often are 4 other males present.

    “…realize how difficult it has been made in Islam, to prove such allegations…” http://www.islamic-sharia.org/general/on-the-testimony-of-women-2.html

  26. Ray Dixon says:

    My point is simple: You two are going over the top on this case because he’s a muslim. Not because of his crime but because he’s a muslim .. even though he got the MAXIMUM sentence.

    Justice has been served. Maybe it’s too light (I already said he should have got more) but the fact is he got the max the judge could dish out under the law. When you two put as much outrage and anger into the next dinky-di Aussie who gets the same sentence for the same crime, then I’ll believe you’re being fair and even handed.

  27. angel says:

    Ray, was this a hate crime or not?

  28. gigdiary says:

    ‘is this a hate crime?’

    of course it was, Angel, and had the shoe been on the other foot, and it was an anglo committing these crimes against muslims, we would have seen all hell break loose.

    Instead the latte-sipping lefties refuse to hear a word of condemnation of their favoured pet project, instead preferring to label us as scare-mongers and hate-mongers. Ray, who is usually well to the middle of these debates, resides firmly on the left when it comes to the efficacy of Middle Eastern immigration. He refuses to admit that Fraser made a mistake, and that we have been, and will paying for this influx of anti-social immigrants for generations.

    It’s not people Ray, it’s cultures that make and break a society. And this is one culture that is not, in any way, necessary, or needed in Australia.

  29. Sax says:

    It’s one culture wanting to dominate the rest that breaks a society I hope you mean too GD ?

    Ray
    Yep, maximum, BUT only for one count !
    Being a muslum has nothing to do with it, other than the fact that this particular creep didn’t seem our laws worthy to obey ? You can’t seem to get past the fact that this creep had multiple (7) counts here. This is not an area where you get a bulk discount ? You don’t go out and kill twenty people, and expect only the one charge, and subsequent prison sentence.

    My ire is the fact that this tosser violated 7 women ! That is why he should be put away, and five years don’t do it. Regardless of the religion.

  30. Ray Dixon says:

    Sax, neither you or I know the full extent of this bloke’s offences, although most seem to be groping females in the street. Former AFL footballer Wayne Carey did that too (groped a girl on the breasts outside a night club saying, “you need a bigger set of tits”) and got off with a slap over the wrist. He also assaulted his girlfriend and police in other subsequent incidents and, despite having form, guess what? No jail time. So I’d suggest this guy received no favours or sentence reduction as a result of his barrister’s attempts to use his cultural background as a mitigating circumstance.

    Angel, yes it was a “hate” crime. Most sexual assaults on women are commited by blokes who hate women. I’m not sure what your point is because this is not the USA where they can up the charge if it’s a racially-based crime as far as I know. We do have racial vilification laws but the police have seen fit not to charge him with that. Either you think the cops are soft lefties too or you’ve been watching too much of ‘Law & Order’ on TV.

    GD, mate .. your “Fraser was wrong …” statement is rather revealing. Please mate, this country was built on immigration and cultural diversity. It’s still being built on it and today’s immigrants are tomorrows true blue Aussies. Give it time. Otherwise … maybe NZ is the place for you after all?

    Btw there’s plenty of “anti-social” behaviour among dinky-di Aussies.
    GD,

  31. Sax says:

    The article mentioned seven counts Ray, so in this instance we DO know the extent of his offences. Added to that, seven is all he has owned up to ?

    I don’t understand, how you can’t get your head around the fact that seven crimes is more serious than one ?

    Again, race should be taken out of this equation. The law is the law is the law. In this case he has seven counts. One perhaps, the time involved could be discounted due to a brain f*rt, but seven ?

    I don’t know you are defending this creep ? What sort of message is this sending to people who would consider partaking in this criminal activity, and what message is it also sending to those women, who go through hell on the witness stand to help put these creeps away. We all know the methods defence councels engage, when they attempt to dig up every piece of dirt the poor girl may have been involved in her life, to discredit the testimony of said witnesses and victims ?

    As for Wayne Carey, he should have also been put in jail. Had he been an average Joe, and not a brain damaged media goofball, he probably would have.

  32. Ray Dixon says:

    Sax, I haven’t defended this jerk. Can’t you read? Iain’s post is about the so-called leniency shown by the judge but it appears he got the maximum sentence. Yes, 7 incidents of assault is bad but we do NOT know the actual details. As I said, it seems they were groping incidents not attempted rape or the like. The incidents are disgraceful but, according to the report, even the victims were satisfied with the sentence. You’re not, but I don’t see the same outrage from you over other cases (like Carey’s) where the offender was certainly shown leniency. Could that be because Carey did not claim “cultural differences made me done it”?

    Look, as for the attempt by this bloke (or by his barrister) to claim he had a “cultural disorder”, that’s a load of crap. But that’s what barristers do – they attempt to mitigate. Btw, I think he might have pleaded guilty, saving the victims from cross-examination too. Geezus you’re blowing this out of proportion – I wonder why.

    I’ve got nothing more to say because you are just repeating yourself and turning this into something it’s not. It was just a poor post by iain, who conveniently did not link to the full article or mention that the bloke got the max.

  33. Sax says:

    I really don’t care if this is your last posting on this matter or not. It’s not your blog, and perhaps others may have something valid to add ?

    So you think it is just a case of a run of the mill attack Ray ? I guarantee your outlook would be different, if perhaps your daughter had been one of the victims ?

    I referred to Carey’s case in my last paragraph. Obviously, as I didn’t agree with your loose thoughts above you didn’t get that far ?

    I am not defending Iain, he doesn’t need it, but all that was relevent was posted here. For those watching the full article is @ http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/more-news/foreign-student-upset-by-the-way-women-dressed-jailed-for-sex-attacks/story-fn7x8me2-1226066379289 and there wasn’t much missing, that I could see.

    It was a good post, in that, it shows the inadequacy again, of a system tilted towards religious bull*hit being used as a defence. What sort of a message does the justice system, (or that old w*nker on the bench), think it is sending to a community, already being degraded and divided due to religious zealotry ? I guarantee, if this had happened in Libya, the result would have been different.

  34. […] sentencing, and the result is as you see above, now if a judge had thought like that in Melbourne then maybe justice would have actually been seen done for those seven women …. Cheers […]

  35. Angel says:

    Wayne Carey, well yes sure. From experience with him, he is a dirtbag driven by his ego.This gods gift complex is not a trait of an AFL footballer though. Not all are like him, even at the top of the level.

    Carey was not taught to disrespect women and he had no trouble being a pig. What happens when a man is taught to disrespect women, what pigs do we have then?

  36. Sax says:

    They get sent packing Angel, just as Carey has.
    I think society is wising up to these sort of people, finally.
    His attitudes, and lifestyle cost him plenty. His potential media career, as well as anything really to do with football, at least in the public eye. Couldn’t have happened to a nicer bloke.

    It is unfortunate, that both here, we put our sports heroes upon such a high pedestal, and demand of them, what they possibly cannot deliver. It takes a special person, not to be affected by this hero status, continual ego stroking, and remain balanced.
    Not an excuse, but there it is ?

  37. Ray Dixon says:

    No, I didn’t say it was a “run of the mill” case, Sax. I said he got the maximum sentence under the law. You have projected that his 7 offences were compounded into one. Okay know-all, where’s your proof of that? I suugest you read the article again – the part Iain left out. Here it is again (as I posted in the very first comment here):

    Several of the victims were in court and welcomed the maximum sentence of five years and three months, with at least three years to serve before being eligible for parole.

    Atagore pleaded guilty to five counts of indecent assault, one of assault with intent to rape and one of committing an indecent act with a child.

    Police were unable to check his criminal past due to unrest in Libya.

    But Sen-Det Dion Achtypis said outside court that Atagore’s nationality was not a factor in his crimes.

    ”There are many, many overseas students in this country who are law-abiding citizens,” he said.

    And please do not bring my daughter into this – okay?

  38. Angel says:

    My outlook would have been different had it been my daughter then, then I would have been really upset.

    Have faith in those already in prison waiting for the rock spider to arrive.

  39. Sax says:

    “Know it All” ?
    As for your daughter, I was bringing up the fact that what if it had been your child Ray ? Would you have been satisfied with the sentence ? I doubt it !
    S*it, and you reckon I’m sensative ?

    No special knowledge here Einstein, other than the quotes I provided, as to the sentence for rape and sexual assault, which in your arrogance, obviously didn’t read.
    What makes my judgement any more poignant than yours ?
    Wow ?
    Try a simple, but obviously a concept you cannot fathom. That being
    Common Sense !

  40. Ray Dixon says:

    Then you’re just talking out your arse, Sax? Okay, let’s leave it at that. We know nothing more than what’s in the (full) article. You interpret that as Islam gone crazy – oh, we’re all doomed!!! I don’t. Your problem mate.

  41. Sax says:

    You’re kidding right ? Leave it at that ? I’m not the one with the problem.
    Time to take another mate, you’re losing it.

    Three instances above, I mentioned the fact that islamic law is stricter than ours. Islam has nothing to do with it. Said that at least three times as well.

    Not much point. You can’t teach the blind what they refuse to want to see.

    Ray’s usual loss of argument tradition. The massive dummy spit, the hissy fit, then the personal attacks.

  42. Angel says:

    Islam law may be stricter and the punishments more primitive but definitely crazy.

    Muhammad did marry a 6 year old and consumated the marriage when she was 9 years old.
    Floggings, stonings, amputations, fear of pigs, mistreatment of animals, ramadan and fasting, virgins in heaven, jihads, sacrifices, sexual apartheid, hijabs, and terrorism.

    CRAZY

  43. Sax says:

    Don’t know Angel ? I think I would prefer the prison time, rather than the 100 lashes, if I were stupid enough to be in that situation ?

    Crazy, as we see it, and that unfortunately is the problem. Our system of justice was also based on this system. Trial by Ordeal I think they used to call it, all those hundreds of years ago ?

    Whether or not, what has developed in our supposedly mature society, is better, that is a personal decision, that everyone has to make on their own. My beef is, that this sort of sentence, for multiple crimes, hardly sends any deterrent message, to anyone in the community that is considering the same path ?

  44. Ray Dixon says:

    Hissy fits? Personal attacks? You’re just not making any sense now, Sax.

Comments are closed.

Welcome to the Sandpit

I love a good argument so please leave a comment

Please support the Sandpit

Please support the Sandpit

Do you feel lucky?

Do you feel lucky?

%d bloggers like this: