Violent wife beater escapes jail because judge says his battered wife was not vulnerable enough.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3194830/mustafa-bashir-cricketer-beat-wife-fakhara-karima-bat-bleach/

"A PAKISTANI cricketer battered his wife with his own bat and made her drink bleach – but was spared jail after claiming he was joining a top cricket club.
A judge heard how Mustafa Bashir had been offered a contract by county cricket champs Leicester on the condition he didn’t go to prison – which the club denies.

The case has sparked fury after Judge Richard Mansell said wife Fakhara Karima was not vulnerable as she was “an intelligent woman with a network of friends” and a degree."




Ahhhh...so it only counts if the wife is ignorant and friendless.
Sack the judge,
Order a retrial,
Put the bastard where he needs to be....behind bars.

His name made me laugh, must have a bash her.

Now more serious, this judge wants sacking. This man bashes his wife, makes her drink bleach but it's ok as she's educated.

I feel so angry over this. Not fair. What message does this tell, oh bash your wife and walk away. Grrrrr

Judges like this idiot give the green light to any free fisted neanderthal that its OK to terrorise your wife, and it would make many battered wives scared (more scared than they would be anyway) to report domestic violence.

Sorry, Eddie, did not see you posted this article as have done the same.

Can you merge please?


http://www.newsfixboard.com/t20191-jess-phillips-hits-out-at-mustafa-bashirs-sentencing-judge-for-sending-dangerous-message-to-victims-of-domestic-abuse#389796

Thorin wrote:Sorry, Eddie, did not see you posted this article as have done the same.

Can you merge please?


http://www.newsfixboard.com/t20191-jess-phillips-hits-out-at-mustafa-bashirs-sentencing-judge-for-sending-dangerous-message-to-victims-of-domestic-abuse#389796

The Labour MP Jess Phillips is 100% right Thor.

Syl wrote:Judges like this idiot give the green light to any free fisted neanderthal that its OK to terrorise your wife, and it would make many battered wives scared (more scared than they would be anyway) to report domestic violence.

This has taken this type of disgusting behaviour back to the 70s when it was called a domestic. Women never bothered to call police and just put up with it. We don't want that, not now not ever!

The Court's must punish offenders not let them off because she wasn't vulnerable. Of course she was bloody vulnerable he whacked her with a bat, bullied her to make her drink bleach, how much more should he have done to be convicted ffs!

The specific words of the judge were:

The Sun wrote:“This relationship started well but you began controlling her and how she spent her money.

“You told her how to spend her money and you tried to turn her against her family who you regularly insulted. She would buy clothes that were of a western style which you disapproved of and called her a slag and said her friends were ‘English slag girls’.”

“But I am not convinced she was a vulnerable person. Sometimes women who moved her from their country become trapped in a relationship where they lose their support network of family and friends and cannot speak the language.

“This is not the case. She is plainly an intelligent woman with a network of friends and did go on to graduate university with a 2:1 and a masters – although this has had an ongoing affect on her. She had difficult trusting people now, especially men.”

I believe the judge was arguing against the depiction of a woman trapped by her culture, brought to a foreign country with no one to turn to.  It appears it was rebuttal to some argument raised by the Crown.  How that subject came up, the article doesn't say.

It is dangerously close to saying that he shouldn't be punished because she can take care of herself.  But the judge did give him an "18-month sentence suspended for two years and ordered him to attend a workshop called 'building better relationships'”.  He also had "to pay £1,000 costs and banned from approaching his wife."  

Whatever it was, prudence says the judge should have left the argument alone, or brushed it aside without going into detail,  Perhaps he was denying some enhancements based upon the vulnerability of the victim.  But he made a rebuttal look like an affirmative defense, which, out of context, looks bad.

Syl wrote:

Thorin wrote:Sorry, Eddie, did not see you posted this article as have done the same.

Can you merge please?


http://www.newsfixboard.com/t20191-jess-phillips-hits-out-at-mustafa-bashirs-sentencing-judge-for-sending-dangerous-message-to-victims-of-domestic-abuse#389796

The Labour MP Jess Phillips is 100% right Thor.

Agreed Syl
The Judge needs taking to task on this, as it sends out the wrong message

Maybe the judge have stuck to what he knew best.
http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/10157970.Bradford_barrister_is_promoted_to_be_a_judge/

Thorin wrote:Sorry, Eddie, did not see you posted this article as have done the same.

Can you merge please?


http://www.newsfixboard.com/t20191-jess-phillips-hits-out-at-mustafa-bashirs-sentencing-judge-for-sending-dangerous-message-to-victims-of-domestic-abuse#389796

Done.

eddie wrote:

Thorin wrote:Sorry, Eddie, did not see you posted this article as have done the same.

Can you merge please?


http://www.newsfixboard.com/t20191-jess-phillips-hits-out-at-mustafa-bashirs-sentencing-judge-for-sending-dangerous-message-to-victims-of-domestic-abuse#389796

Done.

Thank you

Calling girls, English slag girls, is racist. So on top of his bullying, beating, controlling, he is racist too, so why wasn't he done for that too.

Why is he living in England, he obviously don't like it.

magica wrote:Calling girls, English slag girls, is racist. So on top of his bullying, beating, controlling, he is racist too, so why wasn't he done for that too.

Why is he living in England, he obviously don't like it.

Slag seems to be the word of choice for many wife/partner/woman battering monsters, not sure why that is, probably because they see every other man as rivals.

Because our girls dress like young girls do, doesn't make them slags. I'm sick of Muslims like this man calling them such.

that doesn't make sense
If he hit her that is assault..
it is really counter productive of the judge to give any leniency in cases like this. I believe from the details given that it is actually case to through the book at him and give him a harsh penalty.

Women like Fakhara Karim that are integrating into western society need to be given the full protection of secular law to show other women that may be trapped without her education and relationships, they don't have to be. That the LAW will protect them from abusive husbands and/or family that subscribe to something other than secular freedoms

veya_victaous wrote:that doesn't make sense
If he hit her that is assault..
it is really counter productive of the judge to give any leniency in cases like this. I believe from the details given that it is actually case to through the book at him and give him a harsh penalty.

Women like Fakhara Karim that are integrating into western society need to be given the full protection of secular law to show other women that may be trapped without her education and relationships, they don't have to be. That the LAW will protect them from abusive husbands and/or family that subscribe to something other than secular freedoms

The man is not fit to judge...what he said was wrong on so many levels.

It was. It really annoys me. Where can the woman go now. She was let down badly, and now women in the future will think twice before reporting any abuse by their husband's.

This judge should be struck off

[size=32]The shocking sentence of Mustafa Bashir and the Judges comments[/size]


Rachel Williams
Newport, United Kingdom
28 MAR 2017 — Can I all ask you to please read and sign this petition.

It's the shocking case of Mustafa Bashir and the Judges lenient sentencing & comments implying the victim was not vulnerable because she was well educated & had a good network of friends! 

I want to think Judge Mansell has lack of knowledge of domestic abuse opposed to him being plain ignorant. ALL Judges need mandatory specialist domestic abuse training as a matter of urgency.

We have to keep shouting to be heard and by signing this you are standing with the VICTORS of the epidemic domestic abuse and violence. 

Please help me get your voices heard. 
Rachel x

http://Change.org/domesticviolenceincourts

I'm going to sign this Thor. I'm so disgusted with this Judge and the comments

magica wrote:I'm going to sign this Thor. I'm so disgusted with this Judge and the comments

Thanks Magica, hence why I posted this. In the hpope that others sign as I did

x

I hope others do Thor, this really needs to be addressed. Hope the Judge gets fired too. X

magica wrote:I hope others do Thor, this really needs to be addressed. Hope the Judge gets fired too. X

+1

Lets hope so

Night

x

Night Thor, I'm off too x

Signed... have a thanks for posting the petition Thor, great idea. x

Great Syl, it really is good someone has made this petition.

magica wrote:Great Syl, it really is good someone has made this petition.

This judge apparently was only promoted in 2013, he was a barrister previously.
I really don't think he is fit to make judgments, like we have said, his comments were wrong on so many levels.
I hope the petition reaches the desired number and hopefully something will be done.
I feel for the abused woman in this case, and for the many more who having read of this case wont have the confidence to report abusive partners in the future.

Most of our Judges, it seems, are not of our World !

nicko wrote:Most of our Judges,  it seems,   are not of our World !

True, they seem to be cocooned on a different level to most 'ordinary' people.

Syl wrote:Signed... have a thanks for posting the petition Thor, great idea. x

Thanks Syl

x

This judge seriously needs to be sacked or whatever they call it for a Judge. This has put women's rights on domestic violence right backwards, as I said before. Who will bother to report it now.

The wife who was abused must feel so let down.

magica wrote:This judge seriously needs to be sacked or whatever they call it for a Judge.  This has put women's rights on domestic violence right backwards, as I said before. Who will bother to report it now.

The wife who was abused must feel so let down.  

This abuser lied about being offered a contract by Leicester county cricket champions as long as he didn't go to jail, the club denies ever hearing of him.
In any case, if this coloured the judges decision to spare him jail he was wrong on this count too.

Why should a persons job, (especially a fantasy one) ever have any influence on the sentence a person should receive? If you have committed a crime you should pay the consequences.

Totally agree Syl. The man should've got prison for what he did, not let off, no matter what his job is. Lying surely makes him contempt of court, so can't they haul him in again

I hope they can.
I also hope if enough people sign the petition Thor put on here the judges decision will be investigated.

A man spared jail for beating his wife after telling a court he would lose an offer to play professional cricket is to have his sentence reviewed.

Mustafa Bashir, 34, was given a suspended sentence at Manchester Crown Court for assaulting Fakhara Karim.

Judge Richard Mansell QC has been heavily criticised by domestic abuse campaigners after he reportedly said Miss Karim was not vulnerable because she was a graduate.

And the judge was told that if Bashir was spared custody he would be employed as a professional player by Leicestershire County Cricket Club. But the club later said this claim was "wholly false".

Now Judge Mansell has ordered Bashir's sentence to be reviewed at Manchester Crown Court on Friday. Bashir was said to have beaten his wife with a cricket bat and forced her to drink bleach.

He was given an 18-month sentence, suspended for two years, after admitting assault occasioning actual bodily harm, assault by beating, destroying or damaging property and using a destructive substance with intent to maim.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/05/wife-beater-spared-jail-would-losecricket-contract-faces-sentence/

This is brilliant news. /\

The judge himself has ordered a retrial, I suspect if he had not one would have been ordered anyway within the allowed 56 days.

It seems as the abuser lied in court about a possible job, the judge is grabbing on this as a reason to order a retrial....the judge was totally wrong in the first place to take this into account imo.
Abuse is abuse and should be judged accordingly, a persons job should never be a reason to let someone off, just as the fact his wife, because she is an intelligent woman with a network of friends should never be used as a reason not to jail a violent abuser.

Thankfully Leicestershire county cricket club, the club that Bashir lied about being offered a professional job with  have also added their voice to the many who have voiced their disgust at this mans actions and the pathetic ruling of the judge.

I assume the judge has recused himself from any further proceedings.

Great news, justice at last for his wife. Hope he gets a few years in prison.

magica wrote:Great news, justice at last for his wife. Hope he gets a few years in prison.

Hopefully she will see justice done Mags.
The retrial is yet to take place, but with all the publicity this last one had re the pathetically light sentence, I cant see Bashir escaping jail...and this forthcoming trial can also add contempt of court, as he lied on oath..

Original Quill wrote:I assume the judge has recused himself from any further proceedings.

Would that be normal procedure to exclude the original judge from the retrial?
I hope in this case he is excluded....he certainly messed the first one up.

Syl wrote:

Original Quill wrote:I assume the judge has recused himself from any further proceedings.

Would that be normal procedure to exclude the original judge from the retrial?
I hope in this case he is excluded....he certainly messed the first one up.

If it was allegations of his prejudice that led to the problems, I should think it's a de facto conflict of interest for him to continue.  Had he just made an error in evidence or procedure, that could be chalked up to judicial error.  But if he has a potential problem with the status (male/female, black/white, etc.) of one of the parties, that's irremediable error.

Personally, I said long ago, he was making a ruling on a side bar issue that the law required him to do. He was not, himself, bringing up the issue.  He just used indiscreet language to deny a routine motion for enhancement, a decision which the law requires of him.  Legal colleagues will understand, even if the public does not.

However, personally, he would be a fool not to graciously step back and declare that his presence in the matter is too much of a distraction.  Then, go to the board and write a thousand times: I will take care in how to word denials of routine motions.

It's a lesson learned by a newly appointed jurist.  

Original Quill wrote:

Syl wrote:

Would that be normal procedure to exclude the original judge from the retrial?
I hope in this case he is excluded....he certainly messed the first one up.

If it was his prejudice that led to the problems, I should think it's a de facto conflict of interest for him to continue.  Had he just made an error in evidence or procedure, that could be chalked up to judicial error.  But if he has a problem with the status (male/female, black/white, etc.) of one of the parties, that's irremediable error.

Personally, I said long ago he was making a ruling on a side bar issue that the law required him to do, and he was not, himself, bringing up the issue.  He just used indiscreet language to deny a motion for enhancement, which the law requires of him.  Legal colleagues will understand, even if the public does not.

However, personally, he would be a fool not to graciously step back and declare that his presence in the matter is too much of a distraction.  Then, go to the board and write a thousand times: I will take care in how to word denials of motions.

But it wasn't only the language he used in disregarding the wifes vulnerability, the things the abuser did to her were surely bad enough to deserve an actual prison sentence.

Add to that the way the judge seems to have taken into consideration the mans opportunity to play professional cricket, which he would have lost had a prison sentence been passed..(all lies as we now know) as being a reason to spare him jail.

I agree that if he is not ordered to keep away from the retrial he should stay away from it voluntarily ......he has lost all credibility to judge fairly.

Syl wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

If it was his prejudice that led to the problems, I should think it's a de facto conflict of interest for him to continue.  Had he just made an error in evidence or procedure, that could be chalked up to judicial error.  But if he has a problem with the status (male/female, black/white, etc.) of one of the parties, that's irremediable error.

Personally, I said long ago he was making a ruling on a side bar issue that the law required him to do, and he was not, himself, bringing up the issue.  He just used indiscreet language to deny a motion for enhancement, which the law requires of him.  Legal colleagues will understand, even if the public does not.

However, personally, he would be a fool not to graciously step back and declare that his presence in the matter is too much of a distraction.  Then, go to the board and write a thousand times: I will take care in how to word denials of motions.

But it wasn't only the language he used in disregarding the wifes vulnerability, the things the abuser did to her were surely bad enough to deserve an actual  prison sentence.

I agree. That's the reason why the wife's attorney jumped on the issue. The judge was using the wrong words, but he made himself look prejudiced. What attorney would leap at such an opportunity?

Syl wrote:Add to that the way the judge seems to have taken into consideration the mans opportunity to play professional cricket, which he would have lost had a prison sentence been passed..(all lies as we now know) as being a reason to spare him jail.

Again, a necessary duty...to list reasons why freedom is preferable over incarceration is no doubt required by the statute. I don't know local law, but it is clear the judge was reading from a list as he proceeded. This he was required to do. He just wasn't seeing the public perception.

Syl wrote:I agree that if he is not ordered to keep away from the retrial he should stay away from it voluntarily ......he has lost all credibility to judge fairly.

As I say, it's a lesson learned. As a jurist he needs to learn that he is constantly in the public eye, and that there's two perceptions in what he is doing: the legal, and the public.

Original Quill wrote:

Syl wrote:

But it wasn't only the language he used in disregarding the wifes vulnerability, the things the abuser did to her were surely bad enough to deserve an actual  prison sentence.

I agree.  That's the reason why the wife's attorney jumped on the issue.  The judge was using the wrong words, but he made himself look prejudiced.  What attorney would leap at such an opportunity?

Syl wrote:Add to that the way the judge seems to have taken into consideration the mans opportunity to play professional cricket, which he would have lost had a prison sentence been passed..(all lies as we now know) as being a reason to spare him jail.

Again, a necessary duty...to list reasons why freedom is preferable over incarceration is no doubt required by the statute.  I don't know local law, but it is clear the judge was reading from a list as he proceeded.  This he was required to do.  He just wasn't seeing the public perception.

Syl wrote:I agree that if he is not ordered to keep away from the retrial he should stay away from it voluntarily ......he has lost all credibility to judge fairly.

As I say, it's a lesson learned.  As a jurist he needs to learn that he is constantly in the public eye, and that there's two perceptions in what he is doing: the legal, and the public.

That old quote is true, 'Justice must not only be done but must be seen to be done'....something like that.....is truer today than it ever was, especially as everything is reported and dissected online now almost as soon as it happens.

So the same judge reviewed the case.......pity.

Anyway, he is now imprisoned, 18 months seems very light considering the catalogue of abuse he dished out to his wife.

Thanks for the update Thor.

Syl wrote:So the same judge reviewed the case.......pity.

Anyway, he is now imprisoned, 18 months seems very light considering the catalogue of abuse he dished out to his wife.

Thanks for the update Thor.

Was too light, especially as he also lied.

Have a good evening Syl

x

Yes he got prison, I was delighted when I heard. Should have got at least five years for that abuse and lying under oath as well.