It's Not Just XL Bullies....

A dog who repeatedly bit a man’s groin in an attack is so dangerous he must be put down, a court has ruled.

Owner is, of course, utterly useless:

"He is a lovely family dog normally,” she said" 

The story is paywalled, but the thing is a German Shepherd cross mastiff. Not another XL Bully. 

Not that that stops the idiots from proclaiming that dangerous dogs are just fine family pets and shouldn't be destroyed.

Who wants to try 'retraining' a dog that's attacked people repeatedly?

H/T: Dave Ward via email

Jury Nullification?

A private security guard who was accused of racism and false imprisonment for detaining a 15-year-old boy at Superdrug was today cleared of all charges after just 30 minutes of jury deliberations.

I mean, what else explains this? 

Jake De-Geus and his colleague Edwin Hirst, who were employed to patrol a high street in Chichester, West Sussex, had been accused of tackling the teen in an 'unlawful' and 'unjustified' manner. De-Geus, 30, who wept as he told jurors he wasn't racist, insisted they had been 'justified' in deciding to detain the schoolboy, who had refused to leave the store when asked, pretended to steal shampoo and then head-butted him.

And thanks to CCTV and body worn video, the court - and more crucially, the jury - can see this all unfold. And put themselves in the place of these guards, or the place of a shopper trying to buy something while these 'children' are in the store. 

Hirst, 40, was also accused of assault by beating having punched another teenager in the testicles. But now, a jury has unanimously cleared the pair of all charges after a week-long trial at at Portsmouth Crown Court, Hants, and jury deliberations of just half an hour.

Not even long enough to have a cup of tea!  

During his evidence, the court was shown body worn footage of the incident, for which the teenage boy apologised for the 'vile language' he used. In it, he could be heard telling the rangers to 'turn me around so I can spit in your face'. It was heard he had been banned from Greggs and Sports Direct and admitted he had 'probably' behaved badly at Boots in a previous incident.

And he won't be named or face any charges. This is why we are broken as a country. And I fear, beyond all repair.  

The People 'Interested In These Matters', Judge? Why Don't You Be More Explicit About Who They Are?

On 22 January 2022, 11 boys entered a CCTV blind spot at the intersection of two roads in Stretford, Manchester. Only 10 left alive. Sixteen-year-old Kennie Carter was stabbed, his last words heard by his older brother to whom he was on the phone at the time: “They’ve stabbed me in my heart, bro.”

What happened in that CCTV blind spot has been the focus of a six-week trial at Manchester crown court, at which 10 Black boys, ranging in age from 12 to 16 at the time of the killing, stood accused of murder. Described as “a jigsaw with pieces missing” and “a net that had been cast wide” by lawyers defending the boys, the trial was the latest of several high-profile joint enterprise prosecutions involving large groups of Black youths in Manchester.

These trials attracting the attention of the usual suspects, of course, the ones who think that it's somehow 'unfair' that those whose hands aren't the ones holding the knife should be punished. Especially if - as is usually the case - they are black.

The controversial legal doctrine allows prosecutors to charge multiple people with the same crime. It can be applied even if a defendant played no active role but is found to have encouraged or assisted the main perpetrator. What it means to assist or encourage can fall to the the jury to interpret.

And the jury, mercifully free of critical race theory, seems to often take the view that if you're involved to the point of being part of the gang, you're just as guilty, which upsets the progressives. 

The contention surrounding the legal doctrine was not lost on the judge. Before the jury was even sworn in, Judge Julian Goose was heard warning the lawyers present about the term. “I’m not a fan any more of the words ‘joint enterprise’; it raises concern amongst people interested in these matters,” he said.

A coy and judicial way of saying 'activists and race hustlers', m'lud? 

But while the phrase was avoided, the principle behind the doctrine was clear. Despite the lack of CCTV at the moment of the stabbing, there was no question over who had caused the death. Everyone involved in the trial, including the defendant himself, agreed that the fatal blow was struck by Boy A, then 14, who cannot be named for legal reasons. He argued he was acting in self-defence after Kennie produced a knife. The prosecution said the knife was his own.

And if that won't work win over the jury, how about a bit of 'they was good boys, they dindu nuffin'? 

There was no evidence that any of the other nine defendants ever had any weapons or played any active role in the killing. Three of the boys said they were around the corner on another street and so did not even witness the events. Two of the boys, one of whom was just 12 at the time, were described as having abnormally low IQs. Another, who was 13 at the time, was autistic and had ADHD. And yet, Boy A was found guilty of murder and another three convicted of manslaughter after the Crown Prosecution Service argued that, through their presence at the scene, they intentionally assisted or encouraged Boy A in his actions. All nine boys had denied that suggestion.

And the jury clearly said 'pull the other one!'... 

“It’s collective punishment,” said Gloria Morrison, the founder of the campaign group Joint Enterprise Not Guilty By Association (JENGbA). “It messes with the whole idea of what young people, or anybody, thinks justice is. What benefits can there be of locking up a child who hasn’t actually done the crime?”

Pour encourager les autres, Gloria... 

At Last, A Judge No Longer Prepared To Waste Public Money!

Although an exact figure has not been calculated, Hussain has cost the police, criminal justice system, and essentially the public, thousands upon thousands of pounds, by dragging her case through the courts for more than two years, hauling her dog’s victim through relentless hearings, appealing her conviction, withdrawing the appeal, then appealing the order to destroy her dangerous dog.

This is this case, which would have been avoided, as would the mauling of this victim, if police had acted the first time this dangerous dog caused trouble.

During a hearing at Preston Crown Court last week, Judge Guy Mathieson refused to accept an application to adjourn the appeal hearing. He then refused to uphold the appeal against the destruction of Ashiya Hussain’s dog Bruno, saying the time spent on the case was “not a proper use of public funds”.

Thank god for a judge with sense!  

Evidence was presented to the court by dog handling and behaviour expert Craig Richardson who said that while he believed Bruno was a danger to other dogs, and not directly to humans (unless they got between Bruno and another dog), he could be trained to lower this aggression. He suggested that the dog’s life be spared, and he be given to a new owner, with conditions for that new owner to keep the dog muzzled at all times while out in public; to be on a harness while in public; to be controlled by two points of contact at all times such as a lead attached to a collar and also a harness; and to only be allowed off a lead when in a private field.

What new owner would want to take this thing on?  

A proposed new owner, Ansar Ali, also gave evidence during the hearing, telling the court that he would take care of Bruno at his terraced home in Great Harwood, which only has a small back yard, and would take him to work with him at a car garage every day and keep him locked in that garage should he need to nip out.When asked by Judge Mathieson when Bruno would ever get chance to exercise or be allowed more space to roam around in, Mr Ali could not provide a satisfactory answer.

Come to think of it, why did the owner need such a beast? There may be a clue in the comments: 

 Very interesting...

When an adjournment for the hearing was requested, so a second dog expert report could be compiled, Judge Mathieson said: “We are not going to use any more money on this case, for a dog. I know it’s a family pet but it’s a dog.

“How many thousands of pounds is to be spent? If this was a privately paid for case would this still be going on?

“How much is it costing on a daily basis, how much to keep Bruno in kennels? No-one has the answer, so shall we just adjourn for another three months for more public money to be spent?”

Bye bye Bruno. You've lived two years longer than you should have, in any sane country. 

Well Played, Well Played Indeed...

Blade runner ULEZ vandals have used a sticker of London Mayor Sadiq Khan's face to block the hated cameras.

Heh! The police are not amused. And are so desperate to stop support for this, they have resorted to lying. Badly. 

Which, let's face it, is how they do everything these days.  

Chief Inspector Priya Shome, based in Bromley, said: "We are investigating the criminal damage to five sets of traffic lights in the Orpington area overnight which has caused major traffic management issues.

Boo hoo! So do Palestinian terrorism support protests, but I bet you never complain about those, eh? 

"Two police units, who should have been available to answer 999 calls, were instead required to spend the morning managing traffic.

Sure, of course they'd be answering 999 calls instead of monitoring Facebook for hurty words, Priya... 

Can you work in a 'For the cheeeeldreen!' angle? You can? Good girl!

"The people who are carrying out this criminal damage are putting the public at risk.

"There has been a collision between two cars on Court Road, at the location of one of the damaged traffic lights, in which a child was injured.

"I would urge the people carrying out these crimes to stop immediately and think about the danger they are causing to road users."

But in a rare case of a British journalist not simply repeating the police boilerplate and calling it 'job done', it seems the anti-ULEZ group aren't the culprits Priya would have us believe.

The junction seems to have been a big problem area over the years, and one man who lives directly opposite the crash noted he has seen multiple accidents in the area.

He said: “I have lived here for three years, and this is the seventh serious crash I have seen happen.

“It is because of the traffic lights people get so confused on this road about who has the right of way.”

If traffic lights 'confuse people about who has the right of way', maybe Priya's officers should be there every day checking driving licenses...  

Well, Maybe There Really Aren't Any?

Under an opaque policy condemned as discriminatory and “inhumane”, the government has refused dozens of visas for children of migrant single mothers, many of whom came to work in the NHS or social care, saying there are “no compelling reasons” to grant them.

Do they really 'come to work in the NHS or social care', or do they come to get a foot in the door?

The women left their children – some as young as two – in the temporary care of relatives or friends while they moved to Britain from countries including Zimbabwe, Zambia, Kenya, South Africa and India. Before leaving, they say, they had been reassured by their employers that their children would be able to follow, in line with current immigration rules permitting healthcare workers to bring close family members.

We are continually told the NHS needs these people, as workers. But are they workers, or the vanguard of an invasion? 

In refusal letters seen by the Observer, the Home Office questioned why the children could not stay permanently with their grandparents or other relatives. In other cases, it said there was no reason why they could not go to live with their fathers, even though their mothers had sole custody or the fathers had not seen the children for years. Many of the letters, addressed directly to the children, conclude: “It was your mother’s personal decision to depart for the UK and you have not provided sufficient evidence to grant your visa on serious or compelling grounds.”

Yes, it was. She gambled. She lost.  

Patricia Chinyoka, chief executive of the Women of Zimbabwe project, which is supporting many of the women, described the refusals as “absolutely appalling”. “Some of the women have supplied an amazing array of proof and then they still get a letter saying: ‘We don’t believe you.’ They have sold properties, left jobs – they’ve sold up and come here and this is what they are now faced with,” Chinyoka said. “They don’t know what to do.”

Go home to raise their families in their own countries.  

More Of This, Please, And Faster!

A female boxer withdrew from a Canadian tournament after being told her rival is transgender, citing safety fears.

Dr. Katia Bissonnette, from Saguenay, claims she was given just an hour's notice she was being matched with transgender fighter Mya Walmsley last month. The two had been due to face off in the 2023 Provincial Golden Glove Championship in Victoriaville, Quebec.

It's the only way this nonsense will ever be defeated. 

She did have the advantage, of course, in being able to cite a genuine H&S concern:

She ... cited a study by the University of Utah which found that men can punch 163 per cent harder than women.

Studies on the strength of transgender women suggest that hormone blockers may reduce this biological advantage slightly.

How slightly? 

To Paraphrase Lydia Grant: "Woke Costs..."

Suspended GB News TV presenter Reverend Calvin Robinson has won an out-of-court settlement from the Royal Academy of Dance after he was sacked from a senior role for opposing a drag queen storytelling session for children.

Mr Robinson, 37, was awarded £8,000 after the RAD removed him from its education sub-committee for protesting against what he believed to be the sexualisation of minors.

"...and right here's where you start paying!"

No Wonder They Want To Scrap The Lords...

They are a brake on stupid legislation at times, and they've done it again:

The controversial Trophy Hunting Bill has been blocked by the House of Lords after politicians were accused of failing to listen to conservation experts.

Because it seems that listening to the views of the people who live with an issue go out the window when there's vistuesignalling to be done. 

The African nations that are home to the most endangered animals had criticised the 'arrogant' legislation – which included a blanket ban on the import of all souvenir pelts and heads – for ignoring their views in favour of virtue-signalling celebrities such as Gary Lineker. But the Bill passed through the Commons unopposed in March.

Once again, it seems that dogma about 'colonialism' is ignored when the great and good want to rub shoulders with some vacuous sleb bunng hugger at the right parties... 

Rebel peers had asked for an amendment under which a small number of trophies could be imported if it could be shown that the hunting benefits conservation projects. They had consulted African experts who claimed that the profits from some sustainable blood sports are needed to pay for such work.

Ministers 'refused to compromise' and so the rebels talked the Bill down and stopped it.

Well done, Lords. Well done indeed. 

More Like Judge Cole, Please!

Ezeanyika asked the judge: “Could I not just be committed to the community?”

Judge Cole replied: “No. In one word, no. These matters will be dealt with by a hospital order or a lengthy determinate sentence.”

Nice to hear that attacking random strangers in public is taken seriously for once. Because it's so rare.

Win Some, Lose Some...

A Cleveland Police officer accused of driving without due care and attention ahead of a horror crash which left two teenagers seriously injured has been cleared.

And the IOPC isn't happy, if you read between the lines... 

IOPC regional director Emily Barry said: “My sympathies remain with the two young occupants of the Vauxhall Corsa, who sustained serious injuries, and all those affected by the incident in May 2022.

“This incident has had a profound impact on the lives of these young people and their families, and this is something they will have to live with for many years to come.

“Given the seriousness of the allegation, it was right for the evidence to be tested in a public court. It was a matter for the judge, applying a far higher evidential threshold than the one we must use when considering referral to the CPS, to determine whether PC French drove without due care and attention, and I am grateful for their careful consideration of this case.”

Sure you're grateful! 

The IOPC found PC French, whose conduct was also under investigation, had a case to answer for gross misconduct in relation to his driving prior to the collision. It will be for Cleveland Police to arrange a disciplinary hearing in due course, the IOPC said.

I hope Cleveland Police decline to do so. 

Good, Because That's Exactly The Signal It Should Send...

A mitigation plea was sent to the judge in April 2023 signed by groups including the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists and the Royal College of Midwives. “We plead to Your Honour to consider leniency in this case … we are fearful that if the case before you receives a custodial sentence it may signal to other women who access tele-medical abortion services, or who experience later gestation deliveries, that they risk imprisonment if they seek medical care,” it said.

I can't add much to what's already been said at Tim's and Orphans', but I'll add this: 'Good!'

Because that's exactly what it should do. Especially if they knowingly lie about how far along they are when they do seek it. 

The Prosecution Says...

'Mr Mahmood should not have used the Taser. It was not, the prosecution say, a reasonable use of force in the circumstances he faced. It was not lawful.'

And the jury says 'Oh, yes, it was...'

And yet another jury says 'You must be kidding!'...

Prepare For The Fightback

Transgender pupils are to be banned from competing in PE lessons against pupils of the opposite biological sex, new government plans advise. The guidance, which is expected to be released within the next few weeks and will apply to all state and independent single-sex schools in England, aims to protect girls' safety and ensure fair competition in sport.

It's about time. And don't waste time and money on lawyers, either: 

The rule will not be in breach of the Equality Act because there are exemptions for competitive sport and schools are allowed to provide same-sex services if 'objectively justifiable'.

Of course, that will no doubt fall on deaf ears... 

The move came after school leaders and governors met with lawyers amid fears about discrimination claims from parents of transgender pupils if they refused to accommodate them.

Parents of transgender pupils are like owners of vegan cats. We all know this.

Employers, Not Masters Or Parents...

Maureen Martin was accused of gross misconduct after her employer, a housing association, claimed her campaign pledge to promote 'natural marriage' was discriminatory and would offend gay and trans people.

Ms Martin sued London & Quadrant Housing Trust (L&Q) for unfair dismissal, discrimination and harassment in a case called 'an attack on democracy'. Last night she told The Mail on Sunday she was happy with the out-of-court settlement but described her treatment as chilling.

It seems the fact you are employed by a company to perform a role during work time gives some of them the right to assume control over every aspect of your life, as Longrider points out.  

'I should have had a right to express my own Christian beliefs in my own private time and should not have been required to self-censor my beliefs or be forced out of my job.

'I will be standing again as mayoral candidate in 2024. My message will not have changed. You can fire me, but you cannot silence me.'

Good for her. But where do these companies get the bare-faced cheek to imagine they can control every aspect of our lives? They pay us for our time, and that's all. 

Perhaps Ms Martin should have simply billed them for every hour she worked on her campaign instead?

Not Today, Race Grifter, Not Today...

Calling someone a 'dark horse' is not racist, an employment judge has ruled...

...after a black worker tried to sue her employer when her boss used the phrase.

Her employer? Would you believe, the Citizen's Advice Bureau!

Thankfully, not in a position where she was giving any, we must hope...

Ms Mangwanya, a support assistant at the organisation who was based in Leeds, West Yorkshire, complained at work that her manager used the phrase 'dark horse' in front of her, but she had 'misunderstood' what the expression meant when she took offence to it. Ms Mangwanya brought a 'litany of allegations' against Citizens Advice to the tribunal after she lost her job. However, her claims - including the 'dark horse' allegation - were thrown out.

It's the latest in a long long line of chancers and race grifters who roll the dice at these things... 

The Leeds Employment Tribunal heard Ms Mangwanya was employed by Citizens Advice in September 2019 on a one-year fixed term contract in its scams department, helping vulnerable people at risk of online scams.

Well, when you want a gamekeeper, I suppose it makes sense to select from a known pool of poachers! But it rather backfired, this time. 

Ms Mangwanya's contract was not extended in September 2020 due to a lack of work and she was let go.

A lack of work for her, or from her, Reader..? 

At the tribunal, Ms Mangwanya insisted Citizens Advice was a 'racist organisation' and made dozens of racism allegations.She had made claims such as claiming it was racist to ask her if she was telling 'porky pies', that she was subjected to a 'witch hunt', complained about her workload, and insisted her role was created so 'black and ethnic minority employees could be employed on a lower salary'.

And even the patience of the Tribunal has its limits: 

Judge Shepherd concluded: 'Her case was very difficult to follow. The evidence she gave was often incoherent.

'She failed to answer questions put to her in cross-examination on numerous occasions and resorted to taking an exceptional length of time finding documents which did not assist her and she then tended to mutter and state that [Citizens Advice] is a racist organisation.

'Her approach was to attack Citizens Advice and its witnesses but not to go through the issues or put the allegations in any clear form.

'This has been an extraordinarily lengthy and wearing case for all those involved.

'The Tribunal has sympathy for everyone in the case, particularly those employees who have been subject to unfounded serious allegations of discrimination. Ms Mangwanya provided a litany of allegations.

'It is clear that she views every difficulty, or perceived difficulty, she faced during her employment through the lens of discrimination whether race, disability or religion or belief.'

Gosh. I wonder who instilled that belief into her? 

Finally, A Proper Sentence...

Albeit for an attack that would never have happened if the authorities had acted in the first place:

The defendant had denied that Mako carried out the attack and told the court that Ms Turner arrived injured at her front door having been attacked by a stray dog elsewhere.

Ms Beaven added that Mako, which had been subject to a dog behaviour contract because of two previous incidents, had since been euthanised because of health problems.

Nor was the dog the only one with a horrific record: 

The court heard that Peacock was previously given a suspended prison term in 2017 for causing unnecessary suffering to an animal after she killed eight puppies by placing them in a freezer and a ninth by hitting it over the head.

Why was someone like this ever allowed to own so much as a goldfish, let along a powerful dog? 

Judge Richard Parkes KC told Peacock : 'You have shown no remorse whatsoever for what happened, indeed you continue to protest even today that Miss Turner turned up at your door having already been attacked by some savage stray.

'The only real mitigation in this very serious case is the fact that you are elderly and suffering from multiple sclerosis, a condition which plainly requires long-term treatment.'

The irony being, she'll probably get better treatment in prison than out... 

And I Always Thought He Was A Useless Slacker...

...turned out he did do something worthwhile!

In her resignation letter, Baird said Raab had “encouraged her to apply” for her role rather than being reappointed, as her predecessor had been. She did so, but said she was then “brusquely informed” in early July that there would be no appointment from the process, told she could reapply and asked to stay in post until December.

Gosh, he scraped you off his shoe like you were something nasty he'd stepped in, eh, Vera?

“Victims need to be acknowledged in the criminal justice system, not to bend it in their direction, but to give them basic procedural justice, dignity and support,” she said. “Because if they continue to be treated poorly, they don’t recover from a crime we have failed to protect them from in the first place and participation in the criminal justice system collapses.”

Oh, despite my frequent blasts at the criminal justice system, you have to admit, Vera, it does produce the right result more often than not... 

Schadenfruede Is Such A Lovely Word, Isn't It..?

They should teach it in schools!

Pardon me while I rummage around in the image files. Ah, here it is!

A Judge With Common Sense?

A convicted criminal left a woman bleeding from the face after a dog attack because he was under police curfew. Jamie Cassidy appeared at Liverpool Magistrates' Court after a woman was viciously savaged by his dog.

I wonder what sort of dog? 

The XL Bully was being walked on the lead by convicted criminal Cassidy when it suddenly jumped up and attacked the woman.

Oh. I really should have guessed... 

Cassidy, on licence from prison, did not check on her injuries as he only had four minutes to get to his nearby home because he was under a curfew with an electronic tag. Judge District Hatton told the 27-year-old that he had just been trying to "save your own skin".

He was apparently buying baby milk. was there a baby in the house with this brute? 

Cassidy told the judge he was sorry. But the judge told him: "You say you have expressed remorse, that remorse I do not accept as genuine."

Blimey, you could knock me down with a feather! 

Cassidy was jailed for eight months after pleading guilty to being the owner of a dangerously out of control dog which caused injury.

Judge Hatton ordered the destruction of the dog and banned Cassidy from owning a dog for ten years.

Pity he couldn't order the destruction of both worthless vicious animals...