Nine Luton muslim men involved in violent attack on football
Sat Dec 12, 2015 8:43 am
Nine Luton muslim men involved in violent attack on football fan have ASBOs overturned
By LutonOnSunday
Saturday December 11, 2015
Lawyers representing the nine men argued that the orders were not justified
NINE muslim men who were caught up in violence in public demonstrations and gatherings today had their Asbos overturned by top judges at the Court of Appeal.
The Sunni men, all from Luton, had been involved variously in violent clashes in London with Shia muslims and with a football fan.
In an incident in Edgware Road, victims were left battered and bruised after they were attacked during a protest march.
The football fan, attacked after approaching an Islamic stall in Oxford Street, was subjected to a vicious beating.
All nine received jail terms, but were also hit with anti-social behaviour orders at the Old Bailey in January.
The Asbos, among other things, banned the men from associating together in public and put strict restrictions on their ability to perform 'Da'wah' - proselytizing Islam.
Last month, they appealed against the imposition of the Asbos, which they said were a violation of their human rights.
And today, after taking a month to consider the case, Lady Justice Macur returned to court to quash the orders.
'We conclude that all the prohibitions are unjustified in principle: they were not shown to be necessary and represent a disproportionate restriction on their rights and freedoms,' she said.
The Court of Appeal heard the first incident took place in May 2013, when protestors planned to march from the Regent's Park Mosque to the Syrian embassy.
Prosecutors alleged the march was sectarian, with anti-Shia banners carried and offensive slogans chanted.
Trouble was sparked when a Shia man remonstrated with the marchers in Edgware Road and was abused and doused with water.
While march organiser Anjem Choudhary was interviewed by a journalist, another man was punched to the ground and set upon.
Another victim was attacked with a flag pole and struck twice, before he was kicked by several people on the ground.
Mohammed Ishtiaq Alamgir, Mohan Uddin and Kamran Khan were among those who were involved.
Uddin and Khan - along with Moshiur Rahman, Naseer Khan, Qadeer Ahmed, Yousef Bashir, Jalal Ahmed and Munim Abdul - were also involved in Oxford Street days later.
Violence began there at a Da'wah stall, when a football fan approached and 'may have made inflammatory comments', said the judge.
When he emerged from a nearby pub later, he was set upon, knocked to the ground and kicked and punched repeatedly.
Qadeer Ahmed threw himself at the victim, before Naseer Khan kicked and stamped on him.
Bashir passed his crutch to Uddin, who brandished it in the direction of the victim.
Abdul also kicked the man, while Jalal Ahmed was said to be in the thick of the action, behaving 'menacingly' towards people.
The eight men admitted affray over the Oxford Street incident, while Uddin and Alamgir were found guilty of violent disorder and Kamran Khan of affray over the Edgware Road clash.
At the Old Bailey, Judge Paul Worsley QC said he considered the Asbos were necessary to prevent further incidents.
But lawyers representing the nine men argued at the Court of Appeal that the orders were not justified.
Giving judgment, Lady Justice Macur, sitting with Mr Justice Andrew Smith and Judge Jeremy Carey, said the restrictions on Da'wah were a breach of the men's human right to be able to practise their religion.
And to put restrictions on them doing so was not necessary, as the Oxford Street incident was not the result of the stall, but of a private clash with the football fan.
'As we see it, the operation of the Da'wah stall was part of the background to the violent episode, but it was not the cause,' she said in her judgment.
She continued: 'We conclude that the Asbos against all the appellants should be quashed, and the appeals allowed accordingly.'
Naseer Khan, 33, of Ascot Road; Qadeer Ahmed, 30, of Highfield Road; Jalal Ahmed, 27, of Cavendish Road; Yousef Bashir, 35, of Dane Road; and Munim Abdul, 34, of Hampton Road, were all jailed for 29 weeks.
Kamran Khan, 31, of Wodecroft Road, got 55 weeks; Moshiur Rahman, 34, of Dane Road, got 21 weeks; Mohammed Ishtiaq Alamgir, 36, of Kenilworth Road, got 10 months; and Mohan Uddin, 38, of Trinity Road, got 21 months and three weeks.
Lawyers representing the nine men argued that the orders were not justified
By LutonOnSunday
Saturday December 11, 2015
Lawyers representing the nine men argued that the orders were not justified
NINE muslim men who were caught up in violence in public demonstrations and gatherings today had their Asbos overturned by top judges at the Court of Appeal.
The Sunni men, all from Luton, had been involved variously in violent clashes in London with Shia muslims and with a football fan.
In an incident in Edgware Road, victims were left battered and bruised after they were attacked during a protest march.
The football fan, attacked after approaching an Islamic stall in Oxford Street, was subjected to a vicious beating.
All nine received jail terms, but were also hit with anti-social behaviour orders at the Old Bailey in January.
The Asbos, among other things, banned the men from associating together in public and put strict restrictions on their ability to perform 'Da'wah' - proselytizing Islam.
Last month, they appealed against the imposition of the Asbos, which they said were a violation of their human rights.
And today, after taking a month to consider the case, Lady Justice Macur returned to court to quash the orders.
'We conclude that all the prohibitions are unjustified in principle: they were not shown to be necessary and represent a disproportionate restriction on their rights and freedoms,' she said.
The Court of Appeal heard the first incident took place in May 2013, when protestors planned to march from the Regent's Park Mosque to the Syrian embassy.
Prosecutors alleged the march was sectarian, with anti-Shia banners carried and offensive slogans chanted.
Trouble was sparked when a Shia man remonstrated with the marchers in Edgware Road and was abused and doused with water.
While march organiser Anjem Choudhary was interviewed by a journalist, another man was punched to the ground and set upon.
Another victim was attacked with a flag pole and struck twice, before he was kicked by several people on the ground.
Mohammed Ishtiaq Alamgir, Mohan Uddin and Kamran Khan were among those who were involved.
Uddin and Khan - along with Moshiur Rahman, Naseer Khan, Qadeer Ahmed, Yousef Bashir, Jalal Ahmed and Munim Abdul - were also involved in Oxford Street days later.
Violence began there at a Da'wah stall, when a football fan approached and 'may have made inflammatory comments', said the judge.
When he emerged from a nearby pub later, he was set upon, knocked to the ground and kicked and punched repeatedly.
Qadeer Ahmed threw himself at the victim, before Naseer Khan kicked and stamped on him.
Bashir passed his crutch to Uddin, who brandished it in the direction of the victim.
Abdul also kicked the man, while Jalal Ahmed was said to be in the thick of the action, behaving 'menacingly' towards people.
The eight men admitted affray over the Oxford Street incident, while Uddin and Alamgir were found guilty of violent disorder and Kamran Khan of affray over the Edgware Road clash.
At the Old Bailey, Judge Paul Worsley QC said he considered the Asbos were necessary to prevent further incidents.
But lawyers representing the nine men argued at the Court of Appeal that the orders were not justified.
Giving judgment, Lady Justice Macur, sitting with Mr Justice Andrew Smith and Judge Jeremy Carey, said the restrictions on Da'wah were a breach of the men's human right to be able to practise their religion.
And to put restrictions on them doing so was not necessary, as the Oxford Street incident was not the result of the stall, but of a private clash with the football fan.
'As we see it, the operation of the Da'wah stall was part of the background to the violent episode, but it was not the cause,' she said in her judgment.
She continued: 'We conclude that the Asbos against all the appellants should be quashed, and the appeals allowed accordingly.'
Naseer Khan, 33, of Ascot Road; Qadeer Ahmed, 30, of Highfield Road; Jalal Ahmed, 27, of Cavendish Road; Yousef Bashir, 35, of Dane Road; and Munim Abdul, 34, of Hampton Road, were all jailed for 29 weeks.
Kamran Khan, 31, of Wodecroft Road, got 55 weeks; Moshiur Rahman, 34, of Dane Road, got 21 weeks; Mohammed Ishtiaq Alamgir, 36, of Kenilworth Road, got 10 months; and Mohan Uddin, 38, of Trinity Road, got 21 months and three weeks.
Lawyers representing the nine men argued that the orders were not justified
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Re: Nine Luton muslim men involved in violent attack on foot
Sat Dec 12, 2015 8:47 am
Why is the headline "9 Muslim Men"? When christian white men have a football we don't see the same headline so why if they're muslim? Some sort of agenda here I think
Re: Nine Luton muslim men involved in violent attack on foot
Sat Dec 12, 2015 8:54 am
The12thBlue wrote:Why is the headline "9 Muslim Men"? When christian white men have a football we don't see the same headline so why if they're muslim? Some sort of agenda here I think
Ask the LUTON Newspaoers/Media if it really concerns you, you can email them.
Remember also football fans have very little rights ask the courts why?
Re: 9 Luton muslim men involved in violent attack on footbal
Sat Dec 12, 2015 9:12 am
The12thBlue wrote:Why is the headline "9 Muslim Men"? When christian white men have a football we don't see the same headline so why if they're muslim? Some sort of agenda here I think
They are identified as sunni and shia...so not british ....so they can take their diferrences from where have come from and f**k off back......simple really...owww and this is the same if we are talking of polish and russian so as no not a racist thing just being honest......this is Britain
Re: Nine Luton muslim men involved in violent attack on foot
Sat Dec 12, 2015 9:33 am
The paper has probably identified them as Muslim in the context that it was a Muslim March they were on.
I think there have been similar headlines for Anonymous members and the polish Hooligans in Manchester.
We've had same type of headlines as football fans too.
Highly likely that anyone at a Choudary speak g event would class themselves as Muslim and not British.
I think there have been similar headlines for Anonymous members and the polish Hooligans in Manchester.
We've had same type of headlines as football fans too.
Highly likely that anyone at a Choudary speak g event would class themselves as Muslim and not British.
Re: Nine Luton muslim men involved in violent attack on foot
Sat Dec 12, 2015 10:42 am
The12thBlue wrote:Why is the headline "9 Muslim Men"? When christian white men have a football we don't see the same headline so why if they're muslim? Some sort of agenda here I think
Are any football lads christian?
Re: Nine Luton muslim men involved in violent attack on foot
Sat Dec 12, 2015 11:08 am
Forever Blue wrote:The12thBlue wrote:Why is the headline "9 Muslim Men"? When christian white men have a football we don't see the same headline so why if they're muslim? Some sort of agenda here I think
Ask the LUTON Newspaoers/Media if it really concerns you, you can email them.
Remember also football fans have very little rights ask the courts why?
Have to agree with here Forever Blue. Seem to remember a few years back a few valley lads on train were in the paper regarding some woman kicking off at them (She went on national radio with her complaint as well!!!). Although hours after a City match, the local ego labelled first and foremost City fans. The match had ended and they were on their way home but still a rag couldn't help in branded them Cardiff fans first and foremost. Here's the link to story - reference to Cardiff City second paragraph - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-11474308
Re: Nine Luton muslim men involved in violent attack on foot
Sat Dec 12, 2015 11:10 am
Balfblue wrote:Forever Blue wrote:The12thBlue wrote:Why is the headline "9 Muslim Men"? When christian white men have a football we don't see the same headline so why if they're muslim? Some sort of agenda here I think
Ask the LUTON Newspaoers/Media if it really concerns you, you can email them.
Remember also football fans have very little rights ask the courts why?
Have to agree with here Forever Blue. Seem to remember a few years back a few valley lads on train were in the paper regarding some woman kicking off at them (She went on national radio with her complaint as well!!!). Although hours after a City match, the local ego labelled first and foremost City fans. The match had ended and they were on their way home but still a rag couldn't help in branded them Cardiff fans first and foremost. Here's the link to story - reference to Cardiff City second paragraph - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-11474308
Exactly/Spot on Balfblue
Re: Nine Luton muslim men involved in violent attack on foot
Sat Dec 12, 2015 11:12 am
The12thBlue wrote:Why is the headline "9 Muslim Men"? When christian white men have a football we don't see the same headline so why if they're muslim? Some sort of agenda here I think
Think what you want ,That was the headline
Email the paper if you don't agree with it
Re: Nine Luton muslim men involved in violent attack on foot
Sat Dec 12, 2015 12:42 pm
The12thBlue wrote:Why is the headline "9 Muslim Men"? When christian white men have a football we don't see the same headline so why if they're muslim? Some sort of agenda here I think
Maybe it had something to do with them being Muslims.
Re: Nine Luton muslim men involved in violent attack on foot
Sat Dec 12, 2015 12:55 pm
The12thBlue wrote:Why is the headline "9 Muslim Men"? When christian white men have a football we don't see the same headline so why if they're muslim? Some sort of agenda here I think
Because it's relevant to the story and is their association.
Re: Nine Luton muslim men involved in violent attack on foot
Sat Dec 12, 2015 1:15 pm
This is a tongue in cheek comment but if a football lad has a scrap the court bans them from their ground. Maybe the court should ban these Muslims from their mosque.
Imagine the outcry if it happened.
Imagine the outcry if it happened.
Re: Nine Luton muslim men involved in violent attack on foot
Sat Dec 12, 2015 2:11 pm
Just so you know Annis and Co this wasn't aimed at you this was aimed at the publisher, they are cleary doing this to create a reaction from others imo
Re: Nine Luton muslim men involved in violent attack on foot
Sat Dec 12, 2015 4:09 pm
It seems to me that under the human rights act, the right to practice their religion (for muslims that is) comes above the safety of the general public. What a load of bollocks. Are these judges f*cking senile. This crime wouldn't have happened if all these muslims were not in the same place at the same time. They need to be separated. That's not stopping them from practising their religion.
If this had been the other way around and football fans had attacked a muslim they wouldn't have seen the light of day for several years not just 29 weeks. Clearly the judicial system is (1) biased in favour of muslims and (2) biased against football fans. Starting to feel like a second class citizen in my own country!
If this had been the other way around and football fans had attacked a muslim they wouldn't have seen the light of day for several years not just 29 weeks. Clearly the judicial system is (1) biased in favour of muslims and (2) biased against football fans. Starting to feel like a second class citizen in my own country!
Re: Nine Luton muslim men involved in violent attack on foot
Sat Dec 12, 2015 6:10 pm
The12thBlue wrote:Why is the headline "9 Muslim Men"? When christian white men have a football we don't see the same headline so why if they're muslim? Some sort of agenda here I think
GET A GRIP -