Australia: Muslim pedophile verdict to be appealed

What was the scum doing in bed with an 11-year-old boy if he is not a pedophile?

THE Director of Public Prosecutions has been ordered to appeal the sentence given to a medical student, who walked free from court after pleading guilty to attempting to indecently assault an 11-year-old boy. Shakeel Mirza, 26, was given 12-months probation and had no conviction recorded, after admitting to attempting to "massage the boy's penis".

The District Court was told the offence came about as a result of Mirza volunteering for community group Aunties and Uncles - a mentoring organisation for families in need. On the day of the incident, Mirza, the 11-year-old complainant and his brother were watching TV while lying on a single bed when the accused massaged the boy's head before saying "this would feel better if I did it on your penis". But the boy said no and pushed his hand away and the incident stopped.

There was said to be no planning involved in the incident and Mirza, who provided glowing references to the court, has no criminal history. His lawyer characterised the offending as a moment of stupidity -- a description accepted by Judge Searles. Mirza reportedly said the offence was almost done in a "joking" fashion.

But Attorney-General Kerry Shine said after reviewing the transcript of the sentencing remarks, and receiving advice from the office of the DPP, he had ordered an appeal be lodged.

Report here




Britain: Bent cop loses

A journalist who suggested that a former police officer may be corrupt was cleared of libel in the Court of Appeal yesterday. In a victory that strengthens the media’s right to report on matters that are in the public interest, the appeal judges said that Graeme McClagan had acted responsibly in his research for the book Bent Coppers.

Michael Charman, who was a detective constable in the Metropolitan Police, claimed that it was libellous because it suggested that there were grounds for suspecting him of involvement in corruption.

The judges ruled unanimously that Mr McLagan had taken steps to verify the story and that as a result of his honesty, his expertise, his careful research and evaluation of the material, his book was protected by a defence of “public interest”. It is thought to be the first time that the defence has been argued successfully for a book.

Caroline Kean, who acted for Mr McLagan and his publishers, Orion, said: “For too long newspapers and book publishers have been deterred from publishing serious investigative journalism by the threat of incredibly complex and expensive libel proceedings if they made the slightest error. This judgment is a breath of fresh air.”

Mr McLagan said: “Exposing police corruption is obviously in the public interest, and was recognised by the trial judge, the Appeal Court and even Mr Charman’s own defence team.” He was surprised that the Police Federation had supported Mr Charman, a man who had to resign for “discreditable conduct”. The federation would have to pay at least 1 million pounds in costs.

Report here



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today)