Muslim Abuser Who 'didn't Know' That Sex With A Girl Of 13 Was Illegal Is Spared Jail

[HSD1]

• Adil Rashid admitted travelling to Nottingham and having sex with the girl
• He met the 13-year-old on Facebook and they communicated by texts and phone for two months before they met
• He was educated in a madrassa and 'had little experience of women'
• Said he had been taught 'women are no more worthy than a lollipop that has been dropped on the ground'
• Added he was reluctant to have sex but that he was 'tempted by [the girl]'

A muslim who raped a 13-year-old girl he groomed on Facebook has been spared a prison sentence after a judge heard he went to an Islamic faith school where he was taught that women are worthless.

Adil Rashid, 18, claimed he was not aware that it was illegal for him to have sex with the girl because his education left him ignorant of British law.

Yesterday Judge Michael Stokes handed Rashid a suspended sentence, saying: ‘Although chronologically 18, it is quite clear from the reports that you are very naive and immature when it comes to sexual matters.’

Earlier Nottingham Crown Court heard that such crimes usually result in a four to seven-year prison sentence.

But the judge said that because Rashid was ‘passive’ and ‘lacking assertiveness’, sending him to jail might cause him ‘more damage than good’.

Rashid, from Birmingham, admitted he had sex with the girl, saying he had been ‘tempted by her’ after they met online.

They initially exchanged messages on Facebook before sending texts and chatting on the phone over a two-month period.

They then met up in Nottingham, where Rashid had booked a room at a Premier Inn.

The girl told police they stayed at the hotel for two hours and had sex after Rashid went to the bathroom and emerged wearing a condom.

Rashid then returned home and went straight to a mosque to pray. He was arrested the following week after the girl confessed what had happened to a school friend, who informed one of her teachers.

He told police he knew the girl was 13 but said he was initially reluctant to have sex before relenting after being seduced.

Encounter: Rashid and the girl had met randomly on Facebook and had also communicated by phone and text messages for two months before they met

Earlier the court heard how Rashid had ‘little experience of women’ due to his education at an Islamic school in the UK, which cannot be named for legal reasons.

After his arrest, he told a psychologist that he did not know having sex with a 13-year-old was against the law. The court heard he found it was illegal only when he was informed by a family member.

In other interviews with psychologists, Rashid claimed he had been taught in his school that ‘women are no more worthy than a lollipop that has been dropped on the ground’.

When Judge Stokes said Rashid ‘must have known it was illegal, unless he was going round with his eyes shut’, defence lawyer Laban Leake said reports suggested Rashid had a ‘degree of sexual naivety’.

‘The school he attended, it is not going too far to say, can be described as a closed community and on this occasion this was perpetuated by his home life.

Rashid had pre-booked a family room at the Premier Hotel in Goldsmith Street, Nottingham where he took his victim

Sentenced: Rashid admitted at Nottingham Crown Court (pictured) that he had sex with a 13-year-old after she 'tempted' him

‘It is not too far to say that he may not have known that having sex with a 13-year-old girl was illegal.’ Judge Stokes sentenced Rashid to nine months youth custody, suspended for two years, along with a two-year probation supervision order.

Describing Rashid, the judge said: ‘He’s had an unusual education, certainly in terms of the sexual education provided. Comparing women to lollipops is a very curious way of teaching young men about sex.’

But he said that Rashid knew what he was doing was wrong.

‘It was made clear to you at the school you attended that having sexual relations with a woman before marriage was contrary to the precepts of Islam,’ he said.

Addressing Rashid, the judge said: ‘I accept this was a case where the girl was quite willing to have sexual activity with you. But the law is there to protect young girls, even though they are perfectly happy to engage in sexual activity.’

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2268395/Adil-Rashid-Paedophile-claimed-Muslim-upbringing-meant-didnt-know-illegal-sex-girl-13.html

[Amarjeet Singh_1737]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2268395/Adil-Rashid-Paedophile-claimed-Muslim-upbringing-meant-didnt-know-illegal-sex-girl-13.html

Bullshit.

[HSD1]

True story bro. What's so hard to believe? Judges in the UK let people off for all kinds of flimsy reasons. The UK justice system isnt some pure and sancrosanct thing that always gets it right.

[Amarjeet Singh_1737]

True story bro. What's so hard to believe? Judges in the UK let people off for all kinds of flimsy reasons. The UK justice system isnt some pure and sancrosanct thing that always gets it right.

Same shit all over Anglophonic nations. In NZ a young Sikh bodyguard is killed and the judge releases the guilty party saying, 'they did not MEAN to murder him.'

[chatanga1]

Bullshit.

exactly what i thought.

[dalsingh101]

You know what. When goray are scared, they start to try and placate. And they have good reason to be scared of sullay right now.

We also saw similar attempts to placate blacks after the riots.

[chatanga1]

i know, channel 4 and the beeb running multiprogram series on how great islam is.

[BhagatSingh]

They are both pretty young and naive. This dude probably didn't know that the girl was under the age of consent, and she probably didn't either. Outside of that law it appears to be consensual sex.

I think the judge made the right decision.

[HSD1]

You know what. When goray are scared, they start to try and placate. And they have good reason to be scared of sullay right now.

We also saw similar attempts to placate blacks after the riots.

The idea that all goreh are the same and that the establishment is running scared is pretty wide of the mark. If anyone's scared it's the whites who live near large muslim communities or working class types who are more at risk from grooming or street gang violence. The middle class dont come into contact with that many muslims and the ones they do know are just taxi/restaurant workers or educated types so they arent likely to have grief with them. The top couldnt care less. In fact they let them in to give a nice blame target to their own working class for problems or use them in foreign policy to destabilise foreign countries. That's why other countries' intelligence agencies referred to London as 'Londonistan'. Now it's convenient to run the other way. Blaming muslims for social ills, banning the burka, questionning the safety of Arab investments in the UK etc etc.

If you look at the riots the police left all the working and middle class areas alone regardless of who lived there. They bunkered down in the well off areas. The muslims got it as bad as everyone else. Remember how those white and black boys who ran over all those muslims in Brum got let off? Dont mistake the impotence of the British justice system with it's apathy towards sikh issues for some kind of appeasing of muslims. What do you mean by placating blacks? Not shooting them for no reason? They might say they've changed but as time goes on it will be the same old, same old.

They are both pretty young and naive. This dude probably didn't know that the girl was under the age of consent, and she probably didn't either. Outside of that law it appears to be consensual sex.

I think the judge made the right decision.

The definition of justice doesnt include the word gullible.

I guess when Americans drop bombs and strafe houses in the Middle East they shouldnt be held responsible for and kids who die. After all, how are they to know?

I guess you could also say the rape of muslim children is justified now as this is what is in their religion so they should be treated like that.

[chatanga1]

They are both pretty young and naive. This dude probably didn't know that the girl was under the age of consent, and she probably didn't either. Outside of that law it appears to be consensual sex.

I think the judge made the right decision.

you are kidding?

[BhagatSingh]

you are kidding?

He's 18, she's 13. You think they are mature enough? You think it's worth ruining the life of someone who didn't know better?

You must be kidding.

[chatanga1]

no im dead serious.

maturity is not a factorhere, dont pretend it is, its the guy pretending that he was unaware that it was illegal fror under 16s, which everybody who has half a brain cell knows in the western world today.

you dont get young knife murderers getting that kind of protection, that they are young and naive. why should this guy?

[BhagatSingh]

no im dead serious.

maturity is not a factorhere, dont pretend it is, its the guy pretending that he was unaware that it was illegal fror under 16s, which everybody who has half a brain cell knows in the western world today.

Maturity is always a factor.

What happened here? A girl and a guy wanted to have sex and met up in a hotel room. The guy was hesitant but the girl was pushing it even though she is below the age. He put on a condom and no one got pregnant, good. Now whether not they knew the laws or not, if the girl's friend didn't tell on her she'd be fine. He'd be fine. They'd have moved on. Many under-aged kids have sex in secret and you don't hear about it because they only tell their friends or no one at all. This is nothing new. The fact that they labelled him as "abuser" means absolutely nothing.

Plus. Are you telling me that it's worth killing a guy's future career prospects, simply because he did what every teenager is doing in secret anyway? His name should not have been mentioned Period. The reporter should calm down.

you dont get young knife murderers getting that kind of protection, that they are young and naive. why should this guy?

Are you seriously comparing this to murder? LOL alright I was wrong. I will just smile and nod as I back away slowly.

If you are going to charge the guy, then why isn't the girl charged? Does it not take two to tango? And it is natural for girls to be attracted to older guys. and its natural for guys to be attracted to younger girls. So this law is immediately biased against guys. Boys are more likely to go to prison because of this law. Would want to ever see your own son in prison because of a biased law?

Yeah put that guy in jail for nothing, and let bitches like these roam free, who have the audacity to first get pregnant, and then pin a little boy down for money.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prwlOCzeLn0

BULLSHIT!

Edited October 9, 2013 by BhagatSingh

[HSD1]

Boy oh boy does someone have women issues. You're not West London Singh from SikhSangat are you?

Anyway, if you cant tell that an 18 year old MAN having sex with a 13 year old CHILD is wrong, then there is no point spewing the mumbo jumbo.

And we wonder why the Sikh community cant tackle the grooming issues it faces. Good luck raising your own daughters one day.

[Singh123456777]

It's waheguru himself who is doing all this stuff.Sorry if I offend anyone.

[BhagatSingh]

Boy oh boy does someone have women issues. You're not West London Singh from SikhSangat are you?

Anyway, if you cant tell that an 18 year old MAN having sex with a 13 year old CHILD is wrong, then there is no point spewing the mumbo jumbo.

And we wonder why the Sikh community cant tackle the grooming issues it faces. Good luck raising your own daughters one day.

I don't appreciate your rude, snide and condescending comments. Keep them to yourself.

Edited October 10, 2013 by BhagatSingh

[dalsingh101]

Seriously, Bhagat, no offense but your opinions seem to be getting more and more outlandish lately.

All that meditation and grand thinking is super cool, but come back down to earth again now and then.

Don't forget ground level whilst your flying in the sky dude.

[jaikaara]

There are 2 different views we are looking at , All of us who are very well conscious about sexual grooming and the people of one particular community involved in the activity . Bhagat's view is, the age parameter wherein both are considered immature. I could have agreed to Bhagat's view had not this person's pattern been the same as what the the adults of that community follow.

The trapping pattern was similiar and it appears he is one of those who might be attending their meets and has started practicing . Bhagat veere no offense but this very broad minded thinking has harmed apne. Cases upon cases have mounted . How on earth is it that this sexual grooming pattern does not happen with a muslim girl ? why does the victim always have to be a sikh/hindu/gore ?
Coincidence cannot be considered to this extent .

[BhagatSingh]

had not this person's pattern been the same as what the the adults of that community follow.

Cases upon cases have mounted . How on earth is it that this sexual grooming pattern does not happen with a muslim girl ? why does the victim always have to be a sikh/hindu/gore ?

Coincidence cannot be considered to this extent .

Look paaji we are not going to solve sexual grooming by stereotyping muslims into one homogenous group.

And we certainly are not going to get rid of grooming by sending the young men of our countries into prisons for common, forgivable crimes by mistaking it with sexual grooming.

this very broad minded thinking has harmed apne

I disagree there. It's not broad minded thinking that harms, it is narrow minded thinking. The people who groom don't have broad minded thinking. Those who generalize the behaviour of groomers to the rest of the community don't have broad minded thinking. Social ills of society don't come from broad minded thinking. These problems are the result of narrow minded thinking. Most people don't have broad minded thinking, especially apne. Broad minded thinking is much harder to pull off! So do not mistake lack of concern and lack of urgency that apne have for broad minded thinking. It's not.

Dally

Don't forget ground level whilst your flying in the sky dude.

Don't worry bro I am as grounded as one can be.

Edited October 10, 2013 by BhagatSingh

[HSD1]

I don't appreciate your rude, snide and condescending comments. Keep them to yourself.

Oh boo hoo you're offended. Shouldnt defend paedophiles then. Shouldnt you be watching clouds or moving foil or something anyway?

[BhagatSingh]

Oh boo hoo you're offended. Shouldnt defend paedophiles then. Shouldnt you be watching clouds or moving foil or something anyway?

Lol I thought I told you to go away?

[HSD1]

Lol I thought I told you to go away?

Obviously your magical powers arent as good as you thought they were.

[BhagatSingh]

Obviously your magical powers arent as good as you thought they were.

I give this a C+ on the "I am such a smartass scale". You can do much better bro.

You could have said "What do you call yourself a Tinfoil-bender?" Now that is A+ material. Lol

Now go away and practice. And don't show yourself until you can do much better than that.

Edited October 10, 2013 by BhagatSingh

[HSD1]

Nah mate, you're a tinfoil bender. Just without the tinfoil.

I think you need to stop being such a fundamenalist. I know it may be nice acting like the muslims but your views on law and order are so off the mark I think it's best if you stuck to the abstract and left the real world to the people who live there.

[BhagatSingh]

Nah mate, you're a tinfoil bender. Just without the tinfoil.

I think you need to stop being such a fundamenalist. I know it may be nice acting like the muslims but your views on law and order are so off the mark I think it's best if you stuck to the abstract and left the real world to the people who live there.

D-

Bro you got worse. Your spelling is declining too, wtf is a "fundamenalist" lol. Keep practicing you'll get the hang of it. And who knows you might even come across law, morality, the "abstract" on your quest to be the ultimate snide-smartass.

Later