Sharia Law

JUSTICE campaigner John Clough, whose daughter was murdered by her bodybuilder former partner, has said he would back the introduction of Sharia law.

Need I add to that? Does that pile of bollocks even need a fisking?
Today there are an estimated 85 Sharia law courts currently operating across the UK and Mr Clough, from Higherford, was asked to give his views as part of Channel 4’s 4Thought series.
And he has come out in support of the moral code and religious law of Islam, as he believes it takes the views of victims’ families into account.
Jane was brutally murdered by Jonathan Vass in the car park of Blackpool Victoria Hospital in July 2010. He was later jailed for life.

Let's make this as clear as we possible can. Sharia law has no place in the United Kingdom. The views of victims families have no place in a court of law. The 'moral code' of the muslim religion is one of violence and oppression.

So who is Mr Clough and why is he in favour of Sharia law?

John Clough's daughter Jane was murdered by an ex boyfriend while he was out on bail for raping her.

Ever since, Mr Clough and his wife Penny have worked tirelessly on Justice for Jane, to reform bail and sentencing laws, for which Penny was awarded the MBE in the New Year’s Honours list.

John has now become a self styled 'justice campaigner', although looking at his exploits, he's more interested in vengeance than Justice.

The changes to the law that the Cloughs campaigned for now makes it possible for the prosecution to launch an appeal if a suspect is granted bail. I don't know if there is a similar right of appeal if a suspect is denied bail.

My argument at the time was that a person facing a bail hearing has not yet been convicted of any crime. This law may mean that more innocent people spend time on remand while waiting for a trial, an experience that I know would certainly break me.

I would imagine that suitable evidence that the suspect is dangerous would be given to the judge before the hearing and this would make it less likely that an innocent person would be forced to do time. I would imagine...

I would have been behind the Cloughs 100% if they were campaigning for stiffer sentences under current law,  but I am never in favour of tinkering with the checks and balances that our legal system contains to help keep the innocent out of prison.

This was all happening around the time we lost double jeopardy, which makes it even harder to swallow.

The true colours of Clough have finally been revealed in a Channel 4 documentary.

“Had the decision been there to have him executed or sent to prison, I would have built the gallows, I would have carried out the deed myself.

And that is why the opinion of the victims families does not belong in a court of law. Justice should be harsh for those who have committed offences against the person or property, but it must also be uniform.

We don't have the death penalty in the UK for many good reasons, one being we are not a group of middle aged savages who exact bloody revenge rather than justice.

The programme makers had posed the question – ‘Is there a place for Sharia Law in Britain?’



PJH said...

"And he has come out in support of the moral code and religious law of Islam, as he believes it takes the views of victims’ families into account."

Wasn't the victim a female in this particular case?

Why would Mr Clough believe the Religion of Peace would favour her any better than, say, the UK courts?

Bucko The Moose said...

Because he's an embittered moron

Macheath said...

Somehow, I'm reminded of the satirical Mitchell and Webb sketch in which a man whose wife has died in a train crash is asked about rail safety measures; despite increasing pressure from the uncomprehending interviewer, he repeatedly refuses to pronounce on the matter:
"But your wife died in a railway accident."
"Exactly; that's why I'm the last person you should be asking for an objective opinion!"

Tom said...

The man's frustration with the situation is understandable though...

One does have to wonder and actually, not look very far before one finds all sorts of violent assaults perpetrated by either an accused out on bail or a recently released mental patient.

Sharia is clutching at straws but really, there should be some *direct* comeback on the people who sanction or facilitate the release. It won't stop everything but I can't help thinking that the legal profession and doctors should be at a minimum bonded against the behaviour of the people whose release they either sanction or technically facilitate.

Every case is different - but the toll in damaged or prematurely ended lives from an accountability free system is totally plain to see.

Woodsy42 said...

If people lose faith in the proper english law system - and let's face it many have - then they will turn to alternatives that appear to correct the problem.
On the face of it Sharia would stop a hell of a lot of crime, chop off a few hands and burglary would drop for a start!
My hammer is broken so I will use this brick.....

Longrider said...

Under Sharia law it is doubtful he would have been convicted of rape - she would have gone to gaol for adultery - or have been stoned to death. Clough is an idiot.

The answer to the overall question that should never have been asked in a civilised society is: no, no,and thrice, no!

Bucko The Moose said...

Macheath - It's true, yet grief has become a very public thing of late. Those who loose someone are now looked to as the foremost authority on how to 'make sure it never happens again'.
Frankly, that's one of the many reasons why our country is going to shit.

Bucko The Moose said...

Tom - If we start to punish people for letting folk have bail then nobody will get bail. Putting innocent people in prison should be avoided by all reasonable means.

I could understand his frustration, as you say, but he is venting it in the wrong direction.

His daughters killer got life. He should be campaigning for life to mean life. Not for the introduction of savagery.

Bucko The Moose said...

Woodsy - Our system may be in need of repair but Sharia is a long, long way from the answer ;-)

Bucko The Moose said...

Longrider - It's obvious he hasn't thought this through.
The media should take a lot of the blame for his becoming an idiot. Grief should be private but now we parade it across the MSM in order to further whatever is the current agenda.
I bet the Channel 4 program where he came out with this statement never mentioned the truism that you just stated.

John Clough said...

Bucko, I would be the first to agree with your comment 'embittered moron' if the premise it was used in was accurate, but it is not, I do not now or never have supported sharia law, this is a response I have sent to the editor of the paper that printed the article.
Firstly I would like to say I DO NOT SUPPORT THE INTRODUCTION OF SHARIA LAW IN THE UK, indeed there are many aspects of it that are repugnant, what I have said is that there are aspects of it that could be discussed and considered as an additional victim protection within UK law, a bit like cherry picking some aspects that could work in the UK during the recording of the program I stated several time that I do not or did not support sharia, as my wife will back me up. I am not ashamed to want retribution as the current justice system is a farce, I want the UK justice system to be as robust as it can be, and if that involves looking around the world at other systems of law and learning from them I welcome that.
I would also add the only aspect I agree with is the involvement of victims families in sentencing decisions, and that is what I wanted to be conveyed in the program.
There are no circumstances whatsoever that would lead me to want an Islamist state in the UK.
Also I was not interviewed or spoken to regarding the article by the journalist involved, I find the content of the article offensive and inaccurate.
The journalist involved came up with the repulsive suggestions that I am in favour of sharia, and pulled the statement that "And he has come out in support of the moral code and religious law of Islam, as he believes it takes the views of victims’ families into account." out of thin a piece of journalism it is complete B****cks

Bucko The Moose said...

John - Thanks for the response.
Bollocks journalism. It's definately a problem these days. I've learned to mistrust most of the mainstream media but you would still expect such a direct quote to be accurate:

""JUSTICE campaigner John Clough, whose daughter was murdered by her bodybuilder former partner, has said he would back the introduction of Sharia law.""

You live and learn.

Cherry picking makes much more sense than backing an introduction of the hideousness that is Sharia.

Having said that, I'm still dead set against grieving parents having a say in punishment of criminals. I can understand the frustration though, when the courts are very reluctant to hand out any real punishment and the bleeding hearts see the criminals as victims.

The UK system is broke and does need fixing. Sentances need to be a punishment and a deterrent. At present they are not.

As I said above, I would support a campaign for real punishment (Not vengeance) life meaning life, prison for violent offences etc.

I don't agree with tinkering with the foundations of the system and possibly putting the innocent at risk and I don't agree with judgements and punishments based on emotion rather than distanced reasoning.