The verdict is in for the grooming and pimping case in Rochdale, and nine men have been found guilty. The Mohammed Coefficient of the case (among the perpetrators who were named) was 25%.
One of our British readers sent us his observations on the verdict and the way the news was handled by the media:
The UK court case against a number of ‘Asian’ men for child sex exploitation has just concluded. The details can be found on any UK press website.
It is interesting to revisit the UK CEOPS service report on this criminal activity and the following paragraph:
Caution should be taken in drawing conclusions about ethnicity due to the relatively small number of areas where agencies have been proactive around this particular type of crime. We do not draw national conclusions about ethnicity from the data available at this time because it is too inconsistent. Further research would be needed to examine whether the ethnic breakdown reflects issues that need to be addressed within a community context, local demographics of the areas from which data is drawn, an unconscious bias among agency responses or other factors that need to be explored.
In relation to ethnicity, the data was often recorded to a particularly poor standard at the point of capture. ‘Ethnicity’ was often conflated with ‘nationality’ and neither factor captured according to a conventional or standardised classification scheme. Within the available dataset there was a significant difference between the groups. For groups one and two combined, the ethnicity of 38% of the offenders was unknown, 30% were white, 28% Asian, 3% Black and 0.16% Chinese. When only group one was analysed, the offenders were found to be 38% white, 32% unknown, 26% Asian, 3% Black, and 0.2% Chinese.
As the Brilliant El Ingles has already said: if 28% of the offenders were ‘Asian’, that is a large proportion of a minority population compared to the 30% of offenders who were ‘white’ and from a much larger population as a whole.
The police are busy rushing around trying to cover this one up and saying it has nothing to do with race, nothing to do with race — they are right of course, but it does have a lot to do with Islamic attitudes towards females. The BBC socialists quickly mentioned the ‘far right’ riots that the case caused. But it was not the far right: it was angry white people who had nothing to lose who rioted.
They were also the people who knew that their daughters had been or still were at risk. Their parenting skills could, of course, be questioned, as these young girls had been out on their own at a very early age. Nevertheless, it is a grievous crime and one which the ‘Asian’ community needs to deal with… and I don’t mean Sikhs, Hindus, Buddhists, etc.
Below are some excerpts from The Daily Mail concerning the verdict in Rochdale. The details of the case are gruesome, so the worst descriptions have been omitted:
Nine men were today found guilty of grooming and passing round vulnerable white schoolgirls aged between 13 and 15 for sex after plying them with alcohol and drugs.
Five girls were ‘shared’ by Kabeer Hassan, Abdul Aziz, Abdul Rauf, Mohammed Sajid, Adil Khan, Abdul Qayyum, Mohammed Amin, Hamid Safi and a 59-year-old man who cannot be named for legal reasons.
The ten-week trial was told that the men — who are all from Pakistan, some from the same village, apart from Safi who is from Afghanistan — groomed the teenage girls because they were vulnerable and from broken homes.
The jury of three men and nine women heard that the defendants plied the girls, some as young as 13, with fast food, drink and drugs so they could ‘pass them around’ and use them for sex.
The victims were picked up from ‘honeypot locations’ where teenagers congregate, such as outside takeaway restaurants, and were then taken to ‘chill houses’ around the north of England for sex.
The “59-year-old man who cannot be named for legal reasons” still intrigues me. Why is it that he can’t be named? Do any of our British readers know?
Hat tip for the Mail article: watling.