L’uomo ha risparmiato la prigione per aver attaccato il manifestante del Corano
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8xr12yx5l4o
di LycanIndarys
L’uomo ha risparmiato la prigione per aver attaccato il manifestante del Corano
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8xr12yx5l4o
di LycanIndarys
17 commenti
>A Muslim man who attacked someone burning a Quran outside the Turkish consulate in London has been spared jail.
>Moussa Kadri, 59, saw Hamit Coskun setting alight the text and shouted: “I’m going to kill you” before slashing at him with a knife.
>He later told police he was protecting his religion, Southwark Crown Court heard.
>Judge Adam Hiddleston handed Kadri a 20-week prison sentence, suspended for 18 months.
Some of you may remember this one, [as the victim was charged and fined as well](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce9v4e0z9r8o#:~:text=On%20Monday%20he%20was%20found,of%20Islam%20and%20its%20followers%22.), for burning the Quran. It triggered a few conversations on here about free speech, protest, and the right to offend a religion.
What I can’t work out is why Kadri was found guilty of assault – given that he went to go and fetch a knife, before yelling “I’m going to kill you” and then attacking Coskun, I don’t know why he wasn’t charged with attempted murder?
20 weeks as a suspended sentence seem *incredibly* light given what he did, as far as I’m concerned.
This is why religion shouldn’t be a protected characteristic; all the others are demographics you’re born into (age, sexuality, nationality, race, disability, gender, etc) except religion; that’s the only one where people can just decide to be a part of that characteristic and you can’t criticise.
It’s literally no different to if they criminalised critiquing people based on what party they vote for; people make choices, we have the right to critique those choices. Religion is a choice and should be open to criticism without legal repercussions.
>Greg Unwin, defending, said: “This was a response to a very unusual situation that Mr Kadri has demonstrated regret and remorse for.
>”His reaction was in the heat of the moment to what he perceived was a deeply offensive act on a holy book.”
“Heat of the moment” is punching Coksun in the face immediately (which obviously is also unacceptable). It isn’t going somewhere else to retrieve a lethal weapon and then coming back to use it. His sentence seems astoundingly lenient.
“Judge Adam Hiddleston handed Kadri a 20-week prison sentence, suspended for 18 months.”
This was the wrong outcome and sets a dangerous precedent that reactions with violence from one community is tolerated in the name of presevering their collective phantasies.
Our judges are weak. I guarantee if it was another religion involved, he’d get put away for a long time.
I guess it sets the bar. Knife attack when your religion is called into question is vaguely acceptable.
This is absolutely sickening wow just wow the worst part is there are people on the left defending him
Wasn’t the chap who burnt his own property fined a few hundred quid? Where as this chap, who went home, got a murder weapon and returned shouting ‘I’m going to kill you’ has received a suspended sentence?
So in a practical sense the guy who damaged his own property has a more sever sentence than the guy who wanted to kill someone?
“A Muslim man who attacked someone burning a Quran outside the Turkish consulate in London has been spared jail.
Moussa Kadri, 59, saw Hamit Coskun setting alight the text and shouted: “I’m going to kill you” before slashing at him with a knife.”
What’s scary is that this was the response of a 59 year old man living in liberal London. Your everyday man, someone you could encounter in acts of daily life.
Yet, the judge was disturbingly blasé about his actions, like it’s a normal, typical response. It’s not – this verdict only serves to empower others, that acts of violence are acceptable under certain ideological systems.
Does this set a president for anyone caught in public threatening with knives ?
With religious extremism and sectarianism in the UK growing, society needs to send a clear message that violence conducted with the excuse of someone’s religious sentiment being hurt is not acceptable. Lenient sentences like this and inability to eg defend the Batley teacher who will encourage extremists to continue using violence and intimidation
This wasn’t an impulsive act — he came back to the scene with a knife and openly said he was going to kill the protester.
Muslims should never face discrimination, but Islam, like any set of beliefs, should not be placed beyond criticism. It isn’t an immutable characteristic, and treating it as such blurs an important distinction. My concern is that Western courts may be drifting toward criminalizing criticism of religion under the guise of protecting Muslims.
Sounds like a lot more people are going to burn qurans
There’s only one ideology whose followers get this kind of kid glove treatment. If it had been a white working class man threatening to kill a Muslim whilst slashing at them with a blade, would he have been spared prison?
We all know the answer to this.
I’ve heard of people getting sent to jail for literally carrying an illegal weapon. And this guy actually uses it and gets off?
Shit like this is what will given Reform more power. If you don’t want that to happen, clean up the mess in front of you.
And you asked me why Reform has been topping the polls recently