Friday 24 March 2017

In case you only get your news from the BBC, here are the names of the 29 people charged yesterday with historic sex offences in Huddersfield

I missed this story yesterday, what with the blanket coverage of the murderous terrorist attack in Westminster on Wednesday (or "dangerous and violent incidents" as Jeremy Corbyn prefers to call them). I only became aware of it thanks to a link to a Daily Mail item in a tweet this morning. The story was headlined:
Twenty seven men are charged with dozens of historic sex offences including rape and trafficking against 18 women aged as young as 11 in Huddersfield
The charges include rape, sexual activity with a child, child neglect and child abduction. I read the names of those charged with a dispiriting sense of déjà vu. Some sixth sense prompted me to check the BBC website to see how they'd covered the story: not a name in sight...

That strikes me as a bit odd, because there's no legal problem with printing the names, and not doing so might lead people to assume they're all called things like Bert Slatterthwaite of Harold Higginbottom. So here - courtesy of the Mail - are the names of the 27 men and two women who've been charged and released on bail, along with details of the charges they face:

Amere Singh Dhaliwal, 34, of Huddersfield, is charged with 21 counts of rape, four counts of supply of Class A drugs, supply of Class B drugs, supply of controlled substances with intention to engage in sexual activity, 14 counts of trafficking a female in the UK with a view to her sexual exploitation, five counts of inciting a child to engage in sexual activity, three counts of sexual assault by penetration, three of sexual touching, three more of possession of indecent images of a child, racially aggravated assault and inciting a child into prostitution.
Irfan Ahmed, 32, of Huddersfield, is charged with six counts of trafficking a female within the UK with a view to her sexual exploitation, sexual touching, taking indecent images of a child and inciting a child to engage in sexual activity.
Asif Bashir, 32, of Huddersfield, is charged with four counts of rape and attempted rape.
Zahid Hassan,28, of Huddersfield, is charged with five counts of trafficking a child within the UK with a view to her sexual exploitation, eight of rape, racially aggravated assault, two of supply of Class A drugs, inciting a child into sexual activity, two of child abduction and attempted rape.
Manzoor Hassan, 37, of Huddersfield, is charged with supply of noxious substance with intent to injure, annoy or aggrieve female, two of supply of Class A drugs and inciting a child into prostitution.
Mohammed Kammer, 32, of Huddersfield, is charged with two counts of rape.
Mohammed Rizwan Aslam, 29, of Huddersfield, is charged with two counts of rape.
Abdul Rehman Hanif,2 9, of Huddersfield, is charged with rape, supply of Class A drugs, two of supply of Class B drugs, supply of controlled substance with intent to engage in sexual activity, sexual touching and trafficking a female within the UK with a view to her sexual exploitation.
Mohammed Asaf Akram, 31, of Huddersfield, is charged with seven counts of rape, three of trafficking a female within the UK with a view to her sexual exploitation, child abduction, supply of Class B drugs, sexual touching and threats to kill.
Raj Singh Barsran, 33, of Huddersfield, is charged with two counts of sexual touching and rape.
Mansoor Akhtar, 25, of Huddersfield, is charged with rape, attempted rape and two of trafficking a female within the UK with a view to her sexual exploitation.
Niaz Ahmed, 53, of Huddersfield, is charged with two counts of inciting a child into sexual activity and sexual touching.
Mohammad Nahman, 31, of Huddersfield, is charged with trafficking a female within the UK with a view to her sexual exploitation, sexual touching, and two counts of rape.
Hamzha Ali Saleem, 37, of Manchester, is charged with three counts of trafficking a female within the UK with a view to her sexual exploitation.
Waqas Mahmood, 36, of Huddersfield, is charged with 3 counts of rape.
Naveeda Habib, 38, of Huddersfield, is charged with one count of child neglect.
Shahnaz Akhtar Malik, 55, of Huddersfield, is charged with one count of child neglect.
Nasarat Hussain, 28, of Huddersfield, is charged with three counts of rape, attempted rape and inciting a female to engage in sexual activity.
Sajid Hussain, 32, of Huddersfield, is charged with facilitating the commission of sexual activity on a child, three counts of rape and inciting a child into sexual activity.
Zulwarnain Dogar, 29, of Huddersfield, is charged with sexual touching and trafficking a female within UK with a view to her sexual exploitation.
Mohammad Ifraz, 28, of Huddersfield, is charged with trafficking a female within the UK with a view to her sexual exploitation (x3), rape, false imprisonment, child abduction, taking indecent images of a child and inciting a child to engage in sexual activity.
Faisal Nadeem, 30, of Huddersfield. He is charged with supply of Class A drugs, rape and possession of extreme pornography.
Mohammad Azeem, 31, of Bradford, is charged with three counts of rape.
Mohammad Imran Ibrar, 32, of Huddersfield, is charged with trafficking a female within the UK with a view to her sexual exploitation, facilitating the commission of sexual activity on a child, assault occasioning actual bodily harm, supply of Class B drugs.
Everton La Bastide, 50, of Huddersfield, is charged with two counts of sexual touching.
Mohammed Saqib Raheel, 30, of Dudley, is charged with child abduction and trafficking a female within the UK with a view to her sexual exploitation.
Zubair Ahmed, 30, of Huddersfield. He is charged with rape and possession of extreme pornography.
Usman Khalid, 29, of Huddersfield, is charged with sexual assault by penetration, child abduction and sexual touching.
Aleem Javaid, 27, of Huddersfield, is charged with rape and supply of Class B drugs.

In fact, this whole story appears to have been underplayed or ignored by all the national news media, with the notable exception - as far as I can tell - of the Mail. the Mirror and the Star. I understand that the law prohibits news outlets from doing more than stating the names of those charged and what they've been charged with - but, even so, you'd have thought newspapers and broadcasters would at least have felt the need to report as many details as they're allowed to at this early stage. One man is charged with 21 counts of rape. Doesn't that alone qualify as significant criminal activity these days?

Or am I missing something? What's going on? (Should you feel the desire to comment, please tread carefully - the law is clear on what can and can't be said about the case at this stage.)



4 comments:

  1. I see what you are getting at, Scott but I have never been entirely comfortable with anyone, no matter the crime, being named prior to trial. At the time of going to press these 29 have been charged; none has been convicted.

    Should any of them be convicted I would expect them to be named immediately / put in public stocks / castrated / hanged (delete as applicable) but until that time I welcome anonymity.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Is what you're asking for, gogilesgo, a change in the law - i.e. anonymity prior to the verdict? That's a bit extreme, I think, but defensible - although I'm very much in favour of naming the accused, as it must help further invaluable evidence (of guilt or innocence) to emerge before the jury makes its decision. Meanwhile, it's a bit much to ask all news outlets to pass up the opportunity of publishing the names of those charged with crimes - especially when those names are in the public domain, and when the crimes they're accused of are as newsworthy as the ones mentioned above. It just strikes me as odd that a news organisation such as the BBC would rush to let us know that Cliff Richard's home had been "raided" (complete with video of the event), despite the fact that the singer hadn't been charged with anything (and wasn't subsequently), while coyly withholding the names of 29 people charged with what sound like truly shocking crimes. Mind you, I haven't been a journalist for a long time, so there may be a reasonable explanation for this reticence: I just can't imagine what it might be.

      Delete
  2. It's never a Murray Lipschitz, is it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I hope you're not seriously suggesting that the Elders of Zion aren't behind every bad thing that happens in the world? And who's to say every one of these defendants hasn't deliberately changed their name as part of a plot to smear members of the Muslim community? Honestly, what a racist!

      Delete