Justice for Charlene Downes? Not yet.

Posted by Guessedworker on Friday, 25 May 2007 19:10.

My thanks to Donna and Sue on the Charlene thread that has been simmering away since March 2006, and to the untangled refusnik named Smith, all of whom have provided “heads-up” gen on the trial now begun at Preston Crown Court of (alleged) burger-bar butcher and paedophile Iyad Albittikhi.

The good news is that the MSM has finally begun reporting Charlene’s fate, locally and nationally. This is an advance, obviously, on the near-perfect silence that greeted the breakthrough of the initial arrest and commital to trial. But it remains a cause of journalistic shame that such an exceptional and vile crime against a 14-year old adolescent girl is acknowledged only in the judicial breach, so to speak, and is then accorded a completely unacceptable and thusfar universal shunning of the central feature of the case.

Look, for example, at the headline of the Mail article: Killer joked that he put schoolgirl lover in his kebabs. Schoolgirl lover?

In the body of the copy we read that prosecuting council Tim Holroyde, QC, told Preston Crown Court:-

The teenager had become familiar around the takeaways and would sometimes get free food.

... “In addition, she was one of a number of adolescent white girls who sometimes went at night to the alleyway behind the restaurants.

“She and others went there to meet much older men from the restaurants, and it seems perfectly clear that there was at times some sexual activity.”

So here are an unspecified number of “school-girl lovers” of “much older men”, having sex in “the alleyway behind the restaurants” in return, apparently, for “free food”. Well, if it’s all ““perfectly clear”, where are the press reports declaiming: Lancashire police smash Blackpool paedophile ring? Does this sound in any way like a complete police investigation to you?

Quite. So let’s ask a few questions of the politician-policemen who run Lancashire Constabulary:-

1) Were these “much older men from the restaurants” primarily of Asian descent?

2) Were they Moslems?

3) Were the victims English?

4) Did the “free food” give the girls one helluva hit for a short while and then, when that wore off and after a number of such “meals”, generate a powerful interest in a repeat?

5) Is there still or has there been an investigation into a suspected peadophile ring in Blackpool connected to Iyad Albatikkhi and his landlord Mohammed Raveshi (who is charged with assisting with the disposal of the body)?

6) Has there been an investigation of Raveshi’s activities as a social services worker and foster father?

7) Have the “much older men” been identified and investigated, and their clothes and possessions been subjected to analysis for DNA traces of the other adolescent English girls caught up in this evil?

8) Are charges laid or pending?

9) If not, and since the Lancashire force is not lacking in professionalism, and organised paedophilia is probably taken more seriously than any non-fatal crime, is there any operational reason why?

10) Could that possibly be because the left-liberal goal of “community cohesion” outweighs the protection of victims?

11) Alternatively, could it be because the BNP campaigns on rape and grooming issues, and frustrating their ambitions outweighs not only victim protection but practically eveything?

Now let’s turn to the print and broadcast media:-

1) If the murderer had been an English owner of a burger bar and the victim a 14-year old Asian Moslem girl, would you consider that the disposal of her flesh in the manner allegedly employed by Iyad Albattikhi was of sufficient interest to report from the outset as a major story?

2) If the Blackpool paedophiles were English and the victims Asian Moslems, and if there had been persistent rumours elsewhere in Northern England of similar grooming and drug-rapes of Asian Moslem adolescent girls by English men, would you report it?

3) Further, would you divine a racial element in the crime, and would you undertake your own journalistic investigation of that, perhaps requiring long-term coverage with much wringing of hands?

4) Would you promote your liberal political values above strictly professional journalistic values, as you usually do and as you did over the Stephen Lawrence and Anthony Walker murders, and make as much play as possible of the political backwash and of the applicability of the criminality of the English perpetrator to “indelible” wider English moral attitudes?

5) At the murder trial, would you describe the victim as a “schoolgirl lover” of her paedophile killer? Would you describe her home life as “chaotic”, thereby suggesting that she is something other than a genuine victim? Or would you portray her as “bright”, even “academic” and with a “promising future” in law or perhaps medicine cruelly snatched away?

You see, until you people in national politics and the media, in the police and civil service, education and law ... until you comprehend your own hypocrisy, selfishness and suggestibility there will be no justice for Charlene or for any of our sons and daughters who have been lost to the Insanity Cult, the cult of population transfer.

What their deaths cry out for is not your impossible elitist dream of community cohesion, not those unreturned “British values” of openness, tolerance and the rest. For these things will give us more victims like Charlene, and no poor soul should be asked to pay such a price for your obsessions. Justice for her and for all the ones we have lost will only begin to become a possibility when you, the traitorous, listen to us. For we are the the people of this land, and Charlene belonged to us and we to her.

Tags: Law & Order

Comments:

Posted by Matra on Fri, 25 May 2007 20:59 | #

The Sun, Britain’s highest circulation newspaper (over 3 million sold per day), also reports on the murder trial. It mentions the foreign nationalities of the men involved.

Posted by TottenhamLad on Fri, 25 May 2007 23:34 | #

Hi Guessedworker,

The Times now has a article about the trial, but nothing as far as I can see from the Guardian or Independent (surprise surprise).

Nowt on the TV neither, perhaps they are still too busy reporting on Big Brother and the Shilpa Shtty ‘racism’ row.

Posted by Guessedworker on Fri, 25 May 2007 23:53 | #

From The Sun report:-

The court heard Charlene and other adolescent girls would go to an alley at night to romp with older men from the resort’s restaurants.

It’s not hard to believe that the people who can write such outright shit as this are beneath an emotion as pure and selfless as love of race.

Tottenham Lad, do you have a link to Murdoch’s posh rag? I can’t find the report you mention on the on-line edition.

Posted by Al Ross on Sat, 26 May 2007 02:53 | #

The Sun newspaper’s target audience and the longest-serving editor’s opinion of the readership :

“You just dont understand the readers. do you, eh? He’s the bloke you see in the pub. a right old fascist, wants to send the wogs back, buy his poxy council house, he’s afraid of the Russians, hates the queers and the weirdos and drug dealers. He doesnt want to hear about that stuff” (serious news)

Kelvin MacKenzie

Posted by calyen on Sat, 26 May 2007 05:56 | #

Brilliant piece Guessedworker. I totally agree that the reporting of the suspect’s allegation that English schoolkids seek him, and other much older Asian men, out for sex in alleyways is almost definitely a lie and a smear.

If the case was the other way round, there would be no need for the media to try and shift some responsibility onto the victim by reporting these hideous allegations of the prosecutor in a way to make them appear as if they are fact.

But I have one question, why are the papers already describing him as the “killer” not the “defendant”?

Posted by TottenhamLad on Sat, 26 May 2007 10:43 | #

The Times report:
Kebab man ‘cut up missing girl, 14’

Posted by Englander on Sat, 26 May 2007 13:54 | #

OT but did anyone see Newsnight last night? Nick Griffin actually got a chance to speak. He was up against the hostile host Gavin Esler and a rather smug and odious Asian.

Posted by Bodkin on Sat, 26 May 2007 15:22 | #

“until you people in national politics and the media, in the police and civil service, education and law ... until you comprehend your own hypocrisy”

You could have added the legions of Guardian reading graduates who are incapable of seeing non-whites as anything other than victims and the white working class as racist.

The hypocrisy is oppressive and intolerable.

To hell with their ‘community cohesion’. They deserve to be on the receiving end of a revolution.

Posted by Bodkin on Sat, 26 May 2007 16:11 | #

Guessedworker, could you delete my last post please?

It was a little intemperate.

Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 26 May 2007 16:21 | #

My dear fellow, I will not. The language may fall below the standard you normally maintain but the sentiments are perfectly fitting.

How about a bit of editing?

Posted by Bodkin on Sat, 26 May 2007 16:50 | #

Guessedworker

That’ll do.

Thanks.

Posted by Amalek on Sat, 26 May 2007 17:29 | #

Gavin Esler, a Jew, interviewed Nick Griffin last night on Newnight, on behalf of ‘us’. His manner implied ‘we’ were fighting down revulsion at the very sight of this vile fascist fellow on ‘our’ televitz.

Griffin said that the Margaret Hodge Barking flap would lead to nothing in the establishment parties but a lot of talk, and that they would continue to allow the fundamental character of the country to be changed by reckless importation of immigrants.

On the other side was that shining light of Parliamentary probity and commercial property, Keith Vaz MP, who ringingly affirmed that multiracialism was a glorious thing for Britain while simultaneously avowing that 90pc of his casework was to do with immigrants and that we have rigid barriers against them coming in.

Griffin said that immigration might not be an issue in Vaz’s Leicester constituency (i.e. because that battle was lost) but it was a hot topic elsewhere in Britain. Indeed, the discussion followed a filmed report of a group of ‘old Labour’ voters in a rambling club in the East Midlands, all middle aged and elderly. The BBC reporter was taken aback to discover they had the effects of immigration uppermost on their minds when he went to talk to them about the radiant new dawn of Gordon Brown.

All in all, a chink of light, though Esler had the gall to suggest to Griffin that he should not complain about being marginalised any more—after all those years of criticism and exposes in absentia by the BBC—now that he had been graciously allowed to talk for up to 30 seconds at a stretch without being interrupted.

This AFAIK is the first national BBC report on the Charlene Downes case There was one in March on BBC Lancashire only:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/lancashire/6688137.stm

The accused are called Jordanian immigrants, but no M-word.

Posted by Guessedworker on Sat, 26 May 2007 18:05 | #

Thank you Englander and Amalek,

Anyone wishing to see the Newsnight programme can do so here. The link should be on the page until the middle of next week. The Griffin/Vaz interview commences at 12 mins 24 secs and runs to the 18 mins 52 secs point in the show.

Vaz’s remarks were quite surreal. I have rarely heard such a fathead, and I hope he will be the automatic choice of the Labour Party for all future pronouncements on The Great Issue.

The BBC’s Newsnight page has a (moderated) comment facility here. As usual, the left-inclined intelligentsia are semi-open to non-censorship - certainly more so than the Daily Mail - and the ghastly truth of English opinion is there for all to see. We do not want our country taken from us.

Posted by john rackell on Sat, 26 May 2007 20:16 | #

“This Week on Newnight 25th May” - Didn’t see it - after waiting for 68MB to download :-(.

25th May is the right show?

Posted by john rackell on Sat, 26 May 2007 20:33 | #

Oops, sorry. Got it. Top right link “Latest Program.” Streaming too. Thanks.

Posted by Bodkin on Sat, 26 May 2007 20:45 | #

I know this is off topic but did anyone else click on the Der Spiegel link in the BBC comments?

Sarkozy is going to pay immigrants to go away!

http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,484716,00.html

Posted by gongstar on Sat, 26 May 2007 21:17 | #

Charlene Downes and Mary-Ann Leneghan in the UK, Christian Channon and Christopher Newsom in the US: doesn’t it warm your heart to know that the media refuse to let these rare and regrettable incidents be used to pretend that ethnics are somehow a threat to whites? When you consider the wicked white racist hegemony that holds sway on both sides of the Atlantic, it’s more than admirable—it’s heroic!

Feminists are to be congratulated too for not exploiting these incidents, which might at first glance seem to involve gross male abuse of power over women and girls. In fact they don’t, because the males in question aren’t white. So there’s no need for feminists to ask whether mass immigration harms white women. But how could it anyway, when it’s undermining that source of all evil, the white heterosexual male? Trebles and choruses of “We Shall Overcome!” all round!

Some observations elsewhere on Vaz:

Oh dear, Labour’s Keith Vaz was even slimier and more arrogant than usual on tonight’s Newsnight. Even the BNP’s Nick Griffin was able to wipe the floor with the odious spiv.

It’s fin de siecle time for New Labour I’m delighted to say though sadly we’ve still got another 2 or 3 years of their pillaging, incompetence, and piracy soon to become even worse under the vile Brown.

***

I’m glad Vaz was able to re-assure me that there is no immigration problem in the UK. Which Utopian paradise is he living in? Try taking a bus down the Coventry Road in Small Heath, Birmingham and you would realise that we have got it all wrong and need re-educating.

***

Probably a utopian paradise where there are no white people if the truth be told

***

Vaz doesn’t experience multi-cultural problems in Leicester. The centre is now mono-cultural and more akin to Bombay than an English town.

As one of the tribal elders he must feel very comfortable and very much at home there which is why he spends so much of his taxpayer funded time facilitating the arrival of more and more arrivals from India.

***

I posted earlier about the oleaginous Vaz on Iane Dale’s Diary. I felt like the guy in Ghostbusters who cried: “Arrrrgh, I’ve been slimed!”

***

I saw Vaz on BBC2. Jesus what a smug arrogant creep. He’s a New Labour politician I take it?

Yuk!

***

How did you guess, appointed to chair the Black Socialist Society’s Ethnic Minority Taskforce by Blair. Not impressed by his misrepresentation of what Hodge said, classic NuLab bully and suppress tactic.

***

“It now appears that the tycoons’ applications were assisted by two Labour ministers, Peter Mandelson, then the secretary of state for trade and industry, and Keith Vaz, then a junior, unpaid, parliamentary private secretary, but now minister for Europe.”

Guardian Friday January 26, 2001

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=8212152&postID=110554765381663628&isPopup=true

Posted by Englander on Sat, 26 May 2007 23:06 | #

See the smug chuckle from Vaz when Griffin asks if Labour had a democratic mandate for their ethnic transformation policy. Quite disgusting.

Griffin handled himself poorly, I thought, when he had to explain what he meant by ‘demonizing racism’.

Posted by regab on Fri, 08 Jun 2007 18:00 | #

I notice that poor Charlene Downes is not even worthy of a Wikipedia entry. It was deleted on 6 June. This case is apparently only of interest to those in Lancashire!
I can’t believe it. This case is so NOT run of the mill that there isn’t even a word in the English language to describe precisely how the accused is alleged to have disposed of the body. Does this sort of thing go on a lot at Wikipedia?

Posted by SUE on Wed, 25 Jul 2007 22:16 | #

THERE IS SO MUCH NONSENSE ABOUT ALL THIS, NOBODY KNOW IF IYAD ALBATIKKHI AND RAVESHI HAVE MURDERED CHARLENE DOWNES.
THEY HAVENT 100% PROOF.ITS ALL TO DO WITH A TAPE RECORDING THAT THEY CANNOT REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY SAYING AS ITS VERY LOW QUALITY THE RECORDINGS, SO I DONT KNOW HOW THE PRESS KEEP PUBLISHING NAMES OF THESE MEN AND YET MAYBE THEY ARE TOTAL INNOCENT, I THINK ITS AWFUL HOW THEY LABEL RACES ETC, I WISH THE PRESS ETC WOULD NOT PUBLISH THINGS UNLESS THEY 100 % SURE,THERE MUST BE SO MANY INOCENT PEOPLE THAT ARE ACCUSED OF EVIL ACTS, AND 10 YEARS LATER THEY FIND OUT THEY INNOCENT, HAPPENS ALL THE TIME IN USA

Posted by Lurker on Thu, 26 Jul 2007 01:54 | #

“I WISH THE PRESS ETC WOULD NOT PUBLISH THINGS UNLESS THEY 100 % SURE,THERE MUST BE SO MANY INOCENT PEOPLE THAT ARE ACCUSED OF EVIL ACTS, AND 10 YEARS LATER THEY FIND OUT THEY INNOCENT, HAPPENS ALL THE TIME IN USA”

Sue, you must be referring to the Duke University rape <strike>case</strike> hoax.

Posted by sue on Wed, 09 Apr 2008 23:00 | #

Just read that the retrial regarding Charlene has been thrown out due to a witness being no longer reliable, was wondering if anyone had heard anything else.

http://www.thisislancashire.co.uk/display.var.2185207.0.suspects_cleared_in_charlene_downes_murder_probe.php

This is all i can find about it.

Posted by donna on Mon, 25 May 2009 16:50 | #

all ive been told is that they are going to carry on with the investigation
we still aint got no justice, it makes me feel so sick to be told that them men have been freed, they should be locked up and the key to be thrown away.
but everyone should no bout Charlene Downes, ok shes not from an important family, but it sickens me there are people about who kills and then eat them.

Posted by fellist on Mon, 26 Oct 2009 15:10 | #

The latest, perhaps the last, news:

Police errors mean girl’s killer may never be found

Officers to be disciplined over poor handling of covert surveillance operation

Yesterday, the police watchdog, the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) ruled that covert surveillance evidence gathered against the two main suspects in the case was flawed. This means that the evidence can never be submitted in court.

The IPCC said that Lancashire Constabulary’s investigation was “handled poorly and unprofessionally” and that the evidence contained a “catalogue of errors which undermined the court case”. Seven detectives will be disciplined.

Karen Downes has given up all hope of justice for her daughter. “Whoever killed Charlene must be laughing their heads off,” she said. “I feel really let down that the police put us through this trauma when they must have known there were problems with the evidence. To me this just means they will never catch who killed my daughter. They’ve got no evidence at all now, have they?”

The IPCC report relates to the May 2007 trial of Iyad Albattikhi, who was charged with murdering Charlene, and Mohammed Raveshi, who was charged with helping Mr Albattikhi dispose of the body.

During the trial, the jury was played taped conversations in which Mr Albattikhi, who ran a takeaway restaurant in the seaside town, joked that he killed the girl, that she was “chopped up” and her body had “gone in the kebabs”. In another excerpt, he said: “I killed her, I killed a girl ... I was just angry.” His co-accused was heard on the tapes saying: “There is nothing left of her. She was here, she died, there really is nothing.”

The jury failed to reach a verdict. A retrial was set for April 2008. However, while preparing for the second trial, senior police officers raised issues with the surveillance evidence, much of which had been obtained by a police informant, David Cassidy, who had worn a wire-tap device when speaking to Mr Albattikhi and Mr Raveshi.

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) was notified, as was the IPCC. The second trial was abandoned when the CPS offered no evidence against the men. Mr Albattikhi and Mr Raveshi, who say they have never met Charlene, were released.

Yesterday, after an 18-month investigation, the IPCC revealed that the flaws in the evidence included the fact that much of the recorded tape and video evidence was not properly transcribed, that the officers working on the investigation were “inexperienced and untrained” and that the informant, Mr Cassidy, was not properly briefed and so therefore asked the suspects leading questions.

One officer will face a disciplinary hearing, one has received a written warning and five will be given words of advice. Two other detectives retired before the investigation was completed and so cannot now be dealt with by the IPCC. A 10th, who has also retired but is still employed in a civilian capacity, will have his position considered.

Naseem Malik, the IPCC commissioner for the North-west, said: “Six years since the disappearance of Charlene, her parents are no nearer to knowing what happened to their daughter. I cannot imagine how distressing this must be for them. The failings in Lancashire Constabulary’s investigation can only have compounded that distress. Lessons must be learned ... to ensure such failures cannot happen again.”

...

Karen Downes is still angry. She has criticised the police for not doing enough to find her daughter, saying that Charlene’s working-class upbringing meant that her disappearance was not taken seriously.

“I often wonder,” her mother says, “if she had been from a posh family and was having piano lessons, would they have tried harder to find her?”

Even yesterday’s announcement that the police officers whose conduct during the investigation effectively scuppered any hope of a prosecution will be disciplined has not sated her anger.

She told The Independent: “I have only just come to terms with the fact that Charlene is dead. It’s very hard to accept, but I know deep down that she must be dead because she would have been back by now if she wasn’t.

“I’ve been told I’ll get an apology from the police but I don’t want them to say sorry. An apology is not going to find my daughter. The fact that some police officers will be punished is no consolation. I want to know what the police plan to do now. But I know the answer: nothing. There is nothing they can do. Unless they find her body and it has DNA or some sort of forensic evidence, there is no way they will be able to convict anyone now.”