• Miss Rhea Page: a victim of institutionalised discrimination.

      3 comments

    In our article yesterday, Miss Emma West: Foul mouthed xenophobe AND Political prisoner, we drew the reader’s attention to some of the hallmarks of a totalitarian society. The example mentioned was extreme and harsh punishment for what in tolerant democracies would be considered petty offences.

    There is of course another hallmark of a totalitarian and oppressive state – that is lack of even handedness, of treating one group (be they Muslims, Jews, Christians, a particular ethnic group &C.) with undue harshness whilst dealing with undue leniency with other groups (be they Muslims, Jews, Christians, a particular ethnic group &C.) Note: it is irrelevant which particular groups are the subject of the lenient or harsh treatment, the deciding factor is the lack of even-handedness.

    The British Gazette therefore draws the reader’s attention to the fate of Miss Rhea Page above. Miss Page was the unfortunate victim of a vicious and wholly unprovoked attack made upon her by four young women. These were, sisters, Hibo and Ambaro Maxamed, Ayan Maxamad and Ifrah Nur, a cousin of the three other women.

    The attack took place in Leicester – which is incidentally a city in which Anglo-Saxons such as Miss Page are now an ethnic minority.

    Miss Page, stated: “I had gone for a drink after work and then I met my boyfriend for a couple more before heading home. We didn’t want to stay out too late so we went to get a taxi and all of a sudden I heard these women shouting abuse at me. We were just minding our own business but they kept shouting ‘white bitch’ and ‘white slag’ at me. When I turned around one of them grabbed my hair – she literally wrapped her fingers in my hair – then threw me on the ground. That’s when they started kicking me.”

    Miss Page’s attackers shouted, “kill the white slag” as they kicked her.

    Miss Page has now lost her job as a result of being traumatised by the attack. Miss Page has also been permanently disfigured as she has a bald patch on her scalp as her attackers pulled her hair out by the roots.

    The way that the Crown Prosecution Service handled this attack could not be in starker contrast to the way in which the case of Miss West has been handled.

    Firstly; these four women were not remanded in custody at any time – this notwithstanding that they perpetrated an unprovoked and violent attack upon an innocent victim who has been left permanently disfigured.

    Secondly; at no time did the Police or Crown Prosecution Service deem this to be a “racially aggravated attack.”

    Thirdly; in sentencing these four women to six months in prison but in the form of an immediate suspended sentence, Judge Robert Brown gave as his reasons for the non custodial sentences:
    - he believed the women may have felt that THEY were the victims of unreasonable force from Miss Page’s boyfriend Mr Lewis Moore, as he tried to defend his girlfriend
    - he believed that as Muslims (the women originally come from Somalia) they were not used to the effects of alcohol.

    The perpetrators have showed no remorse after their trial. When asked if she wanted to apologise, Hibo Maxamed replied: “What, to the public? I really don’t care.” Hibo Maxamed’s sister, Ambaro Maxamed, wrote on her Twitter account: “Happy happy happy! I’m so going out. Today has been such a great day!”

    British Gazette comment: These two cases – Miss West and Miss Page – demonstrate the different ways in which the authorities in this country deal with the different communities. Is it not an irony that Miss Page’s attackers have been handed six month suspended sentences for an unprovoked violent attack on a member of the Anglo Saxon ethnic minority in Leicester after being remanded on bail – which means of course they have spent no time in custody – whilst it appears that Miss West is going to serve the equivalent of a six month prison service as she has been remanded in custody following her foul mouthed outburst on a tram.
    Unsurprisingly, Miss Page called the sentence ‘disgusting’ and said her attackers “deserved immediate custody.” The British Gazette agrees.

    Of course there is the provision whereby the Crown Prosecution Service can appeal an unduly lenient sentence. Our advice to Miss Page: Don’t hold your breath.

    The lack of even-handedness apparent in these two case is a classic hall mark of a totalitarian state. We should not be surprised however, for it is the case that every judge – including Judge Robert Brown – as well as every MP and every sitting member of the House of Lords has taken an oath (under the penalties of perjury) of bearing true allegiance to Her Majesty the Queen, her heirs and successors – whilst at the same time participating in the handing over the government and the legislative functions of the nation to a foreign power.

    • I agree with your summary which serves to highlight the discrimination practiced in this country against the white Anglo-Saxon race.
      IF, we are all supposed to be equal in the sight of the law, either these four women should be in cells alongside Emma West but serving a much longer sentence than her, or, Emma West should not have been detained at all. Miss West will not only be incarcerated over Christmas but her children will suffer even more by being placed with foster parents unknown to them, at this special time of year for children.
      What a scandal and shame on those in authority for their skewed interpretation of so-called natural justice.
      Jo, Middlesex.

    • My only surprise is that the idiotic and irresponsible fool of a Judge, Robert Brown, did not jail Miss Page for discriminating against her attackers, by being white, and then jail her boyfriend for defending her against what he obviously believed to be a justified attack.

      Where do they find these wet lettuce, lunatic judges, and why the hell do we allow it?

      As for equality under the law, that fool is too clueless to have heard of it.

    • I totally agree with the comments here, I find it stupid that a lady on a train who is exercising her Human Rights – Article 10: Freedom of Expression – and the fact that this woman was not given a fair trial – Human Rights Act: Article 6 – means these woman have walked free and a woman who was only voicing her opinions has been jailed. If you read the case; the reason for the lady from the “Tram Experience” custodial sentence was “for her own protection.” Now I ask you; would it not be cheaper to have a police officer at her door 24/7 than keep her in prison unfairly?

      I think Judge Robert Brown needs a formal complaint to be made against him. After all, judges may think they are above the law, but they are not.

      All people want is a fail trial and these violent woman taken off our streets.

    Write a comment