PDA

View Full Version : Muslim woman escapes jail by remaining behind her burqa



Odysseus
06-21-2011, 04:58 PM
Last Updated: June 22, 2011

Muslim woman Carnita Matthews escapes jail by remaining behind her burqa
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/more-news/judge-could-not-be-sure-who-was-behind-the-veil/story-fn7x8me2-1226078801032
Janet Fife-Yeomans and Paul Kent From: The Daily Telegraph June 21, 2011 12:00AM 418

http://resources2.news.com.au/images/2011/06/21/1226079/421506-the-daily-telegraph.jpg
Debate ... Carnita Matthews was pulled over last June. Picture: Channel 9 Source: HWT Image Library

http://resources1.news.com.au/images/2011/06/20/1226078/801257-burka-row.jpg
Supporters shield Carnita Matthews as she leaves court. Picture: Cameron Richardson. Source: Herald Sun

THE woman at the centre of the burqa row, Carnita Matthews, has a long record of driving offences and a history of not paying her fines.

Court documents have revealed that she had been fined seven times for traffic infringements before she was stopped by police in June last year for not displaying her P-plates in the incident that sparked the row that spilled over to the District Court in NSW yesterday.

Since she first received her learner licence in 1998 at the age of 33, she has twice had her provisional licence suspended for totting up too many demerit points and twice had her licence suspended for non payment of fines.

The State Debt Recovery Office had to recover the fines. Both of those two suspensions for non payment of fines were later lifted.

It is not known how many times she was physically stopped by police and whether she had her face covered by a burqa or a niqab on those occasions.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++
Anyone still think that permitting face veils is a good idea?

AmPat
06-21-2011, 05:04 PM
Is it wrong to look at those photos and wish somebody would just shoot them? Maybe it's more wrong for me to not care if somebody did???

Zafod
06-21-2011, 06:22 PM
good ol england.....

marv
06-21-2011, 06:33 PM
She claimed on Channel Seven and allegedly in a statutory declaration to Campbelltown police that the officer who stopped her had attempted to tear the burqa off her face, a claim that was proven untrue by the police patrol car video camera.

A magistrate last year found her guilty of making a deliberately false statement and sentenced her to jail for six months. Ms Matthews appealed, saying there was no proof she was the person in the burqa making the statement and Judge Clive Jeffreys in the District Court yesterday upheld her appeal.
Duh! Am I missing something here?

Odysseus
06-21-2011, 06:56 PM
good ol england.....
Australia, actually.

Duh! Am I missing something here?

Nope. That was her defense. The court couldn't prove that the woman in the burqua who drove the car and then lied to the court was the woman in the burqua who showed up for the trial. Even if it was the same burqua, someone else could have been wearing it. That's her argument, and the court bought it.

It would be worth it to bring Annoyo back just to have his take on this.

noonwitch
06-22-2011, 08:38 AM
If it's her car that keeps on getting pulled over, she is either the one with the bad driving record, or she's legally liable because she keeps loaning her car to someone who is very irresponsible. Either way, if she owns the car, at this point she's responsible because of the number of violations.


I hate the burka and all, but if there is a way to rule on a case like this without getting into religion, well, that's the better way to deal with it for the court. No religious discrimination claim, no successful appeals to a higher court. Pay the fines or go to jail.

Odysseus
06-22-2011, 10:38 AM
If it's her car that keeps on getting pulled over, she is either the one with the bad driving record, or she's legally liable because she keeps loaning her car to someone who is very irresponsible. Either way, if she owns the car, at this point she's responsible because of the number of violations.
Yes, but the issue here was the false claim of racism and assault against the police officer, not the traffic offenses. Filing the false report was a felony that carried jail time. The traffic violations were chump change by comparison. She filed a false report, and then used her anonymity to escape the charges. The court could not prove that the masked woman (at least, it might have been a woman) who filed the false report was the same woman (?) who showed up in court to answer the summons. Her case boiled down to her saying "can't prove it was me! Nyah nyah nyan!"


I hate the burka and all, but if there is a way to rule on a case like this without getting into religion, well, that's the better way to deal with it for the court. No religious discrimination claim, no successful appeals to a higher court. Pay the fines or go to jail.

This wasn't about religious discrimination, it was about religious submission. The jihadis forced a secular court to submit to a radical Islamic doctrine that demands that women cover themselves completely. The court tacitly accepted that a woman has the right to go out in public wearing a mask, commit a crime, and then claim that because she was masked and therefore could not be identified, that she could not be convicted. This empowers the jihadis to further expand the wear of the veil (it's now a get-out-of-jail-free card for women who commit crimes, and make no mistake about it, more crimes will follow).

NJCardFan
06-22-2011, 01:00 PM
She claimed on Channel Seven and allegedly in a statutory declaration to Campbelltown police that the officer who stopped her had attempted to tear the burqa off her face, a claim that was proven untrue by the police patrol car video camera.

A magistrate last year found her guilty of making a deliberately false statement and sentenced her to jail for six months. Ms Matthews appealed, saying there was no proof she was the person in the burqa making the statement and Judge Clive Jeffreys in the District Court yesterday upheld her appeal.

Wait, wut? When pulled over, the cop tried to yank the veil off of her face thus admitting it was she who was pulled over and yet appealed because there was no proof that she was pulled over? Um. OK.

noonwitch
06-22-2011, 02:30 PM
Wait, wut? When pulled over, the cop tried to yank the veil off of her face thus admitting it was she who was pulled over and yet appealed because there was no proof that she was pulled over? Um. OK.



This would be considered ridiculous in any courtroom I've been in. I can think of at least two judges who would give her the full extent of punishment possible, just for trying to get away with all of this and for making false accusations against cops.

I see muslim women who work as lawyers, and one who is a referee (the juvenile court version of a magistrate). Some wear the hijab, but none wear the burka or the veil. They would be offended that this woman was trying to use her religion to get away with this type of behavior.