Imperial Party forum

thomas davison

Muslim juror who refused to take veil off is ordered to stand down by judge because he wouldn't be able to see her facial expressionsBy Rebecca Camber
PUBLISHED: 20:15, 19 March 2012 | UPDATED: 02:27, 20 March 2012

The Muslim woman was wearing a black hijab with a narrow slit showing her eyes. Picture above posed by model
A Muslim woman was barred from serving on a jury yesterday because she refused to remove her veil.

In an extraordinary ruling, a judge said she could not sit on an attempted murder trial because her full face covering, known as the niqab, concealed her expressions.

The woman was about to take the oath in the case at Blackfriars Crown Court in London when the judge interrupted to ask if she was prepared to remove the garment which covered her whole face, apart from a narrow slit through which her eyes could be seen.
Judge Aidan Marron QC, said it was �desirable� that her face was �exposed� during the trial and asked her to remove the veil.

When she refused she was told to stand down and a white male member of the jury pool was sworn in in her place.

In the presence of the rest of the jury, Judge Marron said: �I wonder whether I can address the lady who is veiled.

�Would you prefer not to remove your veil in this particular case?�
The woman, who was wearing western clothing including a fitted grey jacket, replied: �Yes.�

Judge Marron added: �I entirely understand that, but in this particular case it is desirable that your face is exposed, so I�m going to invite you to stand down. I hope you understand.�

More...Multi-millionaire British playboy charged with raping woman, 21, on Bondi Beach
Gay prisoners to marry inside some of Britain's toughest jails... as long as they pay for the ceremonies themselves
Family forced out of dream home after lawyers run off with their �400,000 life savings they used to buy property

The ruling, which is thought to be one of the first of its kind in Britain, has sparked outrage.

Yesterday Massoud Shadjareh, chairman of the Islamic Human Rights Commission, said: �This is totally unacceptable. I really can�t understand why facial expressions could have any impact on the judge, the judgment or anyone else in a trial. It has no relevance.

�I�m speechless that you can exclude someone on the basis of the way that they dress.

�It�s very worrying that a judge is being prejudiced against women wearing a veil.�

The female Muslim was dismissed as a juror at Blackfriars Crown Court in London because her hijab concealed her facial expressions
Official guidelines state that veils can be worn in court although senior judges should decide on a case-by-case basis.

In 2007, the Judicial Studies Board�s equal treatment advisory committee said Muslim women should be permitted to wear the garment as long as it did not interfere with the administration of justice.

The guidelines said: �Each situation should be considered individually in order to find the best solution in each case.�

It also says forcing a woman to choose between participating in a court case and removing the veil could have a �significant impact on that woman�s sense of dignity�, and could serve to �exclude and marginalise� her.

The rules say a judge may wish to consider excusing jurors in niqabs if a challenge is made by one of the parties, provided there is a genuine basis for the objection. The guidance followed a case at an immigration court in Stoke-on-Trent in 2006 where the judge, George Glossop, ordered an adjournment because he was having difficulty hearing legal executive Shabnam Mughal.

In 2007, a Muslim female juror who was accused of listening to a hidden stereo under her headscarf was cleared of contempt of court when the Attorney General�s office ruled there was insufficient evidence.

Ruhela Khanom, 20, faced a possible unlimited jail term for allegedly listening to her MP3 player while a defendant was giving evidence.

She doesn't have to wear a hijab, it isn't a requirement of Islam, she wears it by choice; therefore there is no reason why she shouldn't remove it. She was just trying to make a point that she is somehow 'special' because she wears a veil. I think she should be charged with contempt of court;

There is no reason at all for anyone to hide their face in the UK, if they do they must be criminals or hiding something, a law should be made where anyone hiding their face is arrested and if they are Muslims who will not take them off deport them, their family and relations to a country where they will enjoy covering their faces.

WHEN INJUSTICE BECOMES LAW REBELLION BECOMES YOUR DUTY

2Anne · Joined: 04 May 2008 Posts: 399 Location: Norfolk

I used to shop at the Queensgate mall in Peterborough but the last time I went the place was swarming with veiled women pushing prams with huge numbers of kids.
I was overcome with an acute desire to kick these women hard up their backsides as the veil annoyed me so much,so decided in the interests of keeping myself out of prison not to visit Peterborough again.
I totally agree that this form of dress is not acceptable in the UK. The judge was right to ban this woman in court.
Again and again muslims want everthing we hold as civilization turned on its head to accomodate their primitive so called religious requirements.
Its well past time they were kicked out of the UK for good-all of them.