You are here: Welcome to Tambapress Breaking News | World News | Weird News| Celebrity News | Tambapress » World » Rapist and killer foreign criminals using Human Rights Act to fight deportation

Rapist and killer foreign criminals using Human Rights Act to fight deportation

Syed101 | October 16, 2011 | 0 Comments

‘Right to family life’: Rapist Rohan Winfield

A dangerous rapist has become the latest foreign criminal allowed to cheat deportation because of his ‘right to family life’ – even though he abandoned his wife.

Rohan Winfield, from Barbados, twice raped a professional young woman after he settled in Britain.

He was not even in the UK legally when he carried out the vicious assault in November 2008, having overstayed a student visa granted in 1999.

Winfield’s rape victim, a professional woman in her 20s, was ‘crying uncontrollably’ as she desperately tried to fight him off, according to legal papers.

She pounded his chest but he pulled her hair to control her.

Afterwards, he repeated the assault on the woman.

Following prison, Winfield should have been deported, but he successfully appealed on the basis of his human right to a family life.

Despite him being a clear danger to women, an immigration judge allowed him to stay, ruling: ‘The human rights of the rapist appear to trump society’s interest.’

KILLER’S REPRIEVE

Another immigrant allowed to stay is a Pakistani who was high on heroin when he caused a car crash that killed a loving father of two young children.

Raja Mohammed Anwar Khan successfully argued his ‘right to family life’ would be breached if he was deported back to his homeland – even though his wife and eldest child were brought here from Pakistan.

After the accident, in November 2007, Khan tried to blame his victim, 38-year-old Peter Jolley, for the head-on collision. But a witness revealed Khan’s Ford Transit van was being driven erratically.

The killer fell asleep at the scene of the crash, and later refused to answer police questions, but a blood test for heroin proved positive.

He was jailed for six-and-a-half years, reduced to five on appeal, meaning he only served two-and-a-half years.

Mr Jolley’s sons, Regan and Elliott, were aged just 12 months and five when their father died.

Mr Jolley’s partner, Lindsey Moule, 33, from Rawmarsh, South Yorkshire, said: ‘It’s been the same from the start – he’s always had more rights than we have had.

‘Pete has not got a family life any more – he’s dead. Why should Khan have one?

‘Pete loved his life, and we were happy. This man has just destroyed so many lives.’

Senior immigration judge Deborah Taylor said: ‘Causing death by careless driving is not an offence where deportation as a measure to deter others may have particular efficacy.’

She ruled twice-married Khan, 50, could stay in Britain because his children were here and had ‘social contact’ with grandparents, uncles and cousins in Sheffield.

However Khan’s father, Mohammed, told callers to his home that he had no idea where his son even lived.

The same judge was involved in the case of Aso Mohammed Ibrahim, the failed asylum seeker who ran over Amy Houston, 12, and left her to die.

Judge Taylor heard Ibrahim’s deportation case last year, and did not allow Amy’s father, Paul Houston, to make a statement in court.

It is the latest in a string of disturbing examples of how foreign criminals have abused the Human Rights Act’s contentious Article 8, which says that everyone has the ‘right to a family life’.

David Cameron has ordered a review of the operation of the act, but faces opposition from Liberal Democrat members of the Coalition.

Yet the ‘family life’ of Winfield, 38, is extraordinary to say the least.

He has three children by his wife, whom he met after settling in South London where he trained as a chef.

But philandering Winfield walked out on her and the children for a Spanish mistress.

It was during the period he was committing adultery that he raped the Spanish woman.

And it was while he was on bail awaiting a rape trial that he fathered a fourth child by her, in May 2010.

Perversely this had the effect of strengthening his claim to a ‘family life’ in the immigration case.

To complete the farce, brazen Winfield – still an illegal immigrant – even managed to leave Britain and go on holiday abroad while awaiting his rape trial.

It is unusual enough that a rape suspect be allowed bail, but to be permitted to leave the UK is unheard of.

On his return 10 days later, the UK Border Agency did detain him and, on discovering his student visa was a decade out of date, intended to deport him on the next plane to Barbados.

But Winfield produced a letter from his solicitor showing he was awaiting trial in Britain, and the Border Agency had to pass him to police, who let him go.

Had he been kept in detention, he would not have had the fourth child that boosted his immigration case.

So concerned were police and prosecutors at the danger Winfield posed to women, they pressed ahead with his rape trial even though his victim retracted her complaint.

Winfield was jailed for three years, and on his release he fought Home Office plans to deport him.

Senior Immigration Judge Andrew Jordan knew the decision to let him off deportation would be controversial if it came to light.

He said it ‘might at first glance appear to be wrong, if not perverse’ – but insisted it was correct.

His written ruling acknowledged: ‘Although the appellant was only sentenced to three years’ imprisonment, this does not in any way suggest that the appellant did not commit two acts of rape which speak for themselves as to the seriousness of the offences.’

But he said: ‘The use of deportation is a blunt tool if, looked at holistically, the overall effect of deportation is more damaging to society as a whole than its suspension.

Killer: Raja Khan mowed down a father of two, but is able to stay in Britain

‘Whilst I can well understand the sense of disquiet that inevitably arises when this type of offence results in a decision that the human rights of the rapist appear to trump society’s interest, examination of the competing pressures, both for and against removal, demonstrate that such an approach is oversimplistic.’

Yesterday Conservative MP Dominic Raab said: ‘The public interest in deporting a rapist is overwhelming.

‘There is a basic lack of moral clarity in the current regime.

‘Cases like these highlight the need for reform, both to protect the public and to reassert democratic control over the ever-expanding judicial inflation of human rights.’

David Davis MP, the former Shadow Home Secretary, added: ‘The case for reform is incontestable.

‘Yet again these cases demonstrate the clear need to rethink Article 8 and therefore the Human Rights Act itself.’