Thread: Race row woman avoids jail by remaining behind her Burqa

MUSLIM women who file complaints with police while wearing full-face veils may be fingerprinted in future to confirm their identity, NSW Police Minister Mike Gallagher says.

The suggestion arose after Sydney woman Carnita Matthews, 47, who had been sentenced in 2010 to six months' jail for falsely accusing a police officer of trying forcibly to remove her burqa, won an appeal against her conviction.
The mother of seven had made a criminal complaint to police three days after she was pulled over in her car in Woodbine, southwest Sydney, for a random breath test on June 7, 2010.
Judge Clive Jeffreys yesterday overturned Ms Matthews' conviction at an appeal hearing in the NSW District Court.
He said there was no evidence to confirm that it was Ms Matthews who had filed the complaint because the person who made it was wearing a face veil.
Mr Gallagher today said that in future criminal cases, complainants and witnesses who failed to remove their face veils may be required to have their fingerprints taken to confirm their identity.


"The suggestion that I have made to the attorney-general, that may well be considered ... is that there be a provision on the statutory declaration or the statement for a fingerprint to be obtained from the person being interviewed," he said in Sydney.
He said the fingerprint data could be destroyed at a later date, at the request of the complainant.
On the issue of police officers compelling women to remove face veils at the actual scenes of alleged crimes, Mr Gallagher conceded police powers were currently not clear.
He said he would speak to Police Commissioner Andrew Scipione to find ways to clarify the situation.
Officers currently have the power to compel the removal of face veils while investigating more serious or indictable offences, Mr Gallagher said.
But they do not have such power under the Motor Transport Act when stopping a driver.
"I want to look at the Motor Transport Act ... to ensure where there is uncertainty at the scene, police have the ability to take the person back, which they currently do, to the police station and check their identity," Mr Gallagher said.
Mr Gallagher said it was his understanding there was nothing in Islamic law which currently forbade women from removing face veils to assist police and the courts.
Any change to the law regarding crime scene identification would be done in a measured way, reflecting individual freedom while balancing police powers, he said.


Read more: http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/veiled-women-may-be-fingerprinted-in-nsw/story-e6frfku0-1226079325296#ixzz1Pt2P2ljz

Let's look on the bright side. They found a way to put the fucking hag in jail.

Good on 'em.

Originally Posted by bobo746

If i get pulled up and don't take of my helmet i can be arrested,shouldn't the same apply here.

Clearly you are not a Muslim then?

Originally Posted by Strongarm

...several members of the group attacked cameramen.

...

Mrs Matthew's lawyer Stephen Hopper defended their actions saying: "They are obviously happy with the result and are expressing it in a way that is culturally appropriate to them."

Oh so that's all right then, attacking a few cameramen - why stop there, stone a few of them and as their owl arse lawyer would say, "expressing themselves in a way that is culturally appropriate to them".

Pass the sick bag please.

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 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. A number of times she was caught on camera speeding and disobeying traffic lights.


After being stopped by police last year for not displaying her P-plates, Ms Matthews was ordered to pay $276 in fines and court costs.
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 atatement and Judge Clive Jeffreys in the District Court yesterday upheld her appeal.
The news comes as women wearing a burqa may be ordered to remove it to identify themselves in the wake of the Carnita Matthews case.
Police Minister Mike Gallacher has revealed that police do not currently have the legal power to require women to show their face if the women refuse on religious or cultural grounds.
He said he wanted the law tightened up.
"Police powers in relation to face coverings are not clear," Mr Gallacher said.
"It’s time to address that."
He said he had spoken to rank and file police who wanted the situation clarified.
Any decision on whether to appeal the controversial judgment by Judge Clive Jeffreys would not be made until after the judge hands down the reason for his decision which is expected tomorrow.
The government is also considering passing new laws requiring people who make complaints against police, or in the case of witnesses giving evidence, to have to provide at least one fingerprint and their signature.
This follows the finding by the judge that he could not be certain that it was Ms Matthews who made the statutory declaration complaining about the officer who stopped her car because the person who handed the document in to the police station wore a burqa.
Mr Gallacher said he was waiting until Police Commissioner Andrew Scipione returned next week to discuss exactly what needed to be done.
He said he did not expect this to inflame community anger about women wearing full face coverings.
He said he had been told that there was nothing in Muslim culture or religion that stopped women from identifiying themselves in certain circumstances.
Yesterday, Ms Matthews avoided jail because her identity could not be proven.
Ms Matthews, 47, from Woodbine, in Sydney's southwest, had been sentenced to six months in jail for making a deliberately false statement that a policeman tried to forcibly remove her burqa because he was a racist.
But judge Clive Jeffreys said yesterday he was not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that it was Mrs Matthews who made the racism accusation because the person who complained to police was wearing a burqa at the time.
The absurdity of the law is that, to reach the level of proof of identity to make the case, Mrs Matthews would have been required to identify herself by lifting her burqa at the police station - what started the uproar in the first place.
More than a dozen Muslim supporters linked arms and began chanting "Allah Akbar" as they stormed out of Downing Centre Court with Mrs Matthews concealed behind them.
Tempers rose and they began jostling with police after several members of the group attacked cameramen.
It marked a stark difference from their behaviour minutes earlier, when they had quietly assembled outside the lifts for prayer shortly after the judge's decision.
Mrs Matthew's lawyer Stephen Hopper defended their actions saying: "They are obviously happy with the result and are expressing it in a way that is culturally appropriate to them."
Judge Jeffreys said yesterday that even if Mrs Matthews had made the complaint, he could not be sure she knew it was a "false" statement.
"I am not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that she made the complaint," he said.
"Even if I was satisfied that she made the complaint, I am not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that it was knowingly false."
Mrs Matthews made the claim in her court appearance last year, saying police could not prove it was her behind the burqa when the complaint was handed in to police. The local magistrate rejected it.
The case had lit up the religious debate when a magistrate found Mrs Matthews had deliberately made false complaints that Sergeant Paul Kearney was racist and had attempted to tear her burqa off her face when she declined to remove it on request.
She was pulled over for a random breath test last June, and accused Sgt Kearney of racism only after he booked her for failing to properly display her P-plates.
The incident was captured on a patrol car video camera and helped clear Sgt Kearney, prompting calls for all police cars to carry in-built cameras to avoid false claims.
"I've got my P-plates on my car ... there was nothing wrong with how they were displayed," Mrs Matthews says on the video.
"You look at me and see me wearing this and you couldn't handle it. All cops are racist."
She then threatens, "100 per cent", that she will take the matter to court and fight the charge.
France was the first country in Europe to implement a full ban on covering up faces in public.
France's burqa ban descended into farce when the first women to be summoned before a European court for illegally wearing the garments were refused entry, because they would not remove their face coverings.
For more on the Muslim woman accused of lying about police trying to tear her burqa off go to The Daily Telegraph.


Read more: http://www.news.com.au/national/muslim-woman-accused-of-making-false-police-statement-avoids-jail-over-identity-doubt/story-e6frfkvr-1226078884650#ixzz1PxIqOO6y

Originally Posted by Strongarm

Carnita Matthews

so what kind of muslim name is Carnita (Mexican food) Mathews must be an English gipsy convert

I really can't see how its safe to be driving while wearing a burqa to start with?

Well done Barry O' Farrell!

Police given power to remove burkas

NSW approved the move so police could properly identify motorists or any other people suspected of committing a crime

New South Wales police conducting routine car stops will be given the power to demand the removal of head coverings for identification.

Premier Barry O'Farrell says cabinet approved the move on Monday so police could properly identify motorists or any other people suspected of committing a crime.

"I don't care whether a person is wearing a motorcycle helmet, a burka, niqab, face veil or anything else, the police should be allowed to require those people to make their identification clear," he said in a statement.

"I have every respect for various religions and beliefs but when it comes to enforcing the law the police should be given adequate powers to make a clear identification."

Mr O'Farrell says there has to be a balance between religious customs and a police officer's ability to do their job.

"It's also an issue with other religions. It's also an issue with other cultures," he said.

"But whether it's a driver's licence or passing through customs, identity checks are required in this day and age and we're determined to ensure police have the powers to undertake them when required."

The new laws come in the wake of a successful appeal by a Muslim woman who had been sentenced to jail for falsely accusing a police officer of forcibly trying to remove her burka.

The sentence against Carnita Matthews was quashed on appeal last week.

The magistrate said he was unable to confirm whether Ms Matthews had made the accusation as police had been unable to see the face of the woman who made the complaint.

Attorney-General Greg Smith says he will not be appealing against the Matthews decision, but says the new laws should prevent a recurrence of the case.

Police have had the power to ask women to remove face veils during the investigation of serious offences but did not have such powers during routine car stops.

And the predictable mussie snivelling:

The NSW government has been accused of politically intimidating Muslims with its proposal to change the law so police can demand the removal of burqas for identification purposes.

State cabinet agreed on Monday to release details of draft laws before parliament resumes in August.

The legislation would give police the powers to make Muslim women remove their burqa, niqab or face veil.

Hizb ut-Tahrir, a global political movement that wants Muslim nations united under a caliphate, said Premier Barry O'Farrell's proposal had nothing to do with police matters.

"For us, it's a case of political intimidation," Sydney spokesman Uthman Badar told AAP on Tuesday.

"It's not a police issue, it's the fact that a non-issue has been turned into an issue.

"It happened before with the anti-terror laws and this is doing the same thing."

The planned laws have been driven by the case of Carnita Matthews, a Sydney Muslim who was sentenced to six months' jail for falsely accusing a police officer of forcibly trying to remove her burqa.

Her sentence was last week quashed on appeal with a judge ruling there was no evidence to confirm Ms Matthews filed a criminal complaint against the officer, because the person who did so was wearing a veil and wasn't positively identified.

"There's been only one case where there's an issue and we get a law change," Mr Badar said.

"We don't change the law because of one incident."

Mr Badar blamed a call last year by South Australian Liberal Senator Cory Bernardi to ban the burqa for encouraging other politicians to speak out against the veil.

Originally Posted by jizzybloke

I really can't see how its safe to be driving while wearing a burqa to start with?

I've seen one jogging on a treadmill.

You do realise that Mohammed only came up with this nonsense to cover up the fact he was fucking a nine year old?

Next time I drive in England (land of speed cameras) I plan to wear one

It sucks, but it does show the difference between shia law and our western systems. I still think it is a great way to beat a rap.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

You do realise that Mohammed only came up with this nonsense to cover up the fact he was fucking a nine year old?

Or that his 'wife' was really his 'husband'.....

Wonder how many of these tented wives are boyfriends.

Originally Posted by Sailing into trouble

It sucks, but it does show the difference between shia law and our western systems. I still think it is a great way to beat a rap.

The brings up the point: how would it be dealt with by police in Pakistan, Turkey, Egypt, etc? I doubt the suspects would get away so easily, thus maybe the western countries need some training from their MidlleEastern/Asian counterparts...

I don't know about the others, but in the Middle East everyone's driving license has a picture on it, or they have another form of ID.

So the copper wouldn't ask them woman to reveal her face, but he'd still be able to identify her.

And yes, I really don't see the point either.

Originally Posted by Sailing into trouble

Next time I drive in England (land of speed cameras) I plan to wear one

It sucks, but it does show the difference between shia law and our western systems. I still think it is a great way to beat a rap.

It's not Shia law, not even Muslim law.

It's the control some husbands have over their wives and of course the personal desire of some women.

Solution would be to have a policewoman to check the identity. If not available immediately the suspect needs to wait.

Actually the more prissy ladies refuse to even shake hands, or they wear gloves so as not to have to touch the disgusting infidels.

The government has just passed a law so these trollops will now have to remove there rag when asked by a police officer.

Got em foked now.

I'm going to start visiting muslim shops and areas with a brown paper bag over my head-its an old religion you see .
just to find out how culturally sensitive the rag heads are .

Originally Posted by terry57

The government has just passed a law so these trollops will now have to remove there rag when asked by a police officer.

Got em foked now.

That's right Terry. As mentioned in Post #13, hence the thread springing to life.

They come to Geneva in the Summer like crows flapping around our lake shore, spending millions, every Summer. The women frighten me, and the men ogle at young ladies in summer clothes.

It's been called Jeddah by the Lake for years now.

But they spend the money...

It was a couple of years ago that Hannibal Ghadaffi was done for beating up his servants in a 6 star hotel here.