Western Resistance

« US: After Muslim Book Burnings, Comes Knowledge | | UK: Islamist Who Wants Pope Dead Will Not Face Charges »

September 29, 2006

UK: The Muslim Judge, And His Sex, Lies & Videotape

A case concluded this week in which a Brazilian cleaner, 37-year old Roselane Dirza was found guilty of blackmailing her employer, and also her employer's girlfriend, who also employed her as a cleaner. Ms Dirza stole two videotapes which featured her employer engaged in sex. The details of the case are sordid, involving deception, claims of cocaine use and videotaped sex sessions.

But what makes the case more sordid is that the two people whom Dirza was said to have blackmailed were judges. Dirza was an illegal immigrant, and those she blackmailed were employed as Asylum and Immigration judges. Her attempts at blackmail revolved around her threatening to tell Lord Falconer of Thoroton, the Lord Chancellor, that she had worked at the woman judge's home illegally for nearly five years. Dirza wanted payment of £20,000 ($37,376). She also threatened to go to the press. She had a gangster boyfriend allegedly, and it is implied, but not proven, that Dirza used his existence to intimidate her employers.

And both judges were said to be having frequent sex with each other. The woman judge has not been named, but when the case ended, the name of Dirza's employer became revealed.

He is a 60-year old Muslim, Mohammed Ilyas Khan (pictured), who has worked as an immigration judge for 23 years. And yet he employed an illegal immigrant. At one stage he advised her to flee the country, but this decision was made to save himself from the inevitable embarrassment when his own sexual shenanigans became, as they now have done, public knowledge.

As Leo McKistry states in the Telegraph:

Even the most acerbic satirist would have struggled to come up with a plot as outlandish as the trial that concluded this week at the Old Bailey, involving a blackmailing Brazilian cleaner and a pair of adulterous, sexually uninhibited members of the judiciary. The ingredients of this extraordinary case, featuring a Serbian gangster and serial killer, a series of explicit videos, one of them including a "mystery blonde", allegations of cocaine snorting in Thailand and a trouser-dropping, bearded Muslim judge by the name of Mohammed Khan, would have stretched the bounds of credibility if staged in a West End farce.

Mohammed Ilyas Khan earned £98,418 ($183,915) per year, while Miss J, as a senior immigration judge, earned £117,680 ($219,922). The Times stated yesterday that neither judge is likely to face a disciplinary hearing. Today, the Sun describes how Judge J (not Judge Judy I hope) found Khan in bed with Dirza around Christmas 2004. Since shortly after that time, Khan has not been in work, said to be suffering from stress. He still seems to be in receipt of his full salary. A spokesperson at the Judicial Communications Office said: "We wouldn't be able to comment on individuals' sick pay arrangements." The Department for Constitutional Affairs, which is said to be considering holding an investigation into Khan and Judge J, confirmed that Khan would not be returning to work for some time.

Khan said: "I deeply, deeply regret the very fundamental error of judgment that I made with Driza, believing her when she said she was legal and not realising she was such a devious woman. Judges are human beings. They also make mistakes. I have made a mistake, in judging her character, but in my work I do not make character judgments."

The Times reports that Khan's estranged wife Amtul has said: "None of the family have anything to do with him. His parents are both deceased and I doubt his siblings have anything to do with him. The court revelations are no surprise to me."

A friend of the Khans said: "Mr Khan is a weak man who seems quite easily led. This whole thing is very embarrassing for them all and I feel so sorry for Amtul and the kids. He should have behaved more responsibly and thought about them instead of himself."

The Times sates: "Driza's elderly mother, Jandira Araujo, was said to have been devastated by her daughter's conviction. The night before the guilty verdicts were delivered, Driza was allegedly seen in a pub holding newspaper reports of the case and allegedly claimed that she would walk free and make thousands of pounds by selling her story. She will be sentenced next month."

It was revealed in the trial that Khan had called Driza his "real chilli hot stuff". Driza stole two tapes. One showed Khan in bed with a blonde woman, and another tape, which Driza claimed she had destroyed, allegedly showed Judge J sniffing cocaine.

I do not like reporting on sex cases. What people do in private with consenting partners should be their own business. But what has emerged from this case is a disturbing pointer to the ethics, or lack of them, which seem to pervade our judiciary. Judges make decisions which irrevocably affect people's lives. We should be able to trust them.

Leo McKistry states: "If this incident had been isolated, it would not be so serious. But it is just part of a pattern where amoral anarchy has now triumphed in the running of the immigration system. Earlier this year, it was revealed that a senior official in the Home Office was not only willing to trade favourable treatment towards immigrants in return for sex, but was an illegal immigrant himself."

Driza had remained in Britain illegally for five years, and was employed by immigration judges in their own homes. Did the two judges, as they claim, really not know that she was illegal until the blackmailing began?

For details from the trial, reports are found in the Independent, Daily Mail, Telegraph, Metro.co.uk, Telegraph (again), Guardian, BBC, Yahoo News, Times the Guardian (again) and IC Berkshire.

Posted by Giraldus Cambrensis at September 29, 2006 7:55 AM

Comments

Posted by: Rev. Don Spitz at September 29, 2006 12:06 PM

Post a comment