FALSE RAPE ACCUSATION: LYING BITCH IDENTIFIED

A Labour peer yesterday named a "serial and repeated liar" whose false allegations resulted in an innocent man being jailed for a sex attack. Lord Campbell-Savours used parliamentary privilege to name the woman during a debate in the House of Lords on rape legislation. He suggested that women who make false allegations of rape should be named and prosecuted for perjury. It is believed to be the first time that the identity of a woman who claims that she has been the victim of a sexual offence has been revealed in Parliament. Women's rights groups said that they feared that the naming of the woman would further deter rape victims from reporting their ordeal.

It is a criminal offence to name anyone who complains to police that they have been the victim of a sexual offence, even if the alleged attacker is found not guilty in court. But Lord Campbell-Savours is protected from legal action for comments made in the House of Lords. Speaking in the Lords he said: "Is not the inevitable consequence of the workings of the law as currently framed that we will carry on imprisoning innocent people such as Warren Blackwell, who was falsely accused by a serial and repeated liar, (the woman's name), who has a history of making false accusations and having multiple identities? "As a result of her accusations, he spent three and a half years in prison following a shabby and inadequate police investigation and was exonerated only when the Criminal Cases Review Commission inquiry cleared him and traced her history.

"Should not mature accusers who perjure themselves in rape trials be named and prosecuted for perjury?" The official record of the Houses of Parliament, Hansard, included the woman's name in its report because it believed it was covered by parliamentary privilege. However, the Press Association later removed the woman's identity from its report of the debate after seeking legal advice, which said that she was entitled, by statute, to lifelong anonymity. Lord Cambell-Savours said last night that he was unable to comment further on the issue because he would not be covered by privilege outside Parliament.

Mr Blackwell, 36, from Daventry, Northamptonshire, spent more than three years in jail for a sex attack before his conviction was quashed by the Court of Appeal last month after fresh evidence suggested that his alleged victim was a liar. The Criminal Cases Review Commission, which investigates possible miscarriages of justice, discovered that the alleged victim had made similar accusations. The Court of Appeal ruled that Mr Blackwell's conviction was unsafe in the light of the new evidence that the complainant had made "strikingly similar allegations" about other sex attacks, had an ability to lie and a possible propensity to self-harm.

Lord Campbell-Savours' comments came after intense debate about the right to anonymity for victims of sexual offenders and those accused but not convicted. Anonymity is granted automatically to the accuser in rape cases, under the Sexual Offences Act 1976. The woman who accused Mr Blackwell can be identified only when she waives her right to anonymity or is convicted of attempting to pervert the cause of justice, proving that the sexual assault never took place.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal, the Home Office Minister, told the Lords: "It is not inevitable that people will be falsely accused. One of the tragedies in relation to rape allegations is that very few of those who suffer this most dreadful crime have the courage to come forward at all." Ruth Hall, of Women Against Rape, said: "Women are being targeted by the criminal justice system for bringing allegations of rape. It is a new development that we have seen over the past few weeks. "There have been a number of women prosecuted for perverting the course of justice or having something added to their Criminal Records Bureau records because they have made allegations of rape. "The system is institutionally sexist. We don't believe that any assumption can be made that a woman has not been telling a truth."

At present 5.6 per cent of rape cases result in a conviction. The Government and lawyers fear that any attempt to remove anonymity would reduce significantly the number of women coming forward and prepared to go to court

Source




SOME LIARS PENALIZED

With just one in twenty cases of rape leading to a conviction there have been growing demands for changes to the law to make it easier bring prosecutions. However, there have also been growing numbers of cases where men have had their rape convictions overturned and prosecutions of women who have made up allegations. Last month a teenager was jailed after four men were held in police cells for 36 hours after she accused them of rape. Cinzia Sannino, then 17, only admitted her lies when police showed her footage on a mobile telephone of her performing naked lap- dancing for the men after returning home with them from a Cardiff club. The case led a spokesman for the False Allegations Support Organisation to comment: "Too many people jump on the bandwagon, aware that they can get compensation for false allegations."

Two weeks later a woman who falsely cried rape against her former husband was also convicted of perverting the course of justice. Sally Henderson, 40, a mother of two, described by the prosecution as a "wicked liar", claimed that Richard Cooke, 39, had repeatedly raped her during their year-long marriage. However, police discovered that her claims were almost identical to false allegations she had made five years earlier against a previous boyfriend, Gloucester Crown Court heard. Lifting an order preventing her identification, Recorder David Lane, QC, said: "The public has a right to know the identity of a person who makes such allegations and who seeks to use the system of justice for her own, unscrupulous ends."

A month earlier an obsessed stalker who accused her psychiatrist of rape was convicted of harassment, threats to kill and perverting justice. Maria Marchese, 45, rummaged through Jan Falkowski's dustbin for a used condom to clinch DNA evidence. The case against the consultant, of Limehouse, East London, was dropped - but his relationship with his fiancee collapsed.

There have been growing calls for men accused of rape to be granted anonymity until they are convicted. The Liberal Democrats voted last month to grant anonymity to anyone accused of rape until conviction.

Source





Multicultural madness needs such antidotes

A twentysomething visitor from Britain brings us the message that there should be no special rules for Muslims, writes Janet Albrechtsen

IN another sign of predictable cultural capitulation, a check-in employee with British Airways is banned from wearing a small Christian cross but Muslim and Sikh employees may wear turbans and the hijab. Little wonder, then, that Munira Mirza is so refreshing. This young woman, reared as a Muslim, says it's time to scrap multiculturalism and to stop defining people as members of a minority group. Specifically, it's time for our political leaders to stop engaging with Muslims as Muslims. They are citizens; no special rules apply.

Mirza pulls few punches when exposing the West's cultural surrender. We all know the problem. Free speech in the polite West is a little clogged up these days. A Dutch film-maker, Theo van Gogh, is slain for making Submission, a movie critical of Islam. The scriptwriter, Dutch political activist Ayan Hirsi Ali, is forced to live under threat of death. Amateurish Danish cartoons of the prophet Mohammed unleash orchestrated madness across the globe. A nun is killed in Somalia because local Muslims don't like the Pope musing about Muslim attitudes to violence. A French teacher is hiding, under police protection, after describing Mohammed as a "merciless war leader". And so it goes on.

When it's easier to stay quiet for fear of provoking violence from some Muslims or attracting accusations of racism from Western appeasers, then the West is already living under the shadow of Islamic fascism. We're stuck with silent feminists who prefer cultural rights and the burka over women's rights and the silly noise of some on the so-called progressive side of politics marching to the tune of "We're all Hezbollah now".

Which is why, in the battle of ideas, Mirza is a much needed and perhaps most unlikely warrior. This twentysomething petite British woman who visited Australia last week says multiculturalism has caused the West's cultural timidity. She isn't talking about the simple acceptance of diversity originally sold to us as multiculturalism and embraced by Australians. Multiculturalism has gone far beyond whether to eat Thai, Indian, Italian or Chinese food.

Particularly in her native Britain, but also across large swaths of the Western world, multiculturalism has become a far bigger and more insidious concept during the past three decades. Its basic proposition is cultural relativism: that all cultures are of equal value, none can be criticised (except for the majority one), and that encouraging integration is racist.

In Mirza's Britain, this has delivered a tribalised society in which identity politics reigns supreme. In this world, victimhood is especially prized. Mirza told The Australian that multiculturalism "encourages groups to claim exclusion in order to get attention. In order to get resources, you have to prove your weakness." In a competitive multicultural marketplace, groups vie for most victimised status. This political culture disenfranchises people as individuals, rejecting that they are moral agents responsible for their own future.

At a Centre for Independent Studies lecture last Wednesday, Mirza told her audience that when she was at school in Britain a decade ago, few Muslim girls wore headscarves. Now Muslim girls, even those whose mothers don't wear the scarf, are choosing to put it on as an identifier of difference and oppression, the oppressor being the West.

Multiculturalism makes the private part of you - your religion - your most valuable public asset. And it's off bounds to criticise any part of it. Just ask Jack Straw, the leader of Britain's House of Commons, who was recently dubbed a terrorist guilty of inciting religious hatred for raising the problem of interacting with veiled Muslim women.

That powerful multicultural concoction of separateness and victimhood has left the West fractured, neutered of a confident and united identity. The consequences have been far ranging, according to Mirza. Most acutely, it has fuelled home-grown terrorism.

Young Muslim boys such as the London bombers - born, reared and educated in the West - have gone looking for meaning elsewhere because, Mirza says, "being British is so discredited in this country ... The most compelling thing about the al-Qa'ida identity is its victimhood status; it is the ultimate logic of multiculturalism, with its claim that it represents an oppressed minority."

The multicultural message has wrought other disastrous consequences documented by Mirza. Culture Vultures, a book she edited earlier this year, showcases how the arts have been subsumed by an ethnocentric emphasis that promotes wasteful projects with little artistic merit. In the workplace, multiculturalism has spawned diversity training because difference needs to be micro-managed. The premise is that without expert training in how to deal with difference, pudden-headed workers will succumb to their inherent bigoted, racist tendencies.

But, as Mirza points out, emphasising difference through diversity training ends up dividing us more. The ostensibly different ones are reminded of their difference, encouraged to treat every slight as an exhibition of racism. And the rest, their fellow workers, are left paralysed in their interactions for fear of being labelled a racist.

Australia has not yielded to the levels of multicultural madness infecting Britain and Europe, which is why Mirza's message is both a warning for Australia and a sign that perhaps the intellectual tide is turning in Britain. She says the answer is to stop the politics of tribalisation and start being unashamedly proud about the Enlightenment values that lie at the core of Western liberal democracies, values such as freedom of speech.

Where Mirza is less than convincing is in her tendency to ignore Islam as part of the problem confronting the West. When asked whether there was something about Islam that explained the rise of Islamic terrorism, she said all religions could be twisted to suit warped agendas of violence. Perhaps. But disaffected Hindus, Buddhists and Sikhs are not plotting jihad: a point the Pope wished to raise in his speech at a German university before being pummelled into apologetic appeasement.

Following that fracas, Marcello Pera - who in 2004 co-wrote with the then cardinal Joseph Ratzinger a book titled Without Roots: The West, Relativism, Christianity, Islam - told the International Herald Tribune it was legitimate for those in the West to ask if jihad is a necessary part of some interpretations of Islam. It's not a comfortable topic but it goes with the terrain of free speech. And on that score, as Mirza said at a lunch last week, "we could all do with a little more courage, frankly". Amen to that.

Source






NEGLIGENT NHS KILLS AGAIN

THE family of a teenager who was exposed to massive overdoses of radiation during treatment for cancer blamed her death on hospital chiefs yesterday. Lisa Norris, 16, died at home on Wednesday, after receiving at least 17 overdoses of radiation during treatment for a brain tumour at the Beatson Oncology Centre in Glasgow. Her father, Ken Norris, said that she died after the cancer returned, but believed that it was a direct result of the hospital blunder and not a natural recurrence of the disease.

Eight months ago, Lisa and her family were celebrating after doctors said that a course of radiotherapy had destroyed a tumour in her brain. However, days later, consultants from the centre visited Lisa at her home in Girvan, Ayrshire, and told her that on every visit she had been exposed to a level of radiation 65 per cent higher than prescribed. Recalling the visit, Lisa said: "I asked them if I was going to die, but they ignored me. When I asked a second time if I would be here in five years, they said they could not answer."

NHS Greater Glasgow admitted at the time that the overdoses, which were administered by three different physicians and went unnoticed by two hospital administrators, were simply human error. It is now bracing itself for legal action from Lisa's parents, and the possibility of further legal actions from dozens of other patients. It has disclosed that there have been 46 incidents over the past 20 years during radiotherapy treatment, including 14 cases in which patients were given overdoses.

Mr Norris described Lisa as an inspiration. He said: "She kept us going in many ways. She was so positive and strong." He added: "We knew things were not looking good but we never expected Lisa to pass away so soon. We had hoped to see Christmas."

Professor Sir John Arbuthnott, the chairman of NHS Greater Glasgow, said that staff were "extremely upset" to hear of Lisa's death. He said: "I have passed on my condolences to the family on behalf of the whole organisation."

The overdoses left Lisa with bright red sores and blisters on her ears, head and neck. She also had difficulty sleeping because of a constant burning sensation inside her. She needed to take cold showers in an attempt to cool down but maintained her good humour, even as the symptoms grew worse. After trying on a blonde wig, Lisa, who had ginger hair until it fell out, said: "I always hated my hair colour. Anyway, I have such a red face and head now that it would have clashed."

Lisa became ill again last month and returned to hospital for emergency surgery for fluid on the brain. Doctors told her that the tumour had returned and offered her chemotherapy, but by then the cancer had spread to her spine and other parts of her body. Mr Norris said: "When she was in hospital recently, a doctor told us the overdose might have been to blame for the problems she developed. "One of the hardest things is that Lisa has died when there are still so many unanswered questions. But we will continue the fight for truth and for justice in her name."

The Scottish Executive has begun an independent investigation, which a spokesman said was in its final stages.

Source





THE NEW CLIMATE REALISM: UN MEETING TO FOCUS ON ADAPTATION, NOT EMISSION TARGETS

There is an "urgent need" to help developing countries adapt to impacts of climate change, UK Climate Change Minister Ian Pearson has said. Nations were experiencing environmental changes as a result of greenhouse gases already in the atmosphere, he told MPs. He said he was hopeful that an action plan and funding would be agreed at a climate summit in Africa next month. But Mr Pearson added that the talks on the Kyoto Protocol were unlikely to deliver new global emission targets.

He made his comments while giving evidence to the Commons Environmental Audit Committee's inquiry into how the UN Kyoto Protocol will progress after the current period for emission targets ends in 2012. Mr Pearson said that it was helpful that the talks on the protocol were being hosted by an African government. "Climate change is a huge issue when it comes to Africa. There will certainly be a strong focus on adaptation in Nairobi because it is one of the most pressing issues facing countries in sub-Saharan Africa today," he said. "A large number of the countries that did not sign up to Kyoto are very small emitters and they are not a big part of the problem. "But they are going to be affected by the climate change that is already in the (atmospheric) system," the minister told committee members.

The two-week summit will look at what progress has been made by the legally binding agreement that requires industrial nations to cut their emissions by an average of 5.2% from 1990 levels by the period 2008-2012. Delegates will also consider what system should be adopted when the current period ends.

Earlier this month, the UK government co-hosted a climate conference in Mexico for the world's top 20 polluting nations. The two-day informal gathering brought together ministers from G8 industrialised countries and developing nations to try to reach a consensus on the issue. When asked by Labour MP David Chaytor whether the meeting undermined the UN negotiations, Mr Pearson disagreed. "The key thing was to continue to build international consensus on the science and practical actions in terms of what needs to be done," he told the committee. However, he said it would be very difficult to get ministers from 189 nations at the Nairobi summit to reach an agreement on what should happen after 2012.

A number of nations, including the US, the world's biggest polluter, favour technological advances rather than targets to reduce emissions. "I would love to say that I feel confident that everyone is going to Nairobi with the expectation that there is going to be a long-term international agreement, but I do not think that is going to be the case," Mr Pearson conceded. "What we can realistically expect... is to hopefully agree an adaptation work programme and an adaptation fund which will be important issues for developing countries."

Source






Ayn Rand prize. Note that entries for the Chris R. Tame Memorial Prize close on 19th November 2006. Contestants are invited to submit essays under the title "The Achievements of Ayn Rand". Essay Length: 2000 words excluding notes. The prize will be 1000 pounds. The winner will be announced at the Libertarian Alliance Conference, which will take place in London this coming 25-26 November 2006 at the National Liberal Club in London: Send entries by e-mail to sean@libertarian.co.uk


UK Muslim veil row teacher loses case: "A British tribunal ruled that a Muslim teaching assistant had not been discriminated against when the school where she worked asked her to remove her veil. The case of 24-year-old Aishah Azmi against Kirklees Council in West Yorkshire, northern England, has attracted nationwide interest after former foreign minister Jack Straw said Muslim women who wore full veils made community relations difficult."



BBC wastes public money: "The BBC's 18 million pound contract with Jonathan Ross is an indefensible use of licence-fee money, a leading talent agent said yesterday. Unjustifiable pay deals are creating an inflationary spiral among talent, according to Anita Land, who represents BBC presenters such as Jeremy Paxman and Louis Theroux. Mrs Land is the sister of Michael Grade, the BBC chairman. She is a showbusiness veteran with a reputation for tough bargaining and her decision to speak out over top broadcasters' pay will infuriate fellow agents. It also heaped more pressure on the BBC, which has been criticised for demanding an above-inflation licence-fee increase while paying commercial rates to retain star talent. Mrs Land wrote about Ross's 18 million deal - a three-year exclusive contract signed this year - in Shooting Stars, a compilation of essays about television talent. "It is difficult to justify such large sums," she said. "Frankly, I don't think Jonathan does deserve it; nobody in his position could deserve it. I am amazed the BBC managed to get away with it without landing more flak." Paxman earns about 100 pounds a minute for presenting Newsnight, where he enjoys a three-day week, and about 7,500 for each edition of University Challenge."