Why was Khairi Saadallah still in the UK?

Dis86

Dis86

Dis86

Caporegime
Joined
23 Dec 2011
Posts
33,104
Location
Northern England
Why are we allowing people who have 'fled' to the UK and committed previous crimes to remain in this country?
Surely the safety of UK citizens should come first?
 
...and undoubtedly been provided with a flat and subsidised living at the taxpayers expense.

Unfortunately he will now have a cell, three squares, colour television etc for the rest of his life again at taxpayers expense.
 
Maybe he was in the process of deportation?

Apparently there are a couple of reasons that deportation can't happen.

There are certain situations where Home Office policy is that removal windows should not be used. In these circumstances, removal directions (see above) will be issued.

A removal window should not be used in family cases. Read more about the “Family Returns Process” for family cases here.

People with independent evidence that they are an “Adult at Risk” in terms of detention policy should not be subject to a removal window.
Click to expand...
 
stockhausen said:
That is the most important thing that you (and some others here) can focus on? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
No the fact that he was able to kill three Britons and seriously injure three others with relative ease. It smacks again of an intelligence failure along the lines of Manchester arena. These people who are previous offenders or have previously been watched should be taken much more seriously. It's not as if MI5 have a more serious responsibility than keeping citizens safe.
 
It’s a joke - After every one of these awful instances, the security services come out and are like “Oh yeah him? Yeah we knew about him last year” - What use is that?!
 
Intelligence failure? Is this minority report? Do people really want that type of country. And you think the home office are the good guys who always get things right e.g. wind rush.

the fact is we can’t track everybody who says a bad word. Mi5 can’t read minds.
 
Dis86 said:
Surely the safety of UK citizens should come first?
Click to expand...

The trouble is if we're safe they can't pass laws restricting freedom and stripping away privacy under the guise of keeping us safe, they need enemies whether it be terrorism or viruses to make the public accept increasingly controlling/draconian measures.

Watch this video and consider he would probably be smeared as far right today:

 
mmj_uk said:
The trouble is if we're safe they can't pass laws restricting freedom and stripping away privacy under the guise of keeping us safe, they need enemies whether it be terrorism or viruses to make the public accept increasingly controlling/draconian measures.
Click to expand...

Viruses? You think Covid-19 isn't a real threat?
 
Robert said:
Intelligence failure? Is this minority report? Do people really want that type of country. And you think the home office are the good guys who always get things right e.g. wind rush.

the fact is we can’t track everybody who says a bad word. Mi5 can’t read minds.
Click to expand...

They don't need to. He'd already been jailed for criminal offences and was already on their radar as a potential terror risk. How many flags do they need?!
 
Dis86 said:
They don't need to. He'd already been jailed for criminal offences and was already on their radar as a potential terror risk. How many flags do they need?!
Click to expand...
Do you know what criminal offence(s) he had committed?
Do you know whether he might have had any mental health problems?
 
Robert said:
Intelligence failure? Is this minority report? Do people really want that type of country. And you think the home office are the good guys who always get things right e.g. wind rush.

the fact is we can’t track everybody who says a bad word. Mi5 can’t read minds.
Click to expand...
Yep, you can't lock people up for being on a watch list.

I dont think anyone from higher up the intelligence circle would ever say the lists were supposed to 100% prevent attacks but more to reduce the likelyhood of them occurring and to aid in gathering wider picture Intel.

The streatham attack whilst people got injured wasnt nearly as bad as it could have been bc the guy was deemed enough of a potential threat to be followed.
 
It’s simply not good enough and we as a country need to toughen up.

in my mind it’s quite simple.

If you are a refugee with a criminal background, you are turned away.
If you are a refugee and have committed a crime in the country that you have fled to, you’re removed.

No exceptions, no excuses.
 
HoneyBadger said:
It’s simply not good enough and we as a country need to toughen up.

in my mind it’s quite simple.

If you are a refugee with a criminal background, you are turned away.
If you are a refugee and have committed a crime in the country that you have fled to, you’re removed.

No exceptions, no excuses.
Click to expand...


E: Government guidance:


4.3 Refusing settlement on the basis of criminality or extremism

Where caseworkers have established that the individual or any dependant included on the application has a criminal record and that case is not already being handled by Criminal Casework, they must consider referring the case to Criminal Casework. See guidance on When to refer a case to Criminal Casework to establish whether the applicant or any dependants meet the criteria for deportation on grounds of criminality.

In some cases there may be evidence to suggest that the individual refugee or a dependant has espoused extremist views and behaviours.

Article 33(2) of the Refugee Convention provides for the refusal of asylum to individuals who would otherwise be refugees but have been convicted of a particularly serious crime and constitute a danger to the community or there are reasonable grounds for regarding them as a danger to the security of the UK.

This includes those who espouse Page 20 of 47 Published for Home Office staff on 02 February 2016 extremist views and behaviours. Where there is any evidence of extremism the case must be referred to Special Cases Unit (SCU). If it is unclear whether the criterion has been met, the case must be discussed with a Senior Caseworker, who may consult with Criminal Casework colleagues directly.

Source: https://assets.publishing.service.g...ile/497326/settlement_protection_v4.0_EXT.pdf
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom