WEAR A DEL BOY ‘CRASH TURBAN’ SIKH BOBBY TOLD

A SIKH policeman told yesterday how he felt like a character from TV’s Only Fools And Horses when his bosses asked him to wear a “crash turban” helmet.

PC Gurmeal Singh, 31, was asked to remove his turban by Greater Manchester Police, who told him that he had to wear a regulation force helmet.

But when chiefs suggested that he get a protective turban instead, Mr Singh said it reminded him of an episode of the TV sitcom.

Millions watched the show as Del Boy Trotter, played by David Jason, took a delivery of 200 “crash turbans”, which he hoped to sell on to “motorbike-riding Sikhs throughout Peckham”.

Now Mr Singh says he is seeking £200,000 in compensation for racial discrimination after being left “offended and humiliated”.

He told a Manchester employment hearing: “I am deeply offended. My turban is not an article of clothing, like a shirt or tie – it is part of me, a part of my religion, and I feel as though my religion and I have become an issue for GMP.

“I had images in my mind of a helmet with a turban crossed around it, similar to that shown in an episode of Only Fools And Horses where a turban cloth was wrapped around a riding helmet.

“It has made me feel alienated. This is an organisation where senior officers are making racist remarks about machine-gunning down Eid celebrators.”

PC Singh said he had been a practising Sikh all his life. He has worn a turban – which is a strict requirement of his faith – since he was 15 years old.

He joined the force in 2003 as a Police Community Support Officer, but problems began when he was asked to go out on cycle patrols.

“I was not allowed to patrol on the pedal cycle without a safety helmet, despite the law exempting Sikhs from wearing protective headgear,” he said.

“I felt ostracised. As I did not want to wear a helmet I was told that I would not be able to make use of the pedal cycles.

“This meant that I would have to cover the same area of the division by foot, when other officers had the luxury of the pedal cycle policing. I felt disheartened and ostracised.”

He said his promotion to a fully-fledged constable was delayed by 18 months after an assistant chief constable said he was concerned by the fact that Mr Singh did not wear a badge on his turban – despite his claims that this would go against his religion.

Mr Singh added: “I constantly had to reiterate and justify why I did not wear a badge on my turban.” He explained how, during his training, he reluctantly had to remove his turban and put on a helmet in order to complete some of the tasks.

He went on: “I felt coerced and I saw no other option than to remove my turban and wear the helmet in order to carry out the training.

“I was deeply offended and humiliated. I felt as though I had betrayed those oaths that I took at the age of 15.

“I was also coerced into walking through a petrol fire exercise, despite having told one of the other trainers that the substance I use to gel my beard down is highly flammable.

“It is considered a serious breach of the Sikh code of practice if the hair of the face or head is cut or singed.” continues here

EDITOR'S Comment: You know I feel sorry for Mr Singh ,forced to come here with a gun to his head and then forced with a gun to his head to join the police, why we should change all of our laws and traditions for aliens, we’re very impolite, our culture should be seconded to all others, we should permit the many millions that come here to feed of us every accommodation, of course, some parties welcome Sikhs as brothers, seeing only Muslims they simply cannot comprehend the threat from others traditions, in reality each and everyone should go home, the experiment is over and it has failed.

Racist judges forced me out,' claims black magistrate

Racist judges tried to force out a black magistrate after she claimed they treated black defendants unfairly, a tribunal heard today.

Iris Josiah was bullied and victimised by senior white magistrates after raising concerns about a culture of racism towards blacks.

She said black defendants were being found guilty even if they were innocent, were jailed for longer and were more likely to be sent to prison and refused bail.

Judges overlooked her in favour of white colleagues for promotion and unlawfully suspended over a seven and a half year period, the tribunal was told.

She claims this amounted to 'systemic unfair treatment' and a plot to expel her from the magistracy on account of her colour.

Miss Josiah, 50, is claiming harassment, victimisation and racial discrimination against the Ministry of Justice and is demanding £75,000 compensation.

She said within the first few years of her appointment as a judge at Enfield magistrates in north London she witnessed racism.

She said: 'I witnessed the hostile treatment of black defendants by some fellow magistrates (harsh remarks, severe sentencing, disregard for personal mitigation, easy findings of guilty irrespective of evidence, most likely to be refused bail, most likely to be sent to prison, general unfair practices) and have confronted a couple of magistrates about particular incidents of a couple of unfair practices relating to black defendants including unfair practices directed at me - for example leaving me out of discussions during deliberation.

'I felt this needed to be discussed and resolved with the magistrates since I did not want to participate in a culture of unfair practices against black defendants.'

After she made the complaint Miss Josiah was barred from remand court where the alleged incident happened and began to be treated with what she claimed was the "utmost disrespect" which left her humiliated and ineffective.

She repeatedly attempted to progress to the position of court chairman but claimed her attempts to be appraised by court managers were postponed to thwart her.

This compared to three white colleagues who were all easily given appraisals and went on to take up the position.

She also had to deal with complaints from bosses which she told the tribunal were there for a similar purpose.

One was from Clive Amos and Stephen Carroll two magistrates at the Enfield court and Robin Wright one of the court's legal advisors that she had made an inappropriate remark during a trial.

Miss Josiah said it was 'manufactured' and that 'the intention was to stop me from becoming a court chairman and to have me expelled from the magistracy on grounds of my race'.

'This complaint was part of the systemic and direct racial discrimination that was practised against me at Enfield Magistrates Court,' she said.

In February 2007 she made a formal complaint of racial discrimination to the North West London Advisory Committee which investigates disciplinary matters in magistrates courts.

The next month she was told by Mr Carroll she was not beyond the rota and was effectively suspended until her disciplinary matter was resolved.

The title JP was also removed from her name on all court documents.

She was horrified to find out that it would be Mr Carroll and Mr Amos who would be investigating her complaint - the very people she was complaining about.

During her suspension Miss Josiah, a mother of one from Palmers Green in North London, was further enraged when two white colleagues were appointed to sit on the same board she normally sits on.

Miss Josiah, who supplements her voluntary work as a magistrate by lecturing at a college told Stratford Employment Tribunal: 'I am now in my 15th year and still there is not a black court chairman or black mentor on the Tuesday bench and there is not a black female chair or black mentor within Enfield Magistrates Court.

'Every attempt I have made to become a court chairman and a mentor has been blocked.

'The cumulus effect of the systemic unfair manner in which I have been treated has been extremely painful and humiliating.  continues here

You know if you’re white your disabled, at an immense disadvantage, you see you simply haven’t the ability non-whites have, you’re the wrong colour, Enoch Powell stated that, "In this country in 15 or 20 years time the black man will have the whip hand over the white man.", yet it is worse than even that, much, much worse. Not only have non-whites an immense advantage in almost every sphere but egalitarians, leftists and similar ilk hold sway until the take-over. Today individuals with a particular political bent, govern the affairs of this and other countries, this at a stroke places western civilisation at a disadvantage, ruling out as it does equality of representation, now of course there is no other voice but that of egalitarians, of any stripe, you, your family or indeed those to come have no voice.

In many respects non-whites use their supposed historical ill-treatment to do the same to whites today, of course the cruelty of slavery is not as marked, we do not for instance wear shackles however, many millions of us toil each day to pay taxes to support the legions of unwanted and dare I say unneeded non-whites here, those on their way and those yet to be born, financial slavery is in any event slavery. Of course many non-whites work, many are incredibly nice human beings, however, their very presence creates problems and of course, as I strive to illustrate seemingly constantly, genetic amalgamation is in effect state sponsored efficient mechanised genocide, the very thing they accused Germany of carrying out in WW2.

Asylum seeker family wins £150,000 compensation

A family of asylum seekers who have had three claims for shelter turned down have been awarded £150,000 damages after being detained.

The compensation is believed to be the largest payout for such a case and has been handed to a Congolese family after the Home Office accepted their detention was unlawful. 

The damages were agreed at the High Court after the family argued they had been left traumatised after immigration officials raided their home and took them to Yarlswood Detention Centre for 57 days in 2006. 

The case centred, in particular, on the couple's eight-year-old daughter who had psychological problems. 

The family's barrister, Stephanie Harrison, told Mr Justice Mackay that the Home Office now conceded that their detention was "unlawful from the outset". 

The mother arrived in the UK with her eldest daughter in 2002 but had her claim for asylum rejected three years later. The father arrived later but had his claim for asylum also turned down in 2005. 

The couple had another daughter while here and put in a third claim as husband and wife which was refused in 2006. 

Although the mother was still appealing her individual refusal in June of that year, she, her husband, and daughters, aged just eight and one, were woken in the early hours at their home in Dudley, West Midlands, and taken to Yarlswood Detention Centre, where they were held for 57 days. 

After they were released, the Home Secretary again signed a removal order against them and another "dawn raid" followed in September the same year. This time the family was held for three days. 

Miss Harrison said the Home Office had failed to abide by "its own stated policy" on asylum seekers, or take account of the impact of the raids on the children. 

She said the entire family had been traumatised by the raids and detention. 

The Home Office agreed to pay £46,500 damages to the father, £39,000 to his wife, £45,000 to the elder girl and £19,500 to the baby girl, who was born in the UK. 

Mr Justice MacKay, who ordered that the family should not be identified, said: "This is a fair and reasonable settlement for the wrongs that were done to them." 

A UK Border Agency spokesman said: "The UKBA is actively working on alternatives to detaining families with children. 

"During detention or removal from the UK, we take the welfare of families with children extremely seriously. 

"Officers involved in family removals receive thorough training in procedures to minimise the distress caused. All members of the family are treated as sensitively as possible." 

Children's Commissioner for England Sir Al Aynsley-Green said: "I am particularly pleased that the two children have also been awarded compensation by the court. It goes some way to righting this wrong.  continues here