Lenient sentence for 'honour crime' brings dishonour on judge and jury

Shamina Akhtar was subjected to a sickening assault by her brother and two sisters for kissing a white boy on her birthday. She was beaten and her hair hacked off and was told to choose between a hammer and a knife to be used on her and her boyfriend.

Fortunately the police were called and the trio of thugs arrested. However that is where any hope of justice for Shamina ended because her siblings were only convicted for actual bodily harm.

Appallingly, the judge had informed the jury that the crime centred on ‘honour-based domestic violence' as if that was some kind of mitigation. The jury took three weeks to deliver its verdict rejecting the charges of false imprisonment, but finding the two sisters guilty of actual bodily harm and her brother guilty of assault.

Judge Guy Boney gave them each a conditional discharge and a fine instead of the prison sentence which would have been the usual result in a racially based crime.

Consequently poor Shamina must live her life constantly looking over her shoulder, in perpetual fear of her family taking reprisals against herself and her boyfriend.

Both judge and jury should be utterly ashamed of themselves for bringing the justice system and this country into such further disrepute.