TWISTED: British child rapist spared from prison because jails are overcrowded with anti-immigration protesters

08/27/2024 / By Belle Carter

A child rapist in England got away with no jail time simply because the prison is overcrowded with the recently arrested anti-mass immigration protesters.

Sexual predator Ross Newman of Newport was convicted of raping a child under 14 back in December 2023. He was able to dodge imprisonment after his defense lawyer urged the judge to consider the impact on prison overcrowding. The decision of the sentencing judge read: “The only reason you have escaped immediate custody today is because of the prison overcrowding crisis.”

Newman was convicted again last week of violating the terms of his suspended sentence. However, he was again spared prison because facilities were still full to overflowing.

The reason why U.K. prisons are overcrowded is because of the anti-mass migration protesters that have been arrested recently. Both Labor and their Conservative predecessors have starved prison infrastructure of funding while lavishing billions on foreign aid and hotels for illegal immigrants. Now, as uprisings against the nation’s weak immigration policies are mounted, draconian measures are being implemented for “petty crimes” committed by the rallyists. Offenses such as chanting “Who the f**k is Allah?” at demonstrations and sharing “grossly offensive” social media posts are considered unlawful.

More than 1,000 people have already been arrested in connection with “violent disorder” following the riots in England and Northern Ireland earlier this month, according to the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC). The riots erupted following the spread of misinformation online after three girls were killed in Southport. (Related: U.K. authorities have arrested more anti-mass migration protesters than human traffickers.)

U.K. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has already announced emergency measures this month to release around 5,500 prisoners, many of whom could be violent criminals. Among those reportedly set for early release is Lawson Natty, convicted of manslaughter for his role in the killing of a 14-year-old in November 2022. Starmer blamed the emergency measures on “a basic failure” of his predecessor Rishi Sunak’s government. “[These decisions are] having to be taken for one reason and one reason only and that is the terrible inheritance on prisons that we had as an incoming government from the previous government,” he said.

Last Monday, the system known as “Operation Early Dawn” was activated. Prisons Minister Lord Timpson has said the emergency measures will help “manage the pressure felt in some parts of the country.”

But the vice president of the Prison Governors’ Association, Mark Icke, said he was “not sure” how much the measures will help as the prison system has been “lurching from crisis to crisis for some time.”

Under the said project, defendants will only be summoned to a magistrates’ court when a space in prison is ready for them. This means court cases could be delayed, with people kept in police cells or released on bail while they await trial. The Ministry of Justice said that anyone who “poses a risk to the public” will not be bailed and the police’s ability to arrest criminals will not be affected.

Meanwhile, the police will continue to arrest anyone that they need to to keep the public safe, including policing protests and events and ensuring that people are arrested as expected, Deputy Chief Constable Nev Kemp of the NPCC said.

Survey: Reform U.K. voters believe rioters are treated too harshly

A YouGov survey conducted at the height of the unrest on Aug. 5 to 6 revealed that Conservatives (48 percent) and Labor and Lib Dem voters (57-58 percent) think that protesters’ sentences were just about right. However, Reform U.K. voters are most likely to feel that the courts have been too harsh to the rallyists with half (51 percent) saying so, while only three in ten (29 percent) feel that they have received appropriate sentences.

Looking at the specific sentences, a few continue to feel that the sentences handed down have been too harsh but the public becomes significantly more likely to think those involved are getting off lightly.

According to the internet-based market research and data analytics firm, six in ten Britons (60 percent) feel that a certain individual who received a one-year sentence for charging a police officer was too light a punishment and warranted a longer sentence. Meanwhile, only five percent of the public felt the courts were too harsh.

Similarly, six percent believe that the legal system went too far with the four years and eight months for a selection of crimes like those committed in this case for criminal damage, burglary and violent disorder, including throwing missiles at police. The public, on the other hand, is more evenly split between the 44 percent of Britons who feel this was a fair sentence and the 44 percent who believe it didn’t go far enough.

There’s similarly eight to nine percent support among the British public on the idea that a six-year sentence and another of more than three years, for a cluster of violent disorder offenses are disproportionate. Nearly half of Britons 47 to 48 percent feel both sentences were appropriate, with 37 percent feeling both should have been harsher.

Meanwhile, the British public is not convinced the riots were being handled well, with only three in ten Britons (31 percent) feeling Starmer was doing a good job, against half (49 percent) who felt he was handling them badly. There was also skepticism that the courts would mete out justice, with just a third of the public (34 percent) feeling the courts would sentence the rioters effectively.

Visit Revolt.news to read more stories on civil uprisings, revolts and resistance to government tyranny.