Great Britain: Trial halted over lawyer's veil (Full-face veil interfered with communication)

The Sun (U.K.) ^ | November 7, 2006 | JOHN SCOTT

[Stoat]

 
Full-face ... lawyer dressed in veil like this one

 EXCLUSIVE 

Trial halted over lawyer's veil

 
By JOHN SCOTT
November 07, 2006
 
 

 

 

 

 
AN immigration tribunal was halted yesterday after a lawyer twice refused a judge’s request to remove her veil.

 

Shabnam Mughal was dressed from head to foot in black with a full-face veil leaving just her eyes visible.

Miss Mughal was acting for Sikh businessman Jagdev Singh in his appeal against the Home Office’s refusal to grant his nephew permission to visit the UK.

She was asked to remove the veil by tribunal chairman George Glossop during the hearing in Stoke-on-Trent, Staffs.

She declined and the case was adjourned to the afternoon. When it reconvened the judge had to ask Miss Mughal — who is in her twenties — to repeat herself after asking how she spelt her name.

He continued: “I am not very happy that you are appearing in a veil. Would you kindly remove it to assist with communications?

“It will allow me to see your face and I cannot hear you as well as I would like.”

She replied: “Sir, we have been through this issue.” Miss Mughal later announced: “Sir, I am taking my leave.”

The lawyer came back into the courtroom as Judge Glossop spoke to Mr Singh. He asked: “Do you wish to carry on?”

She retorted: “No, I just want to listen to what is being said.”

The judge continued: “If you remove your veil, which happens in other cases, we can proceed, otherwise I am going to have consultations with the President of the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal. Will you remove it?”

Miss Mughal countered: “You are clearly aware of my position on the grounds of my religious beliefs. I won’t.”

Sir Henry Hodge, head of the Asylum and Immigration Tribunals, will rule on the next move.

[Stoat]

This sort of thing has gotten far beyond tiresome. It is interfering with Government's ability to function.

[FreedomPoster]

Being able to see the faces of those testifying in a court of law is essential to operation of Western legal systems. Facial expressions are a hugely important inherent part of human communications, and intentionally concealing them from judges, jurors, and other participants in legal proceedings is just completely unacceptable.

[Battle Axe]

The handshake grew out of a symbolic show that there were no weapons in the hand.

The face is a reflection of the mindset. If we cannot see the other's face, we wonder what they are up to. Civilized societies do not cover the face and hide the demeanor.

[Stoat]

Being able to see the faces of those testifying in a court of law is essential to operation of Western legal systems. Facial expressions are a hugely important inherent part of human communications, and intentionally concealing them from judges, jurors, and other participants in legal proceedings is just completely unacceptable.

All quite true of course.  There is also a small matter of a professional dress code, of which she is in clear violation.

[nina0113]

I was thinking, with the veil thing, it makes sense that women aren't allowed to testify in Islamic courts. You wouldn't even be able to know which woman it WAS, let alone correlate facial expressions to spoken testimony.

[Dallas59]

Next ticket I get I'm still going to court with sparklers on my head....LIT! It's part of my religion. /s?

[happinesswithoutpeace]

A Muslim woman acting as an attorney for a Sikh?

[Stoat]

The handshake grew out of a symbolic show that there were no weapons in the hand.

The face is a reflection of the mindset. If we cannot see the other's face, we wonder what they are up to. Civilized societies do not cover the face and hide the demeanor.
 

Excellent points all, and this story serves as a reminder that Islam is apparently eager to demonstrate that it is an uncivilized culture.

[Stoat]

Next ticket I get I'm still going to court with sparklers on my head....LIT! It's part of my religion. /s?

Be sure to have a FReeper FRiend on hand to take pictures of you as you're dragged away to jail, sparklers blazing, because your religion is not ISLAM, whose adherents can say and do whatever they please, apparently.

[FreedomPoster]

I wondered about that, too. It seemed incongruous.

[Stoat]

I was thinking, with the veil thing, it makes sense that women aren't allowed to testify in Islamic courts. You wouldn't even be able to know which woman it WAS, let alone correlate facial expressions to spoken testimony.

Excellent point, and part of the reason why women are treated worse than garbage in Islamic countries.  Garbage is at least allowed to exist and be recognized as being garbage.  Muslim women are allowed to exist but with a bag over their heads they lose their human identity entirely.....they become less than human.

[Conservative Infidel]

2 thoughts:
Looking at the picture, my first thought was that this woman appears to be wearing eye-makeup. Always the vane ones-those Muslim women.
My next thought was that this veil contraption does have its place in Western society - Helen Thomas should be forced to wear one.

[happinesswithoutpeace]

I don't think that is the lawyer in that picture.

[Battle Axe]

I've been thinking about this for some time.

We have about 10 Muslim families in our town and this town is 75% Amish. The Amish women cover their heads, just their hair which is put up. They wear a special cap which costs about 14.00 and is supposed to be tied on their heads. Well they got around that by using straight pins to pin it to their heads. Lately, they are using some sticky stuff on the edge to glue it to their hair. The ties are tied at the ends, not snug around their throat, and the ties are often behind the head.

But the Amish never cover their face.

I see an Amish person and my heart is filled with love and admiration for their dedication to a pious lifestyle. That part is what is in my head, a non-Amish person. They say that they are just regular people and there are good ones and bad ones just like any society.

Then I see a Muslim woman pushing a baby stroller in the park. She is dressed in black from head to toe and her face is completely covered.

My heart pounds.....is this a TERRORIST. She is certainly dressed like those we see on TV shortly before they blow themselves up.

Yes it is a caricature......just like if I were to see a person dressed as a cowboy, or a sailor, or a police-person.

But I am scared. I am frightened by the sight of a face covered person.

Who is this person? Does this person have a gun in that stroller?

Has anyone else experienced this??

[Stoat]

A Muslim woman acting as an attorney for a Sikh?

The rationality of all this began to escape me some time ago, and I stopped having the expectation of anything associated with Islam  making any sense or having even a passing glance in the direction of logical congruency.

It appears to be a 'make it up as you go" religion where no non-muslim dare question any aspect of it, lest they be accused of "Islamophobia", racism, or any of a dozen other career-destroying crimes.

[jim35]

It's very heartening to hear that somewhere, someone is making a stand against this insanity.

[nina0113]

I actually have a burkha, one of the blue Afghani-style ones, received as a gift after doing some troop support. It is the most dehumanizing and oppressive thing you can imagine. It gave me the most incredible feeling of outrage - I wanted to kill all the Taliban with baseball bats, because shooting them would be too quick. I'm really happy to have it as a reminder of what our soldiers freed them from.

[Stoat]

2 thoughts:
Looking at the picture, my first thought was that this woman appears to be wearing eye-makeup. Always the vane ones-those Muslim women.
My next thought was that this veil contraption does have its place in Western society - Helen Thomas should be forced to wear one.

 

happinesswithoutpeace is correct, the photo is only intended to illustrate what the veil looks like, the photo is not described as actually being the woman in the story.

I agree about Helen Thomas, however   :-)

[6SJ7]

My next thought was that this veil contraption does have its place in Western society - Helen Thomas should be forced to wear one.

Better make that a 'two bagger' for safety sake!

[Mind-numbed Robot]

I can still see her skin so the woman is obviously a whore who is trying to excite the men in the room and provoke rape.