£50k East Lancs heroin courier jailed for six years

£50k East Lancs heroin courier jailed for six years

£50k East Lancs heroin courier jailed for six years

First published in News

A HEROIN courier caught in Haslingden with drugs worth almost £50,000 stuffed down his trousers has been locked up for six years.

Burnley Crown Court heard how addict Mohammed Akmal, 26, who was in the passenger seat of a taxi stopped by police, had a ‘brick’ of heroin, weighing 500 grams and of very high purity, hidden in the front of his pants.

Akmal claimed he had been under instructions to deliver it.

Akmal has a record for drugs trafficking, with previous convictions for supplying heroin and cocaine.

The defendant, living in Huddersfield before he was remanded in custody, had admitted possessing heroin with intent to supply.

Prosecutor Lisa Worsley said police stopped a vehicle on the A56 on January 6. Akmal, who appeared to be messing with the waistband of his trousers, had a mobile phone in his right hand.

He was searched and was found to have a large, square object in the front of his trousers. In a carrier bag was a brick-shaped parcel.

Miss Worsley said the defendant was cautioned and made a number of comments on the way to Burnley Police Station.

He said he knew he was looking at a long sentence and asked: "Where's the nearest jail to here? I’m supposed to be getting married this year. My life is over."

The prosecutor said the brick was sent for analysis and was found to be 500 gram block of heroin, of 60 per cent purity. The wholesale value was £15,000 and the potential street value would be about £45,000.

The defendant had owned up on the basis he had gone to collect the drugs and deliver them by arrangement.

Miss Worsley said in 2007, Akmal was dealt with in court for eight counts of supplying drugs and in 2012, he was given three years behind bars for another eight supply charges. He now faces a proceeds of crime hearing.

Mohammed Nawaz, for Akmal, said he had been an addict for some time and hadworked up a debt. Hewas of limited intellect, was acting under instructions.

Comments (18)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:15am Fri 14 Mar 14

crammster11 says...

scum of the earth bring back hanging for scum like this
scum of the earth bring back hanging for scum like this crammster11
  • Score: 27

11:54am Fri 14 Mar 14

Duni Akwe Tu? says...

You're gone and i got to stay high
All the time
High ..all the time
You're gone and i got to stay high All the time High ..all the time Duni Akwe Tu?
  • Score: -21

12:12pm Fri 14 Mar 14

HecticBigBoy says...

he said where's the nearest jail, i should be getting married this year, my life is over! ......... How many lives get ruined by this terrible drug? How many lives actually could have been over? I'd say he got off pretty lightly to be honest, make drug crime punishable by 25 years and then these scum may think twice!!
he said where's the nearest jail, i should be getting married this year, my life is over! ......... How many lives get ruined by this terrible drug? How many lives actually could have been over? I'd say he got off pretty lightly to be honest, make drug crime punishable by 25 years and then these scum may think twice!! HecticBigBoy
  • Score: 30

12:14pm Fri 14 Mar 14

HecticBigBoy says...

crammster11 wrote:
scum of the earth bring back hanging for scum like this
Potential murderers supplying this stuff !! 6 years, out in 4? No punishment
[quote][p][bold]crammster11[/bold] wrote: scum of the earth bring back hanging for scum like this[/p][/quote]Potential murderers supplying this stuff !! 6 years, out in 4? No punishment HecticBigBoy
  • Score: 21

1:07pm Fri 14 Mar 14

East_lancs_lad says...

He was given a three year sentence in 2012.......why was he out dealing again.

Mohammed Nawaz, for Akmal, said he had been an addict for some time and hadworked up a debt. Hewas of limited intellect, was acting under instructions........
........

Who has limited intellect LT ?
He was given a three year sentence in 2012.......why was he out dealing again. Mohammed Nawaz, for Akmal, said he had been an addict for some time and hadworked up a debt. Hewas of limited intellect, was acting under instructions........ ........ Who has limited intellect LT ? East_lancs_lad
  • Score: 12

1:36pm Fri 14 Mar 14

workaholic says...

Should get a year for each gram !!
Or three strikes and your out like in the US 'LIFE' !!!
Should get a year for each gram !! Or three strikes and your out like in the US 'LIFE' !!! workaholic
  • Score: 20

3:02pm Fri 14 Mar 14

woolywords says...

@LT,
Why aren't we allowed to comment on the burglary of the Accrington mosque?
Personally, I'd have seen the man jailed, as mosques are the equivalent places as to churches, consecrated grounds, and therefore, should incur a greater penalty than commercial or domestic premises.
Cathedrals were once places of sanctuary, just as mosques are places of sanctity, today. To treat a mosque as a lesser place is, in my opinion, completely wrong, and needs addressing by the courts.
However, what if I thought upon religious lines...
He stole from a mosque..
There are ayats and hadiths about attacking mosques, that few are aware of, through ignorance. There could even be a case for a mosque raising a writ of habeas corpus, in it's original sense, produce the body. Where the culprit is taken onto that land and becoming subject to it's laws.
Just because Christian Bishops defer to Criminal from Canonical Law, doesn't mean that, to any right thinking man, that Muslims cannot make an application, via writ of Habeas Corpus, for the criminal, to expose them to Shariah Law.
It may come as a complete shock to some that I write in this way but we have to respect our places of worship or else we fall into complete disarray.
The Accrington man should be very grateful that he was not handed over to that mosque, for judgement by a convened Shariah Courts of the elders, as he would have been in for a nasty surprise, at their punishments for this crime.
Don't look at me to defend him...
I enjoy reading our books, from all cultures, and nit-picking at all. So, if I possess the readings, to know that he should have been treated better, by a Shariah Courts, I will say so...as is my rights!
If it were known that, if you are caught, after burglary of a mosque, they chopped your hand off, whom would be that stupid to do that?
It is, at the very least, an interesting concept for discussion.


as ever, feel free to make my comment appear, completely negative.
to show that you have less respect of ME, rather than the words that I write.
@LT, Why aren't we allowed to comment on the burglary of the Accrington mosque? Personally, I'd have seen the man jailed, as mosques are the equivalent places as to churches, consecrated grounds, and therefore, should incur a greater penalty than commercial or domestic premises. Cathedrals were once places of sanctuary, just as mosques are places of sanctity, today. To treat a mosque as a lesser place is, in my opinion, completely wrong, and needs addressing by the courts. However, what if I thought upon religious lines... He stole from a mosque.. There are ayats and hadiths about attacking mosques, that few are aware of, through ignorance. There could even be a case for a mosque raising a writ of habeas corpus, in it's original sense, produce the body. Where the culprit is taken onto that land and becoming subject to it's laws. Just because Christian Bishops defer to Criminal from Canonical Law, doesn't mean that, to any right thinking man, that Muslims cannot make an application, via writ of Habeas Corpus, for the criminal, to expose them to Shariah Law. It may come as a complete shock to some that I write in this way but we have to respect our places of worship or else we fall into complete disarray. The Accrington man should be very grateful that he was not handed over to that mosque, for judgement by a convened Shariah Courts of the elders, as he would have been in for a nasty surprise, at their punishments for this crime. Don't look at me to defend him... I enjoy reading our books, from all cultures, and nit-picking at all. So, if I possess the readings, to know that he should have been treated better, by a Shariah Courts, I will say so...as is my rights! If it were known that, if you are caught, after burglary of a mosque, they chopped your hand off, whom would be that stupid to do that? It is, at the very least, an interesting concept for discussion. as ever, feel free to make my comment appear, completely negative. to show that you have less respect of ME, rather than the words that I write. woolywords
  • Score: -8

4:09pm Fri 14 Mar 14

Saj143 says...

woolywords wrote:
@LT,
Why aren't we allowed to comment on the burglary of the Accrington mosque?
Personally, I'd have seen the man jailed, as mosques are the equivalent places as to churches, consecrated grounds, and therefore, should incur a greater penalty than commercial or domestic premises.
Cathedrals were once places of sanctuary, just as mosques are places of sanctity, today. To treat a mosque as a lesser place is, in my opinion, completely wrong, and needs addressing by the courts.
However, what if I thought upon religious lines...
He stole from a mosque..
There are ayats and hadiths about attacking mosques, that few are aware of, through ignorance. There could even be a case for a mosque raising a writ of habeas corpus, in it's original sense, produce the body. Where the culprit is taken onto that land and becoming subject to it's laws.
Just because Christian Bishops defer to Criminal from Canonical Law, doesn't mean that, to any right thinking man, that Muslims cannot make an application, via writ of Habeas Corpus, for the criminal, to expose them to Shariah Law.
It may come as a complete shock to some that I write in this way but we have to respect our places of worship or else we fall into complete disarray.
The Accrington man should be very grateful that he was not handed over to that mosque, for judgement by a convened Shariah Courts of the elders, as he would have been in for a nasty surprise, at their punishments for this crime.
Don't look at me to defend him...
I enjoy reading our books, from all cultures, and nit-picking at all. So, if I possess the readings, to know that he should have been treated better, by a Shariah Courts, I will say so...as is my rights!
If it were known that, if you are caught, after burglary of a mosque, they chopped your hand off, whom would be that stupid to do that?
It is, at the very least, an interesting concept for discussion.


as ever, feel free to make my comment appear, completely negative.
to show that you have less respect of ME, rather than the words that I write.
Sharia Law aint Law is this country.

Don't try and be clever mu99et !
[quote][p][bold]woolywords[/bold] wrote: @LT, Why aren't we allowed to comment on the burglary of the Accrington mosque? Personally, I'd have seen the man jailed, as mosques are the equivalent places as to churches, consecrated grounds, and therefore, should incur a greater penalty than commercial or domestic premises. Cathedrals were once places of sanctuary, just as mosques are places of sanctity, today. To treat a mosque as a lesser place is, in my opinion, completely wrong, and needs addressing by the courts. However, what if I thought upon religious lines... He stole from a mosque.. There are ayats and hadiths about attacking mosques, that few are aware of, through ignorance. There could even be a case for a mosque raising a writ of habeas corpus, in it's original sense, produce the body. Where the culprit is taken onto that land and becoming subject to it's laws. Just because Christian Bishops defer to Criminal from Canonical Law, doesn't mean that, to any right thinking man, that Muslims cannot make an application, via writ of Habeas Corpus, for the criminal, to expose them to Shariah Law. It may come as a complete shock to some that I write in this way but we have to respect our places of worship or else we fall into complete disarray. The Accrington man should be very grateful that he was not handed over to that mosque, for judgement by a convened Shariah Courts of the elders, as he would have been in for a nasty surprise, at their punishments for this crime. Don't look at me to defend him... I enjoy reading our books, from all cultures, and nit-picking at all. So, if I possess the readings, to know that he should have been treated better, by a Shariah Courts, I will say so...as is my rights! If it were known that, if you are caught, after burglary of a mosque, they chopped your hand off, whom would be that stupid to do that? It is, at the very least, an interesting concept for discussion. as ever, feel free to make my comment appear, completely negative. to show that you have less respect of ME, rather than the words that I write.[/p][/quote]Sharia Law aint Law is this country. Don't try and be clever mu99et ! Saj143
  • Score: 13

5:26pm Fri 14 Mar 14

tall in the saddle says...

woolywords wrote:
@LT,
Why aren't we allowed to comment on the burglary of the Accrington mosque?
Personally, I'd have seen the man jailed, as mosques are the equivalent places as to churches, consecrated grounds, and therefore, should incur a greater penalty than commercial or domestic premises.
Cathedrals were once places of sanctuary, just as mosques are places of sanctity, today. To treat a mosque as a lesser place is, in my opinion, completely wrong, and needs addressing by the courts.
However, what if I thought upon religious lines...
He stole from a mosque..
There are ayats and hadiths about attacking mosques, that few are aware of, through ignorance. There could even be a case for a mosque raising a writ of habeas corpus, in it's original sense, produce the body. Where the culprit is taken onto that land and becoming subject to it's laws.
Just because Christian Bishops defer to Criminal from Canonical Law, doesn't mean that, to any right thinking man, that Muslims cannot make an application, via writ of Habeas Corpus, for the criminal, to expose them to Shariah Law.
It may come as a complete shock to some that I write in this way but we have to respect our places of worship or else we fall into complete disarray.
The Accrington man should be very grateful that he was not handed over to that mosque, for judgement by a convened Shariah Courts of the elders, as he would have been in for a nasty surprise, at their punishments for this crime.
Don't look at me to defend him...
I enjoy reading our books, from all cultures, and nit-picking at all. So, if I possess the readings, to know that he should have been treated better, by a Shariah Courts, I will say so...as is my rights!
If it were known that, if you are caught, after burglary of a mosque, they chopped your hand off, whom would be that stupid to do that?
It is, at the very least, an interesting concept for discussion.


as ever, feel free to make my comment appear, completely negative.
to show that you have less respect of ME, rather than the words that I write.
So do you think that the drug dealer who the thread is about should be subject to Sharia Law? I know it’s a different situation but your view would be interesting.
[quote][p][bold]woolywords[/bold] wrote: @LT, Why aren't we allowed to comment on the burglary of the Accrington mosque? Personally, I'd have seen the man jailed, as mosques are the equivalent places as to churches, consecrated grounds, and therefore, should incur a greater penalty than commercial or domestic premises. Cathedrals were once places of sanctuary, just as mosques are places of sanctity, today. To treat a mosque as a lesser place is, in my opinion, completely wrong, and needs addressing by the courts. However, what if I thought upon religious lines... He stole from a mosque.. There are ayats and hadiths about attacking mosques, that few are aware of, through ignorance. There could even be a case for a mosque raising a writ of habeas corpus, in it's original sense, produce the body. Where the culprit is taken onto that land and becoming subject to it's laws. Just because Christian Bishops defer to Criminal from Canonical Law, doesn't mean that, to any right thinking man, that Muslims cannot make an application, via writ of Habeas Corpus, for the criminal, to expose them to Shariah Law. It may come as a complete shock to some that I write in this way but we have to respect our places of worship or else we fall into complete disarray. The Accrington man should be very grateful that he was not handed over to that mosque, for judgement by a convened Shariah Courts of the elders, as he would have been in for a nasty surprise, at their punishments for this crime. Don't look at me to defend him... I enjoy reading our books, from all cultures, and nit-picking at all. So, if I possess the readings, to know that he should have been treated better, by a Shariah Courts, I will say so...as is my rights! If it were known that, if you are caught, after burglary of a mosque, they chopped your hand off, whom would be that stupid to do that? It is, at the very least, an interesting concept for discussion. as ever, feel free to make my comment appear, completely negative. to show that you have less respect of ME, rather than the words that I write.[/p][/quote]So do you think that the drug dealer who the thread is about should be subject to Sharia Law? I know it’s a different situation but your view would be interesting. tall in the saddle
  • Score: 12

5:27pm Fri 14 Mar 14

Rumpole says...

woolywords wrote:
@LT,
Why aren't we allowed to comment on the burglary of the Accrington mosque?
Personally, I'd have seen the man jailed, as mosques are the equivalent places as to churches, consecrated grounds, and therefore, should incur a greater penalty than commercial or domestic premises.
Cathedrals were once places of sanctuary, just as mosques are places of sanctity, today. To treat a mosque as a lesser place is, in my opinion, completely wrong, and needs addressing by the courts.
However, what if I thought upon religious lines...
He stole from a mosque..
There are ayats and hadiths about attacking mosques, that few are aware of, through ignorance. There could even be a case for a mosque raising a writ of habeas corpus, in it's original sense, produce the body. Where the culprit is taken onto that land and becoming subject to it's laws.
Just because Christian Bishops defer to Criminal from Canonical Law, doesn't mean that, to any right thinking man, that Muslims cannot make an application, via writ of Habeas Corpus, for the criminal, to expose them to Shariah Law.
It may come as a complete shock to some that I write in this way but we have to respect our places of worship or else we fall into complete disarray.
The Accrington man should be very grateful that he was not handed over to that mosque, for judgement by a convened Shariah Courts of the elders, as he would have been in for a nasty surprise, at their punishments for this crime.
Don't look at me to defend him...
I enjoy reading our books, from all cultures, and nit-picking at all. So, if I possess the readings, to know that he should have been treated better, by a Shariah Courts, I will say so...as is my rights!
If it were known that, if you are caught, after burglary of a mosque, they chopped your hand off, whom would be that stupid to do that?
It is, at the very least, an interesting concept for discussion.


as ever, feel free to make my comment appear, completely negative.
to show that you have less respect of ME, rather than the words that I write.
If the mosque hadn't have been built where it was then he would not have been tempted to burgle it so I think the blame has to lie with the people that decided to build a mosque where it was built, therefore, it is your own fault the mosque was burgled!!!

As the mosque was built on British Land and not Islamic land the laws of sharia do not apply!

If you so wish the sharia laws to be allowed to deal with the burglary of a mosque then go build it on Islamic land in any of the Islamic countries and wait for it to be burgled.
[quote][p][bold]woolywords[/bold] wrote: @LT, Why aren't we allowed to comment on the burglary of the Accrington mosque? Personally, I'd have seen the man jailed, as mosques are the equivalent places as to churches, consecrated grounds, and therefore, should incur a greater penalty than commercial or domestic premises. Cathedrals were once places of sanctuary, just as mosques are places of sanctity, today. To treat a mosque as a lesser place is, in my opinion, completely wrong, and needs addressing by the courts. However, what if I thought upon religious lines... He stole from a mosque.. There are ayats and hadiths about attacking mosques, that few are aware of, through ignorance. There could even be a case for a mosque raising a writ of habeas corpus, in it's original sense, produce the body. Where the culprit is taken onto that land and becoming subject to it's laws. Just because Christian Bishops defer to Criminal from Canonical Law, doesn't mean that, to any right thinking man, that Muslims cannot make an application, via writ of Habeas Corpus, for the criminal, to expose them to Shariah Law. It may come as a complete shock to some that I write in this way but we have to respect our places of worship or else we fall into complete disarray. The Accrington man should be very grateful that he was not handed over to that mosque, for judgement by a convened Shariah Courts of the elders, as he would have been in for a nasty surprise, at their punishments for this crime. Don't look at me to defend him... I enjoy reading our books, from all cultures, and nit-picking at all. So, if I possess the readings, to know that he should have been treated better, by a Shariah Courts, I will say so...as is my rights! If it were known that, if you are caught, after burglary of a mosque, they chopped your hand off, whom would be that stupid to do that? It is, at the very least, an interesting concept for discussion. as ever, feel free to make my comment appear, completely negative. to show that you have less respect of ME, rather than the words that I write.[/p][/quote]If the mosque hadn't have been built where it was then he would not have been tempted to burgle it so I think the blame has to lie with the people that decided to build a mosque where it was built, therefore, it is your own fault the mosque was burgled!!! As the mosque was built on British Land and not Islamic land the laws of sharia do not apply! If you so wish the sharia laws to be allowed to deal with the burglary of a mosque then go build it on Islamic land in any of the Islamic countries and wait for it to be burgled. Rumpole
  • Score: 12

5:27pm Fri 14 Mar 14

Rumpole says...

woolywords wrote:
@LT,
Why aren't we allowed to comment on the burglary of the Accrington mosque?
Personally, I'd have seen the man jailed, as mosques are the equivalent places as to churches, consecrated grounds, and therefore, should incur a greater penalty than commercial or domestic premises.
Cathedrals were once places of sanctuary, just as mosques are places of sanctity, today. To treat a mosque as a lesser place is, in my opinion, completely wrong, and needs addressing by the courts.
However, what if I thought upon religious lines...
He stole from a mosque..
There are ayats and hadiths about attacking mosques, that few are aware of, through ignorance. There could even be a case for a mosque raising a writ of habeas corpus, in it's original sense, produce the body. Where the culprit is taken onto that land and becoming subject to it's laws.
Just because Christian Bishops defer to Criminal from Canonical Law, doesn't mean that, to any right thinking man, that Muslims cannot make an application, via writ of Habeas Corpus, for the criminal, to expose them to Shariah Law.
It may come as a complete shock to some that I write in this way but we have to respect our places of worship or else we fall into complete disarray.
The Accrington man should be very grateful that he was not handed over to that mosque, for judgement by a convened Shariah Courts of the elders, as he would have been in for a nasty surprise, at their punishments for this crime.
Don't look at me to defend him...
I enjoy reading our books, from all cultures, and nit-picking at all. So, if I possess the readings, to know that he should have been treated better, by a Shariah Courts, I will say so...as is my rights!
If it were known that, if you are caught, after burglary of a mosque, they chopped your hand off, whom would be that stupid to do that?
It is, at the very least, an interesting concept for discussion.


as ever, feel free to make my comment appear, completely negative.
to show that you have less respect of ME, rather than the words that I write.
If the mosque hadn't have been built where it was then he would not have been tempted to burgle it so I think the blame has to lie with the people that decided to build a mosque where it was built, therefore, it is your own fault the mosque was burgled!!!

As the mosque was built on British Land and not Islamic land the laws of sharia do not apply!

If you so wish the sharia laws to be allowed to deal with the burglary of a mosque then go build it on Islamic land in any of the Islamic countries and wait for it to be burgled.
[quote][p][bold]woolywords[/bold] wrote: @LT, Why aren't we allowed to comment on the burglary of the Accrington mosque? Personally, I'd have seen the man jailed, as mosques are the equivalent places as to churches, consecrated grounds, and therefore, should incur a greater penalty than commercial or domestic premises. Cathedrals were once places of sanctuary, just as mosques are places of sanctity, today. To treat a mosque as a lesser place is, in my opinion, completely wrong, and needs addressing by the courts. However, what if I thought upon religious lines... He stole from a mosque.. There are ayats and hadiths about attacking mosques, that few are aware of, through ignorance. There could even be a case for a mosque raising a writ of habeas corpus, in it's original sense, produce the body. Where the culprit is taken onto that land and becoming subject to it's laws. Just because Christian Bishops defer to Criminal from Canonical Law, doesn't mean that, to any right thinking man, that Muslims cannot make an application, via writ of Habeas Corpus, for the criminal, to expose them to Shariah Law. It may come as a complete shock to some that I write in this way but we have to respect our places of worship or else we fall into complete disarray. The Accrington man should be very grateful that he was not handed over to that mosque, for judgement by a convened Shariah Courts of the elders, as he would have been in for a nasty surprise, at their punishments for this crime. Don't look at me to defend him... I enjoy reading our books, from all cultures, and nit-picking at all. So, if I possess the readings, to know that he should have been treated better, by a Shariah Courts, I will say so...as is my rights! If it were known that, if you are caught, after burglary of a mosque, they chopped your hand off, whom would be that stupid to do that? It is, at the very least, an interesting concept for discussion. as ever, feel free to make my comment appear, completely negative. to show that you have less respect of ME, rather than the words that I write.[/p][/quote]If the mosque hadn't have been built where it was then he would not have been tempted to burgle it so I think the blame has to lie with the people that decided to build a mosque where it was built, therefore, it is your own fault the mosque was burgled!!! As the mosque was built on British Land and not Islamic land the laws of sharia do not apply! If you so wish the sharia laws to be allowed to deal with the burglary of a mosque then go build it on Islamic land in any of the Islamic countries and wait for it to be burgled. Rumpole
  • Score: 6

6:30pm Fri 14 Mar 14

mmcampbell says...

woolywords wrote:
@LT,
Why aren't we allowed to comment on the burglary of the Accrington mosque?
Personally, I'd have seen the man jailed, as mosques are the equivalent places as to churches, consecrated grounds, and therefore, should incur a greater penalty than commercial or domestic premises.
Cathedrals were once places of sanctuary, just as mosques are places of sanctity, today. To treat a mosque as a lesser place is, in my opinion, completely wrong, and needs addressing by the courts.
However, what if I thought upon religious lines...
He stole from a mosque..
There are ayats and hadiths about attacking mosques, that few are aware of, through ignorance. There could even be a case for a mosque raising a writ of habeas corpus, in it's original sense, produce the body. Where the culprit is taken onto that land and becoming subject to it's laws.
Just because Christian Bishops defer to Criminal from Canonical Law, doesn't mean that, to any right thinking man, that Muslims cannot make an application, via writ of Habeas Corpus, for the criminal, to expose them to Shariah Law.
It may come as a complete shock to some that I write in this way but we have to respect our places of worship or else we fall into complete disarray.
The Accrington man should be very grateful that he was not handed over to that mosque, for judgement by a convened Shariah Courts of the elders, as he would have been in for a nasty surprise, at their punishments for this crime.
Don't look at me to defend him...
I enjoy reading our books, from all cultures, and nit-picking at all. So, if I possess the readings, to know that he should have been treated better, by a Shariah Courts, I will say so...as is my rights!
If it were known that, if you are caught, after burglary of a mosque, they chopped your hand off, whom would be that stupid to do that?
It is, at the very least, an interesting concept for discussion.


as ever, feel free to make my comment appear, completely negative.
to show that you have less respect of ME, rather than the words that I write.
What a nob!
[quote][p][bold]woolywords[/bold] wrote: @LT, Why aren't we allowed to comment on the burglary of the Accrington mosque? Personally, I'd have seen the man jailed, as mosques are the equivalent places as to churches, consecrated grounds, and therefore, should incur a greater penalty than commercial or domestic premises. Cathedrals were once places of sanctuary, just as mosques are places of sanctity, today. To treat a mosque as a lesser place is, in my opinion, completely wrong, and needs addressing by the courts. However, what if I thought upon religious lines... He stole from a mosque.. There are ayats and hadiths about attacking mosques, that few are aware of, through ignorance. There could even be a case for a mosque raising a writ of habeas corpus, in it's original sense, produce the body. Where the culprit is taken onto that land and becoming subject to it's laws. Just because Christian Bishops defer to Criminal from Canonical Law, doesn't mean that, to any right thinking man, that Muslims cannot make an application, via writ of Habeas Corpus, for the criminal, to expose them to Shariah Law. It may come as a complete shock to some that I write in this way but we have to respect our places of worship or else we fall into complete disarray. The Accrington man should be very grateful that he was not handed over to that mosque, for judgement by a convened Shariah Courts of the elders, as he would have been in for a nasty surprise, at their punishments for this crime. Don't look at me to defend him... I enjoy reading our books, from all cultures, and nit-picking at all. So, if I possess the readings, to know that he should have been treated better, by a Shariah Courts, I will say so...as is my rights! If it were known that, if you are caught, after burglary of a mosque, they chopped your hand off, whom would be that stupid to do that? It is, at the very least, an interesting concept for discussion. as ever, feel free to make my comment appear, completely negative. to show that you have less respect of ME, rather than the words that I write.[/p][/quote]What a nob! mmcampbell
  • Score: 5

7:07pm Fri 14 Mar 14

nice person says...

mmcampbell wrote:
woolywords wrote:
@LT,
Why aren't we allowed to comment on the burglary of the Accrington mosque?
Personally, I'd have seen the man jailed, as mosques are the equivalent places as to churches, consecrated grounds, and therefore, should incur a greater penalty than commercial or domestic premises.
Cathedrals were once places of sanctuary, just as mosques are places of sanctity, today. To treat a mosque as a lesser place is, in my opinion, completely wrong, and needs addressing by the courts.
However, what if I thought upon religious lines...
He stole from a mosque..
There are ayats and hadiths about attacking mosques, that few are aware of, through ignorance. There could even be a case for a mosque raising a writ of habeas corpus, in it's original sense, produce the body. Where the culprit is taken onto that land and becoming subject to it's laws.
Just because Christian Bishops defer to Criminal from Canonical Law, doesn't mean that, to any right thinking man, that Muslims cannot make an application, via writ of Habeas Corpus, for the criminal, to expose them to Shariah Law.
It may come as a complete shock to some that I write in this way but we have to respect our places of worship or else we fall into complete disarray.
The Accrington man should be very grateful that he was not handed over to that mosque, for judgement by a convened Shariah Courts of the elders, as he would have been in for a nasty surprise, at their punishments for this crime.
Don't look at me to defend him...
I enjoy reading our books, from all cultures, and nit-picking at all. So, if I possess the readings, to know that he should have been treated better, by a Shariah Courts, I will say so...as is my rights!
If it were known that, if you are caught, after burglary of a mosque, they chopped your hand off, whom would be that stupid to do that?
It is, at the very least, an interesting concept for discussion.


as ever, feel free to make my comment appear, completely negative.
to show that you have less respect of ME, rather than the words that I write.
What a nob!
We live under common law rule,Sharia law is a muslim belief,not a countrys.The land the mosque stands on is owned by the crown,and so shall he be judged.
[quote][p][bold]mmcampbell[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woolywords[/bold] wrote: @LT, Why aren't we allowed to comment on the burglary of the Accrington mosque? Personally, I'd have seen the man jailed, as mosques are the equivalent places as to churches, consecrated grounds, and therefore, should incur a greater penalty than commercial or domestic premises. Cathedrals were once places of sanctuary, just as mosques are places of sanctity, today. To treat a mosque as a lesser place is, in my opinion, completely wrong, and needs addressing by the courts. However, what if I thought upon religious lines... He stole from a mosque.. There are ayats and hadiths about attacking mosques, that few are aware of, through ignorance. There could even be a case for a mosque raising a writ of habeas corpus, in it's original sense, produce the body. Where the culprit is taken onto that land and becoming subject to it's laws. Just because Christian Bishops defer to Criminal from Canonical Law, doesn't mean that, to any right thinking man, that Muslims cannot make an application, via writ of Habeas Corpus, for the criminal, to expose them to Shariah Law. It may come as a complete shock to some that I write in this way but we have to respect our places of worship or else we fall into complete disarray. The Accrington man should be very grateful that he was not handed over to that mosque, for judgement by a convened Shariah Courts of the elders, as he would have been in for a nasty surprise, at their punishments for this crime. Don't look at me to defend him... I enjoy reading our books, from all cultures, and nit-picking at all. So, if I possess the readings, to know that he should have been treated better, by a Shariah Courts, I will say so...as is my rights! If it were known that, if you are caught, after burglary of a mosque, they chopped your hand off, whom would be that stupid to do that? It is, at the very least, an interesting concept for discussion. as ever, feel free to make my comment appear, completely negative. to show that you have less respect of ME, rather than the words that I write.[/p][/quote]What a nob![/p][/quote]We live under common law rule,Sharia law is a muslim belief,not a countrys.The land the mosque stands on is owned by the crown,and so shall he be judged. nice person
  • Score: 6

7:10pm Fri 14 Mar 14

Just an observer says...

Akmal has a record for drugs trafficking, with previous convictions for supplying heroin and cocaine.
Mohammed Nawaz, for Akmal, said he had been an addict for some time and hadworked up a debt. Hewas of limited intellect, was acting under instructions.
All this (above) = 6 years, what an abismal sentence. should all receive 2years for every £1 worth of the stuff.
Akmal has a record for drugs trafficking, with previous convictions for supplying heroin and cocaine. Mohammed Nawaz, for Akmal, said he had been an addict for some time and hadworked up a debt. Hewas of limited intellect, was acting under instructions. All this (above) = 6 years, what an abismal sentence. should all receive 2years for every £1 worth of the stuff. Just an observer
  • Score: 8

11:10am Sat 15 Mar 14

Saj143 says...

woolywords wrote:
@LT,
Why aren't we allowed to comment on the burglary of the Accrington mosque?
Personally, I'd have seen the man jailed, as mosques are the equivalent places as to churches, consecrated grounds, and therefore, should incur a greater penalty than commercial or domestic premises.
Cathedrals were once places of sanctuary, just as mosques are places of sanctity, today. To treat a mosque as a lesser place is, in my opinion, completely wrong, and needs addressing by the courts.
However, what if I thought upon religious lines...
He stole from a mosque..
There are ayats and hadiths about attacking mosques, that few are aware of, through ignorance. There could even be a case for a mosque raising a writ of habeas corpus, in it's original sense, produce the body. Where the culprit is taken onto that land and becoming subject to it's laws.
Just because Christian Bishops defer to Criminal from Canonical Law, doesn't mean that, to any right thinking man, that Muslims cannot make an application, via writ of Habeas Corpus, for the criminal, to expose them to Shariah Law.
It may come as a complete shock to some that I write in this way but we have to respect our places of worship or else we fall into complete disarray.
The Accrington man should be very grateful that he was not handed over to that mosque, for judgement by a convened Shariah Courts of the elders, as he would have been in for a nasty surprise, at their punishments for this crime.
Don't look at me to defend him...
I enjoy reading our books, from all cultures, and nit-picking at all. So, if I possess the readings, to know that he should have been treated better, by a Shariah Courts, I will say so...as is my rights!
If it were known that, if you are caught, after burglary of a mosque, they chopped your hand off, whom would be that stupid to do that?
It is, at the very least, an interesting concept for discussion.


as ever, feel free to make my comment appear, completely negative.
to show that you have less respect of ME, rather than the words that I write.
What a 5hit. Woolywords tries and makes it a race story. Good on all on here not to take the prats bait and stooping to his dirty level.

Shame on you wooly.
[quote][p][bold]woolywords[/bold] wrote: @LT, Why aren't we allowed to comment on the burglary of the Accrington mosque? Personally, I'd have seen the man jailed, as mosques are the equivalent places as to churches, consecrated grounds, and therefore, should incur a greater penalty than commercial or domestic premises. Cathedrals were once places of sanctuary, just as mosques are places of sanctity, today. To treat a mosque as a lesser place is, in my opinion, completely wrong, and needs addressing by the courts. However, what if I thought upon religious lines... He stole from a mosque.. There are ayats and hadiths about attacking mosques, that few are aware of, through ignorance. There could even be a case for a mosque raising a writ of habeas corpus, in it's original sense, produce the body. Where the culprit is taken onto that land and becoming subject to it's laws. Just because Christian Bishops defer to Criminal from Canonical Law, doesn't mean that, to any right thinking man, that Muslims cannot make an application, via writ of Habeas Corpus, for the criminal, to expose them to Shariah Law. It may come as a complete shock to some that I write in this way but we have to respect our places of worship or else we fall into complete disarray. The Accrington man should be very grateful that he was not handed over to that mosque, for judgement by a convened Shariah Courts of the elders, as he would have been in for a nasty surprise, at their punishments for this crime. Don't look at me to defend him... I enjoy reading our books, from all cultures, and nit-picking at all. So, if I possess the readings, to know that he should have been treated better, by a Shariah Courts, I will say so...as is my rights! If it were known that, if you are caught, after burglary of a mosque, they chopped your hand off, whom would be that stupid to do that? It is, at the very least, an interesting concept for discussion. as ever, feel free to make my comment appear, completely negative. to show that you have less respect of ME, rather than the words that I write.[/p][/quote]What a 5hit. Woolywords tries and makes it a race story. Good on all on here not to take the prats bait and stooping to his dirty level. Shame on you wooly. Saj143
  • Score: 7

5:14pm Sun 16 Mar 14

sen c b l says...

On a different note why is this paper not reporting the arrest and court appearance of 13 Saxon paedophiles for fiddling with little girls?

What's up moron LT, not Asians are there!?
On a different note why is this paper not reporting the arrest and court appearance of 13 Saxon paedophiles for fiddling with little girls? What's up moron LT, not Asians are there!? sen c b l
  • Score: 0

8:05pm Sun 16 Mar 14

Ken dodds cousin says...

should have played usual line...."hes from a respectable,religiou
s family and there deeply ashamed!usual works,slap on wrists and off to Pakistan for another collection,then ferry the deals about in a taxi.......meanwhile 3/4 of Asians complain about allied occupation of Afghanistan,because there smack isnt getting through......
should have played usual line...."hes from a respectable,religiou s family and there deeply ashamed!usual works,slap on wrists and off to Pakistan for another collection,then ferry the deals about in a taxi.......meanwhile 3/4 of Asians complain about allied occupation of Afghanistan,because there smack isnt getting through...... Ken dodds cousin
  • Score: 0

8:33pm Sun 16 Mar 14

zabby says...

This drug has destroyed all fabric of society right across Europe,the money made funds terrorists to attack us,there's only one penalty for these death dealers,but we haven't got the bottle to dish it out,human rights for you
This drug has destroyed all fabric of society right across Europe,the money made funds terrorists to attack us,there's only one penalty for these death dealers,but we haven't got the bottle to dish it out,human rights for you zabby
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree