It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
THE Muslim woman accused of lying about police trying to tear her burqa off has avoided jail - because her identity could not be proven.
Carnita Matthews, 47, from Woodbine, in Sydney's southwest, had been sentenced to six months in jail for making a deliberately false statement that a policeman tried to forcibly remove her burqa because he was a racist.
But judge Clive Jeffreys said yesterday he was not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that it was Mrs Matthews who made the racism accusation because the person who complained to police was wearing a burqa at the time.
More than a dozen Muslim supporters linked arms and began chanting "Allah Akbar" as they stormed out of Downing Centre Court with Mrs Matthews concealed behind them.
Tempers rose and they began jostling with police after several members of the group attacked cameramen.
It marked a stark difference from their behaviour minutes earlier, when they had quietly assembled outside the lifts for prayer shortly after the judge's decision.
Mrs Matthew's lawyer Stephen Hopper defended their actions saying: "They are obviously happy with the result and are expressing it in a way that is culturally appropriate to them."
Originally posted by InvisibleAlbatross
reply to post by badw0lf
"They" don't. There is no "they." Some Muslims do and it seems, from what we have in the article, that this woman did. Fortunately she is not in the majority.
Originally posted by lifeissacred
reply to post by Grey Magic
So you're saying we should ban balaclavas now? How about wigs and glasses because they can be used to hide our identity also? Should we all be forced to look directly into the CCTV cameras when we enter public places also just incase we might intend to do something illegal and we aren't properly identified?
What you have to understand is that by allowing one infringement on personal freedom you thereby justify any and all infringement on personal freedom.