Monday, July 10, 2017

'Attention-seeking' fat slob is found guilty of falsely accusing 15 men of rape and sexual assault after claiming she was a lesbian

Particularly in Britain, feminists fume at the low percentage of rape claims that result in a conviction.  They view this as a fault of lazy or biased police and prosecutors.  As a result, police and prosecutors are under pressure to produce "results" and to mount prosecutions even when the prospect of convictions is slight.  That results in a lot of innocent men being traumatized even when they are acquitted. 

False rape accusations are frequent in Britain so it is amazing when men are arrested, tried and even convicted purely on the say-so of a woman.  Feminist criticisms have put police under huge pressure to get convictions so they clearly skip basic precautions in their responses to many accusations

A fantasist who made up bogus rape and sex assault claims against 15 men in three years just for 'attention' today finally faces jail for her 'appalling lies'.

Jemma Beale claimed to be a lesbian with 'no desire' to sleep with men and her bogus complaints to police led to Mahad Cassim serving two years in jail.

She told police Mr Cassim raped her after offering to give her a lift home - but in fact she got out of the car and told him: 'Get your pants down.'

Beale, from Middlesex, was even then awarded £11,000 in compensation while Mr Cassim languished behind bars.

She would even injure herself and use self-inflicted cuts and bruises against the 15 victims she falsely accused of sex attacks - including one who fled the country with his life in tatters.

The 25-year-old insisted she had been raped or attacked but after a five-week trial at Southwark Crown Court a jury of six men and five women took eight hours and 45 minutes to find her guilty of perjury and perverting the course of justice.

Judge Nicholas Loraine-Smith ordered psychiatric reports and referred to Beale's 'attention-seeking, which is what this case is all about'.

He told her: 'You have been convicted of all of these matters. They are very serious indeed, counts one to four most particularly. 'Somebody went to prison for a long time as a result of your perjured evidence. 'I am going to remand you in custody and I will be fully informed of your true psychiatric state when you return in August.'

Jemma Beale's bogus calls to police led to Mahad Cassim serving two years in jail for having sex with her after she claimed to be a lesbian with 'no desire' for men

Beale made her first complaint on the morning of 26 November 2010, when she told police she had been raped by Mr Cassim the previous night.

Jurors heard the 37-year-old Somalian came to the UK in 2002, aged 23, after a short stint living in Sweden where he also served in the military as part of the peace-keeping corps.

Here are the key dates:

November 26 2010 – Told police she had been raped the night before by a man after getting a lift in his car. He was subsequently jailed and later released after an appeal.

July 7 2012 – claimed two separate sexual assaults, one by a man in The Windsor Castle pub in Hounslow, the second by the same man and three other men near the car park of a nearby medical centre. The man in the pub fled the country after being charged. CCTV showed he had not assaulted Beale, she had attacked him. The charges were later dropped.

CCTV from the medical centre suggested the gang attack could not have happened as she claimed and forensic evidence later showed she had self-harmed using wire from a hanging flower basket to fake the sexual assault.

September 2 2013 – reported another sexual assault, five days earlier, outside her home in Addlestone, Surrey. No-one was arrested or charged.

November 17 2013 – reported a gang rape by four of a group of eight men in the street in Feltham. Two men she identified were arrested, but not charged.

Beale and Mr Cassim accepted that he offered her a lift home which she accepted. But he stopped the car and Beale directed him to a discreet alleyway.

'We drove for about ten minutes and while we were in the car we were talking and then she came and gave me a rub on my knuckles, my hand,' Mr Cassim said. 'She was asking me kind of questions, whilst rubbing my knuckles, asking, obviously about sex.'

He added: 'I said 'Are you sure?' and she said yes - I asked three times 'Are you sure?' - and said OK.

Mr Cassim said they got out of the car. 'Then all of a sudden, after about three yards she told me to pull off my underwear.'

Mr Cassim was tried for rape at Isleworth Crown Court in December 2011. A retrial then took place in January 2012 in front of a fresh jury and he was jailed for seven years.

In a victim impact statement Beale described the 'devastating' effect the 'rape' had on her. 'I feel that any sentence he receives will never reflect the life sentence that he gave me,' she said.

Mr Cassim served two years because of the 'grave injustice' before he was released.

Beale then complained to police she was the victim of two sexual assaults in July 2012, one of which involved 'sexual violence of a most serious kind'.

She later complained to police she was groped by a stranger, Noam Shahzad, in a pub in July 2012, before he took part in a gang rape on her.

Beale even injured herself to back up her claims that she had been assaulted with barbed wire.

Mr Shahzad skipped bail and fled the country after being charged with sexual assault.

Beale then fabricated similar allegations against six other men in 2013.

She claimed two strangers sexually assaulted her close to her home in Ashford, Middlesex, before she was put through another gang rape attack by four others two months later.

Two of the men identified by Beale - Luke Williams, 28, and 25-year-old Steven McCormack - were arrested and interviewed but never charged.

She claimed Mr Shahzad groped her at The Windsor Castle pub, in Hounslow, before the same man took part in a sickening gang attack in the car-park of a nearby medical centre using barbed wire.

Crime scene examiners recovered a number of items from a small gap between the east side of the centre and the brick wall perimeter.

Among those was a wire basket containing a small amount of Beale's DNA along with one of her earrings.

Beale claimed the sample was left as she urinated there but prosecutors claimed the basket was used to cause the 'self-inflicted' injuries.

'The group of men did not exist,' said prosecutor John Price, QC.

Beale reported another serious sexual assault, this time by two men, on September 2, 2013 which she claimed it had happened five days earlier outside of her home.

Although neither alleged attacker was ever identified she said one of the pair was also involved the previous attack in July.

Again the entire incident was 'a grotesque invention'.

Beale reported another attack in Feltham, west London, two months later, on 17 November.

'She described a gang rape at night in a street of the most appalling kind,' said Mr Price. 'She alleged that she had been raped one after the other by four of a group of eight men, and she identified two of them as Luke Williams and Steven McCormack.

'Both of those men were arrested by police later that same day.'

Beale had spent the evening with Mr Williams and others at a house party, and that she had left willingly with him to go and get alcohol and cigarettes.

She claimed he took her to a garage where he arranged for a Mr McCormack and others to attack her, and that he was armed with a machete.

In the days before the alleged assault, Mr McCormack said Beale had threatened to get him into trouble with the police.

'Each of those reports made by Jemma Beale to the police is alleged by the prosecution in this case as being entirely false,' said Mr Price. 'She had not been raped.

'Nor had she been sexually assaulted on any of these occasions.'

She was arrested in June 2014 and eventually charged in March of last year.

Beale told the court she had been bullied at school for being fat and she insisted she was a lesbian and said she had been in several relationships with women. 'I'm not going to go to a man I don't know and ask him for sex,' she insisted, adding: 'I ain't bisexual at all.'

She was remanded in custody ahead of sentence at Southwark Crown Court on 24 August.


I’m a Pediatrician. How Transgender Ideology Has Infiltrated My Field and Produced Large-Scale Child Abuse

Transgender politics have taken Americans by surprise, and caught some lawmakers off guard.

Just a few short years ago, not many could have imagined a high-profile showdown over transgender men and women’s access to single-sex bathrooms in North Carolina.

But transgender ideology is not just infecting our laws. It is intruding into the lives of the most innocent among us—children—and with the apparent growing support of the professional medical community.

As explained in my 2016 peer reviewed article, “Gender Dysphoria in Children and Suppression of Debate,” professionals who dare to question the unscientific party line of supporting gender transition therapy will find themselves maligned and out of a job.

I speak as someone intimately familiar with the pediatric and behavioral health communities and their practices. I am a mother of four who served 17 years as a board certified general pediatrician with a focus in child behavioral health prior to leaving clinical practice in 2012.

For the last 12 years, I have been a board member and researcher for the American College of Pediatricians, and for the last three years I have served as its president.

I also sat on the board of directors for the Alliance for Therapeutic Choice and Scientific Integrity from 2010 to 2015. This organization of physicians and mental health professionals defends the right of patients to receive psychotherapy for sexual identity conflicts that is in line with their deeply held values based upon science and medical ethics.

I have witnessed an upending of the medical consensus on the nature of gender identity. What doctors once treated as a mental illness, the medical community now largely affirms and even promotes as normal.

Here’s a look at some of the changes.

The New Normal

Pediatric “gender clinics” are considered elite centers for affirming children who are distressed by their biological sex. This distressful condition, once dubbed gender identity disorder, was renamed “gender dysphoria” in 2013.

In 2014, there were 24 of these gender clinics, clustered chiefly along the east coast and in California. One year later, there were 40 across the nation.

With 215 pediatric residency programs now training future pediatricians in a transition-affirming protocol and treating gender-dysphoric children accordingly, gender clinics are bound to proliferate further.

Last summer, the federal government stated that it would not require Medicare and Medicaid to cover transition-affirming procedures for children or adults because medical experts at the Department of Health and Human Services found the risks were often too high, and the benefits too unclear.

Undeterred by these findings, the World Professional Association for Transgender Health has pressed ahead, claiming—without any evidence—that these procedures are “safe.”

Two leading pediatric associations—the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Pediatric Endocrine Society—have followed in lockstep, endorsing the transition affirmation approach even as the latter organization concedes within its own guidelines that the transition-affirming protocol is based on low evidence.

They even admit that the only strong evidence regarding this approach is its potential health risks to children.

The transition-affirming view holds that children who “consistently and persistently insist” that they are not the gender associated with their biological sex are innately transgender.

(The fact that in normal life and in psychiatry, anyone who “consistently and persistently insists” on anything else contrary to physical reality is considered either confused or delusional is conveniently ignored.)

The transition-affirming protocol tells parents to treat their children as the gender they desire, and to place them on puberty blockers around age 11 or 12 if they are gender dysphoric.

If by age 16, the children still insist that they are trapped in the wrong body, they are placed on cross-sex hormones, and biological girls may obtain a double mastectomy.

So-called “bottom surgeries,” or genital reassignment surgeries, are not recommended before age 18, though some surgeons have recently argued against this restriction.

The transition-affirming approach has been embraced by public institutions in media, education, and our legal system, and is now recommended by most national medical organizations.

There are exceptions to this movement, however, in addition to the American College of Pediatricians and the Alliance for Therapeutic Choice. These include the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, the Christian Medical & Dental Associations, the Catholic Medical Association, and the LGBT-affirming Youth Gender Professionals.

The transgender movement has gained legs in the medical community and in our culture by offering a deeply flawed narrative. The scientific research and facts tell a different story.

Here are some of those basic facts.

1. Twin studies prove no one is born “trapped in the body of the wrong sex.”

Some brain studies have suggested that some are born with a transgendered brain. But these studies are seriously flawed and prove no such thing.

Virtually everything about human beings is influenced by our DNA, but very few traits are hardwired from birth. All human behavior is a composite of varying degrees for nature and nurture.

Researchers routinely conduct twin studies to discern which factors (biological or nonbiological) contribute more to the expression of a particular trait. The best designed twin studies are those with the greatest number of subjects.

Identical twins contain 100 percent of the same DNA from conception and are exposed to the same prenatal hormones. So if genes and/or prenatal hormones contributed significantly to transgenderism, we should expect both twins to identify as transgender close to 100 percent of the time.

Skin color, for example, is determined by genes alone. Therefore, identical twins have the same skin color 100 percent of the time.

But in the largest study of twin transgender adults, published by Dr. Milton Diamond in 2013, only 28 percent of the identical twins both identified as transgender. Seventy-two percent of the time, they differed. (Diamond’s study reported 20 percent identifying as transgender, but his actual data demonstrate a 28 percent figure, as I note here in footnote 19.)

That 28 percent of identical twins both identified as transgender suggests a minimal biological predisposition, which means transgenderism will not manifest itself without outside nonbiological factors also impacting the individual during his lifetime.

The fact that the identical twins differed 72 percent of the time is highly significant because it means that at least 72 percent of what contributes to transgenderism in one twin consists of nonshared experiences after birth—that is, factors not rooted in biology.

Studies like this one prove that the belief in “innate gender identity”—the idea that “feminized” or “masculinized” brains can be trapped in the wrong body from before birth—is a myth that has no basis in science.

2. Gender identity is malleable, especially in young children.

Even the American Psychological Association’s Handbook of Sexuality and Psychology admits that prior to the widespread promotion of transition affirmation, 75 to 95 percent of pre-pubertal children who were distressed by their biological sex eventually outgrew that distress. The vast majority came to accept their biological sex by late adolescence after passing naturally through puberty.

But with transition affirmation now increasing in Western society, the number of children claiming distress over their gender—and their persistence over time—has dramatically increased. For example, the Gender Identity Development Service in the United Kingdom alone has seen a 2,000 percent increase in referrals since 2009.

3. Puberty blockers for gender dysphoria have not been proven safe.

Puberty blockers have been studied and found safe for the treatment of a medical disorder in children called precocious puberty (caused by the abnormal and unhealthy early secretion of a child’s pubertal hormones).

However, as a groundbreaking paper in The New Atlantis points out, we cannot infer from these studies whether or not these blockers are safe in physiologically normal children with gender dysphoria.

The authors note that there is some evidence for decreased bone mineralization, meaning an increased risk of bone fractures as young adults, potential increased risk of obesity and testicular cancer in boys, and an unknown impact upon psychological and cognitive development.

With regard to the latter, while we currently don’t have any extensive, long-term studies of children placed on blockers for gender dysphoria, studies conducted on adults from the past decade give cause for concern.

For example, in 2006 and 2007, the journal Psychoneuroendocrinology reported brain abnormalities in the area of memory and executive functioning among adult women who received blockers for gynecologic reasons. Similarly, many studies of men treated for prostate cancer with blockers also suggest the possibility of significant cognitive decline.

4. There are no cases in the scientific literature of gender-dysphoric children discontinuing blockers.

Most, if not all, children on puberty blockers go on to take cross-sex hormones (estrogen for biological boys, testosterone for biological girls). The only study to date to have followed pre-pubertal children who were socially affirmed and placed on blockers at a young age found that 100 percent of them claimed a transgender identity and chose cross-sex hormones.

This suggests that the medical protocol itself may lead children to identify as transgender.

There is an obvious self-fulfilling effect in helping children impersonate the opposite sex both biologically and socially. This is far from benign, since taking puberty blockers at age 12 or younger, followed by cross-sex hormones, sterilizes a child.

5. Cross-sex hormones are associated with dangerous health risks.

From studies of adults we know that the risks of cross-sex hormones include, but are not limited to, cardiac disease, high blood pressure, blood clots, strokes, diabetes, and cancers.

6. Neuroscience shows that adolescents lack the adult capacity needed for risk assessment.

Scientific data show that people under the age of 21 have less capacity to assess risks. There is a serious ethical problem in allowing irreversible, life-changing procedures to be performed on minors who are too young themselves to give valid consent.

7. There is no proof that affirmation prevents suicide in children.

Advocates of the transition-affirming protocol allege that suicide is the direct and inevitable consequence of withholding social affirmation and biological alterations from a gender-dysphoric child. In other words, those who do not endorse the transition-affirming protocol are essentially condemning gender-dysphoric children to suicide.

Yet as noted earlier, prior to the widespread promotion of transition affirmation, 75 to 95 percent of gender-dysphoric youth ended up happy with their biological sex after simply passing through puberty.

In addition, contrary to the claim of activists, there is no evidence that harassment and discrimination, let alone lack of affirmation, are the primary cause of suicide among any minority group. In fact, at least one study from 2008 found perceived discrimination by LGBT-identified individuals not to be causative.

Over 90 percent of people who commit suicide have a diagnosed mental disorder, and there is no evidence that gender-dysphoric children who commit suicide are any different. Many gender dysphoric children simply need therapy to get to the root of their depression, which very well may be the same problem triggering the gender dysphoria.

8. Transition-affirming protocol has not solved the problem of transgender suicide.

Adults who undergo sex reassignment—even in Sweden, which is among the most LGBT-affirming countries—have a suicide rate nearly 20 times greater than that of the general population. Clearly, sex reassignment is not the solution to gender dysphoria.

Bottom Line: Transition-Affirming Protocol Is Child Abuse

The crux of the matter is that while the transition-affirming movement purports to help children, it is inflicting a grave injustice on them and their nondysphoric peers.

These professionals are using the myth that people are born transgender to justify engaging in massive, uncontrolled, and unconsented experimentation on children who have a psychological condition that would otherwise resolve after puberty in the vast majority of cases.

Today’s institutions that promote transition affirmation are pushing children to impersonate the opposite sex, sending many of them down the path of puberty blockers, sterilization, the removal of healthy body parts, and untold psychological damage.

These harms constitute nothing less than institutionalized child abuse. Sound ethics demand an immediate end to the use of pubertal suppression, cross-sex hormones, and sex reassignment surgeries in children and adolescents, as well as an end to promoting gender ideology via school curricula and legislative policies.

It is time for our nation’s leaders and the silent majority of health professionals to learn exactly what is happening to our children, and unite to take action.


Want a new passport? Then be prepared to unfasten your trousers:

PETER HITCHENS says he was presumed guilty at his appointment

The terror threat is an excuse for our Government to get above itself. It does so in many ways, but I will cite here my own personal experience of dealing with the British state.

For dull but sensible reasons, I needed to go to Her Majesty’s Passport Office in person, to get a new passport. A charming official had explained to me on the phone what I needed to do, in some detail.

The only hard part was the fee – about what I might expect to pay for a celebratory dinner at a good restaurant, or a tough morning at the dentist.

Both restaurant and dentist would have taken care to treat me nicely – a courteous welcome, somewhere comfortable to sit, a general feeling that they wanted my business.

Not so HMPO. I had imagined, at this price, a quiet visit to a pleasant office, a swift handover of documents and a return a few hours later to collect my passport.

Cautious as ever, I arrived early. That was when I began to get the picture.

I could not even get into the building unless I went through something similar to airport security – that is, a procedure rather like reception at a prison.

A haggard queue of defeated, passive people curled round a bleak ante-room. An official told me I was too early to join it. Come back later.

So I did. Fifteen minutes before my appointment (I had been told I would lose my large fee if I failed to show), I was motionless in that haggard queue.

The minutes ticked by. There was nobody to ask what was going on. Nothing happened.

At last, in a sudden unexplained rush, I was at the scanner.

‘Take off your belt!’ instructed a stern person.

My belt? This is an office block, not an aeroplane.

Trousers slipping, I shuffled into the next room trying to gather together my possessions and documents, and keeping my rage to myself lest I was flung out for having a bad attitude, and deprived of my costly slot.

Then there was some chaos caused by a computer glitch. And finally, trousers fully re-secured, I was at a desk. I no longer had any idea what time it was.

The official glared at my photos, taken three days before by London’s best and longest-established passport photographers.

‘I’m not sure these meet the requirement,’ she snapped, but declined to explain why.

There was a nervous period while she went away to check with higher authority. The same thing happened with a letter of support written to the exact dictation of an HMPO official.

‘The wording on this isn’t right,’ she complained.

In the end, the objections vanished. And four hours later, I collected the passport – not the elegant, understated symbol of a free man’s liberty to travel that it used to be, but an odd, frivolous booklet whose pages are decorated with tourist sights, multicultural stuff, inventions, historical figures and emblems of the clapped-out ‘Cool Britannia’ era.

Perhaps it was the humourlessness that was worst of all, the lack of any kind of recognition that it is absurd to order people to unfasten their trousers to apply for a passport.

During the whole procedure I had been presumed guilty, treated as an object rather than a subject. Maybe the description on my passport should say ‘British Object’.

There was no real justification for any of it, just the general official fear of ‘terror’, which you must never, ever mock or question.

Their claim to protect us from that is about the only source of authority they have left, I suppose.


Australian creationist wins Grand Canyon row

An Australian geologist who believes­ the Bible is the literal word of God has claimed a historic­ legal victory in the US, following the settlement of his lawsuit against the administrat­ors of the Grand Canyon, who had refused to allow him to ­conduct research aimed at proving the story of the Great Flood.

Andrew Snelling, a Christian who has a PhD in geology from the University of Sydney, told The Australian he had been trying since 2013 to get a permit to collect­ rock samples for a peer-­reviewed, scientific research project­ within the Grand Canyon that would challenge the idea that the rock layers are millions of years old.

Dr Snelling lodged his lawsuit against park administrators with the US District Court in Arizona just days after US President ­Donald Trump signed an executive order promising protection of religious freedoms “from undue interference by the federal government”.

“The Grand Canyon is the gold standard for geologists,” Dr Snelling said.

“It’s important because it’s the largest and deepest canyon in the world. It’s accessible, not surround­ed by jungle. The walls are stacked like pancakes: shale, sandstone, limestone, mud. There are more rock layers exposed there than anywhere else.”

While most geologists believe that the Grand Canyon supports the theory that the earth is million­s of years old, Dr Snelling believes that evidence for the Bible story of creation may be found in those stacked layers. In 2013, he applied to collect 40 to 60 samples, each fist-sized, for a research project. “They turned me down because­ they didn’t like the question I was asking,” he said.

In emails obtained under Freedom of Information legislation, park officials criticised his Grand Canyon project as “inappropriate” and “outlandish”. One said it was “dead end creationist”.

Dr Snelling is employed by Answers in Genesis, a US-based Christian think tank established by fellow Australian Ken Ham, who has built a replica ark in ­Kentucky.

“What I’m saying, as a geologist, is that there are folds in those rocks, so were they still soft when they were laid down?” Dr Snelling said. “Because if it looks like it was still soft when it was formed, that implies there was a short period of time between the layering, not millions of years.”

When his application for a research­ permit was dismissed, he put in a Freedom of Information request. “The way they referred to me, and my beliefs, it was defam­atory,” he said. “My methodology was sound, but I was a Christian who had alternative views.”

Dr Snelling said he had withdrawn his lawsuit, after administrators agreed to grant the permit. Under the rules, the data he collects­ must be made available to other scientists.

“That’s fair enough,” he said. “I will provide the data to the park, to the public, and publish the results in scientific journals. Even if I don’t find the evidence I think I will find, it wouldn’t assault my core beliefs. We already have evidence that is consistent with a great flood that swept the world.

“The Australian Aborigines have stories about a great flood. You find similar stories in China. It’s all circumstantial but … I believe the Bible is a record given to us by God and what I read in the Bible really ­occurred.”



Political correctness is most pervasive in universities and colleges but I rarely report the  incidents concerned here as I have a separate blog for educational matters.

American "liberals" often deny being Leftists and say that they are very different from the Communist rulers of  other countries.  The only real difference, however, is how much power they have.  In America, their power is limited by democracy.  To see what they WOULD be like with more power, look at where they ARE already  very powerful: in America's educational system -- particularly in the universities and colleges.  They show there the same respect for free-speech and political diversity that Stalin did:  None.  So look to the colleges to see  what the whole country would be like if "liberals" had their way.  It would be a dictatorship.

For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, GREENIE WATCH,   EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and  DISSECTING LEFTISM.   My Home Pages are here or   here or   here.  Email me (John Ray) here


No comments: