17 year old British girl left to die in burning car by her 24 year old Muslim boyfriend
(Note: a commenter argues below that I am jumping to conclusions in attributing the perp’s behavior to Islam.)
Hey, I don’t look for stories like this. I innocently checked out the Mail, and this was he first article I saw. It gives no explanation of the man’s depraved homicidal behavior. The case reminds me of the Saudi girls whom the authorities kept from fleeing a burning school, I forget why they wouldn’t let them escape. Muslim men despise females and like to see them die. Also, go to the Mail to see the sad photos of the 17 year old girl who was “dating” a 24 year old Muslim man.
Girl left to die in blazing car after driver boyfriend told fire crews no one was inside
27th May 2009
A man left his girlfriend to burn to death in a car after he crashed into a tree, a court heard yesterday.
Waqas Arshad, 24, told emergency services there was nobody inside, despite knowing 17-year-old Emily Brady was trapped in the burning wreckage.
It was only as firefighters tackled the blaze that they realised the teenager was in the car, still strapped into the passenger seat.
Arshad, of Luton, pleaded guilty yesterday to causing death by careless driving while over the alcohol limit, and causing death by driving while uninsured.
Natalie Carter, prosecuting at Luton Crown Court, told the court Arshad lost control and crashed into a tree in Eversholt, Bedfordshire, at 3am on November 2 last year. But instead of calling for help, he got out of the car and did nothing.
Mrs Carter said: ‘After the collision it’s plain that Emily Brady was in the passenger seat; the defendant in the driver’s seat.
‘She did not die as a result of the injuries received in the collision, which included two broken vertebrae, but she died as a result of carbonisation.’
Miss Brady’s mother Patricia said after the hearing: ‘It was despicable behaviour to make no attempt to try and pull her out of the car.’
The court—packed with relatives of Miss Brady, who lived in Dunstable—heard how firefighters answering a call from a witness asked Arshad if there was anyone in the car. He told them ‘no’.
The couple had been together for about six months and had been out drinking together that night. It had been raining and the road surface was wet.
Mrs Carter said Arshad had failed to negotiate a right-hand turn on the country lane and crashed into a sycamore tree.
Emily Brady
Emily Brady
Emily Brady: The victim’s mother called Waqas Arshad’s behaviour ‘despicable’
The vehicle eventually came to a halt in a field and caught fire. She told the court that both had been wearing seat belts.
More…
* Mike Tyson ‘devastated’ after daughter, 4, dies in accident on treadmill
Yesterday, Judge John Bevan QC told Arshad a prison sentence was inevitable. He adjourned the case and remanded the defendant in custody until sentencing on June 19.
The court also heard that Arshad had been arrested for drink driving while on bail following the incident.
[end of article]
- end of initial entry -
Mike Berman writes:
“I forget why they wouldn’t let them escape.”
They didn’t have their shmatas on their heads at the time and it would have been too immodest for them to be seen by unrelated men in public.
A. Zarkov writes:
How was the boyfriend a Muslim? He was drunk and Islam forbids its adherents from consuming alcohol. Unless I’m missing something, this looks like a simple drunk driving incident. The driver might have been so intoxicated that he didn’t even realize his girlfriend was in the car.
I have driven on British roads from Bath to Inverness, and they can be treacherous. Many if not most were never even designed for cars and one encounters sharp turns and blind driveways that require quick reflexes to negotiate. It was 3 am, he was drunk and most probably tired. Criminal negligence.
LA replies:
You write:
“The driver might have been so intoxicated that he didn’t even realize his girlfriend was in the car.”
You mean he was driving back from a night out with his girlfriend, yet didn’t know she was with him in the car? Are you serious?
Here’s what the story says:
“Waqas Arshad, 24, told emergency services there was nobody inside, despite knowing 17-year-old Emily Brady was trapped in the burning wreckage.”
You write:
“How was the boyfriend a Muslim? He was drunk and Islam forbids its adherents from consuming alcohol.”
What is your reasoning here? That if he was not following Islamic law, therefore he’s not a Muslim and it’s inappropriate to describe him as a Muslim or speculate on Islamic roots of his behavior? You sound like the Muslims who say things like: “Terrorism is forbidden by Islam. Therefore the people who destroyed the WTC are not Muslims and it’s slander to say that this act was done by Muslims.” By this reasoning a Muslim can never do wrong and can never be held to account for doing anything wrong, since if he does anything wrong, he is not a Muslim. (Another of Muhammad’s genius innovations that made him the successful Hitler.)
You write:
“It was 3 am, he was drunk and most probably tired. Criminal negligence.”
Again, you seem not to have read the story. He’s charged with leaving the girl in the car and not telling emergency personnel that she was in the car.
A. Zarkov writes:
When the Muslims say that “terrorism is forbidden by Islam,” they are lying, and Islam allows lying to infidels. But Islam does forbid consumption of alcohol. In what sense is the driver a Muslim, and how do we know that—from his name? Perhaps I’m not reading the article carefully enough and missed the evidence of his submission to Islam.
My point has to do with the evidence regarding his state of mind. The driver was drunk, tired and suffered a collision. It’s quite possible that in a confused state, he thought his girlfriend had escaped the car or even forgotten she was with him. The article does not provide sufficient evidence that the driver wanted his girlfriend to burn up in the car. With the information at hand, I do not think that we can validly leap to that conclusion.
You did not answer how you know he’s a Muslim. We do not know his physical and mental state right after the accident. The charge against him sounds like criminal negligence, not murder. Criminal negligence is a very serious crime, but the charge does not tell us that he intended for his girlfriend to die.
From the Daily Mail article
Arshad, of Luton, pleaded guilty yesterday to causing death by careless driving while over the alcohol limit, and causing death by driving while uninsured.
Evidently he was not charged with deliberately concealing the fact that his girlfriend was in a burning car. That would be a more serious crime than “causing death by careless driving.” Moreover
The court also heard that Arshad had been arrested for drink driving while on bail following the incident.
Obviously Arshad is some kind of alcoholic who repeatedly shows callous indifference to the consequences of his actions. He certainly belongs in jail and off the roads. But thus far I see no connection between his actions and any religious beliefs.
LA replies:
I think he’s a Muslim purely from his name.
A. Zarkov replies:
I think that’s going too far. A name can tell us something, but not everything. For example if someone’s last name is “Cohen” you can be pretty sure that he’s Jewish, at least in an ethnic sense. But we don’t know that he’s an observant Jew. Similarly Waqas Arshad might have Muslim relatives, but we have no idea to what extent (if any) he subscribes to Islam. His drinking problem would seem to point away from any adherence to Islam. He could just be a sociopath—we have those in the non-Muslim world too.
Don’t get me wrong. I believe Islam (not just radical Islam) is a danger to, and incompatible with western culture. I believe it was a mistake to allow them into western countries in any significant numbers, and I would call a halt to any further Muslim immigration if I had the power. But let’s not go overboard and give the liberals any ammunition. We must be rigorous in how we draw inferences from facts. We must be ever skeptical of the media, which at best tends to be careless.
LA replies:
Here’s what I said. First, the title of the entry:
“17 year old British girl left to die in burning car by her 24 year old Muslim boyfriend”
That he left her to die in the burning car is stated repeatedly in the Mail article, based on prosecutor’s (and, I assume, the firemen’s’) statements. I call him Muslim because of his Muslim name. You say I shouldn’t refer to him as Muslim without knowledge that he’s observant. But since when is the Islam problem limited only to people who are devout Muslims? When a guy named Muhammad in Brazil last year beheaded in 17 year old English girl friend, to call attention to the Muslim angle was valid.
My more contentious statement is:
“The case reminds me of the Saudi girls whom the authorities kept from fleeing a burning school, I forget why they wouldn’t let them escape. Muslim men despise females and like to see them die.”
I didn’t say that his motive was the same as Saudi authorities who prevented girls from escaping a fire because their heads weren’t covered. I said that this shocking story “reminded” me of that horrible incident.
As for my statement, “Muslim men despise females and like to see them die,” the evidence for this is vast. Every week we read about another honor killing, and the sadism with which it is carried out. Muslim men’s contempt for Western women has been shown in numerous crimes. Does this mean that all or most Muslim men are like this? No, not any more than most blacks are violent criminals. But just as the black population contains vastly more violence than any other population on earth, so Muslims show violent hatred of women, far beyond any other group on earth. That general fact, combined with the unprecedented story that the man had left the girl in the car to burn to death, was the reasons I wrote what I wrote.
You quote the Mail article:
Arshad, of Luton, pleaded guilty yesterday to causing death by careless driving while over the alcohol limit, and causing death by driving while uninsured.
Then you comment:
Evidently he was not charged with deliberately concealing the fact that his girlfriend was in a burning car. That would be a more serious crime than “causing death by careless driving.”
Because the article is hopelessly muddled, it’s not possible to determine what the charges are. Clearly it states that the prosecutor is saying that he left the girl in the car. Yet the defendant does not plead guilty to that. He pleads guilty to “to causing death by careless driving while over the alcohol limit, and causing death by driving while uninsured.” And he will be sentenced next month. Which makes it sound as if there is no more facts to be determined at court. But what about the charges that he left her in the car and didn’t tell emergency personnel about her? The story gives no indication of how that was resolved. It’s maddening. It’s as though there were a news story about a trial for an axe murder, and all the horrible details given by witnesses are reported, and then at the end of the story it says that the defendant pled guilty to second degree assault and battery and will be sentenced next month. Such is contemporary journalism.
Bottom line: I based my statements about his leaving her in the car and not telling anyone she was in the car on what was said in court and reported by the Mail. Without further research, it won’t be possible to determine how all these issues were resolved.
James L. writes:
Since Britain made Ted Kennedy a knight, maybe they can put this guy in the House of Lords.
A. Zarkov writes:
I think we are in basic agreement: the Daily Mail article is too muddled and incomplete to draw reliable conclusions about exactly what happened. In particular we know virtually nothing about his condition immediately after the accident. If he suffered significant head trauma, and as a result became confused, he could be innocent of any deliberate intention to let his girlfriend die in a burning wreck. That and other mitigating circumstances might explain why he was not charged with a more serious crime.
If only the UK had never chosen to admit so many Muslim immigrants, we wouldn’t be having this and many other discussions.
LA replies:
It used to be that the purpose of journalism was to tell people what happened. Now the purpose of journalism is not to tell people what happened.
However, I grant your criticism that my initial comment about Muslim men hating women and wanting to kill them was too sweeping. If I had not already posted your criticism of it, I would have gone back and somewhat modified the language.
James P. writes:
Sadly, I can see the story of Emily Brady playing out exactly the same way with a boyfriend who was a white Briton, not a Muslim. A country that forbids civilians to use fire extinguishers, and forbids bystanders from rescuing people from burning houses, is training its people to be passive sheep who never act on their own initiative, and simply stand around waiting for the “proper authorities” to take action. The “proper authorities,” of course, are too incompetent to act in a timely and effective manner, so nothing gets done and people die.
The story relates that “the victim’s mother called Waqas Arshad’s behaviour “despicable.”” What is despicable is that the victim’s mother allowed her daughter to date a 24-year-old man under any circumstances. (The story says she dated the guy for six months, so perhaps she was even 16 when this started.) The pictures in this story clearly show a minor who is desperately in need of adult supervision and is not receiving it. If you allow your 17-year-old daughter to dress like a skank and go out drinking with 24-year-old men, don’t be surprised when something bad happens.
I found the story’s reference to them as “the couple” repellent, too, as this legitimizes what in my view is an inappropriate relationship on many levels.
Ron K. writes:
“The case reminds me of the Saudi girls whom the authorities kept from fleeing a burning school, I forget why they wouldn’t let them escape. Muslim men despise females and like to see them die.”
Sorry, but you’re being way too easy on the Arabs here. More likely, the Saudi authorities kept the girls inside because they know what their men are like.
A Norwegian, a Chilean, a Japanese man would see young women running from flames and attempt to rescue them—often at the risk of his own life. In contrast, an Arab sees uncovered women fleeing for their lives, and his reaction is … an erection. Yuk.
The Saudis have a very low opinion of their menfolk, and they ought to know. Have you ever met an Arab who wasn’t an incorrigible sex animal? (Oh, you have? And he was Christian, wasn’t he? Christian Arabs are almost a different race, thanks to the ban on consanguinuity.)
This is similar to gun politics in America. NRA-types claim that Barack Obama wants to restrict gun ownership because he’s a liberal, a welfarist, a socialist, a European. Horseblankets! He opposes gun ownership because he’s spent his adult life around other black people, and knows exactly what they’re like! No politician with a black constituency has any illusions about this, any more than the Founding Fathers did—arm a white man, he protects his family; arm a black man, he attacks yours.
(Of course, this implies that the civil rights movement was a fraud. But everyone on the longbus has known that for a while now.)
LA replies:
You write:
“In contrast, an Arab sees uncovered women fleeing for their lives, and his reaction is … an erection.”
If this is the case, then Arab men are only reacting like their perfect exemplar, Muhammad. See my discussion of William Muir’s extremely interesting account of why Muhammad mandated coverings for women.
Joe Catechissimo writes:
I guess I am the only one who is considering the possibility of this 24 year old drunken driver being an Arabic Christian. There are such people, and they do have Arabic (not “Islamic”) names.
Speaking of Arabic Christians, I find it fascinating that they tend to do very well in the West, including Latin America. They assimilate with no problem and impose not. Arabic Moslems, on the other hand, and most Moslems, are quite another story.
Posted by Lawrence Auster at May 28, 2009 01:23 AM | Send