UK: Andrew Ryan jailed for 70 days for burning Koran
Is this a case of disproportionate sentencing?
A man has been jailed for 70 days today after he burnt a copy of the Koran just over a month after a Muslim got away with a paltry £50 fine for a similar offence.
Andrew Ryan, 32, stole a copy of the holy book from Carlisle Library then set it on fire by a monument in the city of Carlisle.
Last month Emdadur Choudhury was fined after he burned a poppy outside the Royal Albert Hall in London on Remembrance Day while shouting ‘British soldiers burn in hell’.
As he was led down to the cells, Ryan shouted at the judge at Carlisle Magistrates’ Court today: ‘What about burning poppies?’.
The Guardian has more and identifies Andrew Ryan with the English Defense League.
The EDL have released a statement urging their members not to burn the Quran.
April 20th, 2011 at 1:46 pm
In hoc signo vinces†
There is no contention with the concrete theft of the book or the destruction of public property, the contention is the de facto application of sharia law under the auspices of’ race hate laws in the United Kingdom.
Approximately 50% of the prison sentence in this case can be attributed to what is a thought crime, if Andrew Ryan had incinerated The God Delusion or Fahrenheit 451 his sentence would have attracted approximately 50% less prison time.
There should be legal clarification by the U.K. Parliament’s and the CPS/PFS as to why this book should hold de facto privileged legal protection over any other book and the British public should be informed what other books if any would attract criminal charges or a prison sentence for being incinerated in the public or private space.
The Original (Muslim) Burn the Quran Day
April 22nd, 2011 at 8:15 pm
As one of the Mail Online commentators pointed out, at least part of the discrepancy could well have to do with the fact that Andrew Ryan has previous “form” whereas Emdadur Choudhury did not.
Furthermore, I find it difficult to believe that a poppy, powerfully symbolic though it is, is quite the same as a copy of the Qur’an, or for that matter the New Testament, a Torah scroll or the Guru Granth Sahib to take several examples.
April 23rd, 2011 at 1:04 pm
In hoc signo vinces†
@Revsimmy,
You miss the point Ryan was sentenced to 30 days in jail for the theft of the book, to run concurrently with the 70 days for the religiously aggravated harassment offence – 30 days for theft and 70 days for the burning of the koran, 70 days not for the solid destruction of a book but for an abstract thought crime of religiously aggravated harassment against islam. The Judge makes this clear in his summing up and the sentencing in short Ryan is fundamentally criminalised, convicted and punished for his previous and present theopolitical thoughts.
Evangelism could be considered a public order offence of religiously aggravated harassment in the public space, how long before we see christians being charged for evangelism in the locality of a mosque.
April 23rd, 2011 at 1:57 pm
In hoc signo vinces†
Incidentally the CJS is in a political paradox here by its own legal admission in that it not only recognises Ryan as 30% crimminal convict but 70% political convict, a prisoner of conscience not a very safe democratic position for the U.K. to be in, Amnesty International anyone!
April 23rd, 2011 at 2:40 pm
@Goy
I’m not sure I do miss the point. Ryan was not sentenced for “his previous and present theopolitical thoughts” but for a specific action he took (which appears to be the latest in a number of other actions), knowing that others would perceive it as sacrilegious and inflammatory.
As to your second point, it would rather depend on the form the “evangelism” took, wouldn’t it? If it were truly harassment I would expect the authorities to act. And I would expect the same if Muslims undertook similar harassment in the locality of a church.
April 23rd, 2011 at 7:02 pm
In hoc signo vinces†
@Revsimmy,
As I have pointed out from the newspaper reports Judge Gerald Chalk makes it abudantley clear that the majority part of the sentence pertains to the perceived religiously aggravated harassment thought crime element of the charge, which with the abilities of his mind reading powers he gauged and weighed to be the value of 70 days.
The 30 days was for the ACTUAL theft of the book and the destruction of public property Judge Gerald Chalk clearly separates the elements of the conviction.
These laws are a tool to crush dissent they are a danger to democratic principle and bring the law into disrepute making a mockery of justice.
An order was also made for the destruction of Andrew Ryan’s iPhone – there is a deliciously irony there somewhere.