Pamela Izevbekhai - Should She Be Deported?

The Raven.

AlekSmart wrote: »

Dreaming Raven..???....Blimey O Reilly thats more like a Nightmare of Edgar Allan Poe proportions....Certainly pulls no punches there does it.....?

LOL. !! Although it has gone beyond a joke.

Have we had evidence of the "attempts" made on Naomi and Jemima ?
This wording appears to infer a physical attempt...or have we missed some other vital element in our quest to be Right-Wing,Reactionary and perhaps Rascist also..???

I haven't seen any reference to it before. I wonder where this has come from.

I contend that the revelations of the past week,plus todays Supreme Court proceedings impose a duty of professional care upon the Members of the RTE Authority to suspend the screening of the programme.

Could the Supreme Court`s ongoing deliberations be described as sub-judice and therefore outside the realm of biased media coverage which may be intended to foster malicious intent towards State Policy and Laws ?

Given that a Senior RTE Investigative Reporter,Mr Boucher Hayes has an ongoing and perhaps contentious involvement with the furtherance of Ms Izevbekhai`s claims there are surely very serious questions of Professional and Public Responsibility at stake here.

I think you have a very valid point. I agree that the screening should be suspended. This has taken a very serious turn.

Perhaps we need a new thread to cater for RTE and the Irish Times attitudes alone.... :eek:

I would certainly welcome a new thread on the issue of media coverage in relation to the case.

opo

The Raven. wrote: »

I would certainly welcome a new thread on the issue of media coverage in relation to the case.

As would I.

Perhaps we might start some momentum to seriously question why the British (Sunday Times) papers are driving the facts whilst our pampered equivalents (RTE, Irish Times etc|) get to rest on their well paid PC laurels and throw caution to the wind in reporting lies as facts and elevating (British again) cranks such as Rosanna ( Forgotten Nigerian Deportee Here) Flynn as authorities on the subject.

icanchange49

Pete4779 wrote: »

Yup. I absolutely think she and anyone she is responsible for should be deported. The far-left appeasment is what is causing this endless appeal system, and she should not be here in the first place.

It's you and me that will end up paying - and I would rather pay (my taxes) to help some local kid get free schooling than pay for endless legal costs and social welfare support for people who are here purely to leech our system.

If isn't about the money or financial welfare tourism in Ireland, these people wouldn't be here. They certainly weren't trying their best to stay when we were poor as dirt 20 years ago, and it's not like there are suddenly loads of direct flights from here to Lagos.

(Anybody from Nigeria who isn't here with a working visa must be an illegal immigrant or is else claiming asylum for some reason as there is no other way they could arrive here as first port of call in EU and claim asylum. E.g., the major of Portlaoise, who to claim asylum valiantly told us of the threats against him from his home in Nigeria and how he needed to stay, but where he subsequently was received as an honoured guest at his home town after becoming Mayor).

Of course there is a threat of FMG in Nigeria. Likewise, there is a threat of religious persecution in Northern Ireland but I don't see a lot of people there claiming asylum in Pakistan, Nigeria or Saudi Arabia.

good post!

this issue has now become quite complex. the woman having obviously lied, but the hub of the issue is the childrens welfare. having used the children as pawns as she obvioulsy did i find to be the most appalling aspect. surely this is akin to child abuse. the only solution to this whole issue is for the children to be allowed to stay and given to foster families and the woman herself to be deported forthwith as giving her the jail time she deserves will only add to the already burgeoning costs her behaviour (and not to mention the legal profession) has incurred.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

AlekSmart

The divil is in the detail....

This is all sounding very suspicious indeed.

Could there now be some possibility of a Legal scandal in the offing ?
Mr Christle`s wording is indeed unusual...even GUBU in it`s context.

This could be ground breaking stuff in the Four Courts.

Pamela Izevbekhai and her case are essentially immaterial now as we appear to have moved onto far more fundamental issues than the State`s regard for a deceiving litigant ?

Hahn Shandy

Hahn Shandy wrote: »

Female genital mutilation doesn't exist in Nigeria. Mutalation is a European newspaper term.

It's still mutilation and it most certainly does exist there.

AARRRGH

6ix wrote: »

Sorry, I had to vent after seeing that 'Neighbourhood against Racism' person talking on the news. What the hell has this to do with Racism? :mad:

I know.

The only conclusion I can come to is the 'Neighbourhood against Racism' people are somewhat racist themselves, as they are unable to see past the colour of Pamela's skin.

mealone43

bluewolf wrote: »

It's still mutilation and it most certainly does exist there.

Mutilation is barbaric and should be stopped but that is for the Nigerians and any other animals who perform this. Why should she stay here because of that? Let her go to Nigeria or Italy where she came from. It is not our problem and I personally object to my tax money being used on a woman whose "stories" are being tested currently by our courts. Time for her to go.Let those idiots in that Racism organisation send her money when she arrives in Lagos like they "did" with the other scammer who had a "problem" son who was deported. To quote Mad Maggie, OUT OUT OUT

PapaQuebec

I was in the Supreme Court for her appearance yesterday. When she finally arrived in court (10 minutes late) - the expression on her face - and those of some her supporters said it all. not so much "is-away-high" but "is-away-home"!!

The Corinthian

mealone43 wrote: »

Let her go to Nigeria or Italy where she came from.

She didn't come from Italy and it is unlikely that she would be terribly welcome there either.

AARRRGH

The Corinthian wrote: »

She didn't come from Italy and it is unlikely that she would be terribly welcome there either.

I reckon she might be terribly welcome in Italy.

djpbarry

MIN2511 wrote: »

I wasn't circumcised(btw, how do i know if i was or not?)

No need to be flippant.

Hahn Shandy wrote: »

What's worse is there is no direct flights from Nigeria to Ireland. European laws states you must claim asylum in the country you land...

No they don’t.

AlekSmart wrote: »

It must also be noted,and I have no doubt but it WILL be noted, by the Supreme Court that the Nigerian Government has given specific guarantees as to the PERSONAL safety of Ms Izevbekhai and her family.

These guarantees were given to the IRISH Government by a soverign democracy and therefore must be of some credence in legal terms as they implicitly involve our State in monitoring and reporting on how Nigeria meets its very publicly stated assurances.

With respect, any assurances given by Nigerian officials should be taken with a pinch of salt, given the country’s rather abysmal human rights record.

AARRRGH

djpbarry wrote: »

No need to be flippant.

Why do you think she's being flippant? I think her question is reasonable.

mealone43

The Corinthian wrote: »

She didn't come from Italy and it is unlikely that she would be terribly welcome there either.

That should have read Holland. She made a claim in Holland previously. It is my contention that all the idiots who are supporting her should be made to pay her costs and not the ordinary decent person.

marcsignal

AlekSmart wrote: »

As this case rumbles on I am coming to believe that the REAL players of note are NOT Pamela Izevbekhai or her daughters but instead, her husband and his business associates.

actually i'd guess you're tantalizingly close to the original game plan imo AlekSmart. Consider this, if Pamela is granted asylum with the 2 kids, you could bet a months wages, that 3 or 4 months down the road, Tony Izevbekhai would arrive on our shores claiming asylum on the grounds of 'wanting to keep his family together'

can nobody else see how this works ??

the damage she has done for genuine cases down the road is staggering, and shameful.

jokjetset

marcsignal wrote: »

actually i'd guess you're tantalizingly close to the original game plan imo AlekSmart. Consider this, if Pamela is granted asylum with the 2 kids, you could bet a months wages, that 3 or 4 months down the road, Tony Izevbekhai would arrive on our shores claiming asylum on the grounds of 'wanting to keep his family together'

can nobody else see how this works ??

the damage she has done for genuine cases down the road is staggering, and shameful.

As long as that !! 3 or 4 Days more like.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

mealone43

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Then hopefully she loses her illegal claim to remain here. It would be good if our judges decided likewise for all appeals. We cannot afford those people here.

mikemac

Lost numerous appeals, lost in the Supreme Court and now they've lost in Europe. And this is still ongoing?

Either the legal team are the most persistent around. Or they know they can't win but they are getting money for every billable hour this drags on so like a greedy tradesman they will drag this process out.....

Who is paying for Pamela's legal team? Is it free legal aid?

AARRRGH

mikemac wrote: »

Who is paying for Pamela's legal team? Is it free legal aid?

I hope not, because then every moron could use free legal aid to appeal everything in the extremely expensive high court.

jokjetset

Excuse the above flippant remark. I have been following this thread and Pamelas case for some time and this is my first (well second really post).

I too was hoping for some resolution to this on Friday. This has gone on far too long. I believe that asylum seekers should have access to the court system, but 23 appeals !!!

This really is a farcical situation. I really think that Pamela should show some dignity and drop her case. How many times do the courts have to say NO before she accepts the answer. This tactic of trying to wear down the State into submission must be ended.

She has done real damage to the asylum process.

djpbarry

AARRRGH wrote: »

Why do you think she's being flippant?

Because I think it’s absurd for someone to ask how they can tell if they were circumcised.

djpbarry

marcsignal wrote: »

the damage she has done for genuine cases down the road is staggering, and shameful.

jokjetset wrote: »

She has done real damage to the asylum process.

I don’t understand these statements; what ‘damage’ are you both referring to?

mealone43

mealone43 wrote: »

Mutilation is barbaric and should be stopped but that is for the Nigerians and any other animals who perform this. Why should she stay here because of that?

I never said she should. But I also won't sit by and let 1-post posters come on this thread and claim FGM is not mutilation and that it doesn't exist in Nigeria. Her case may be a joke, but FGM is still extremely serious and barbaric and despite token action making it illegal over there, the attitudes of many [male] nigerians to take it for granted, not a big deal, and that it must be done otherwise women would be "out of control sexually" is absolutely appalling and ludicrous and it remains common practice.

jokjetset

djpbarry wrote: »

I don’t understand these statements; what ‘damage’ are you both referring to?

(1) Making a mockery of our court system, 23 appeals for Gods sake !! The SC for the state yesterday stated that "Ms Izevbekhai's entire case has proceeded on a lie that is so fundamental that it should be struck out". He also stated that her case was "a breach of court process".

(2) Making the State and people generally extremely sceptical of asylum seeker stories in the future especially with regard to FGM. In effect giving credence to McDowell and his "cock and bull story" statement some years ago. As an aside, McDowell must be lovin' this ( Maybe he will take her case on !!!!)

(3) If by some miracle she does manage to be granted subsidiary protection or Leave to Remain, it will send out the clear message to other bogus asylum seekers to just keep appealing and the State will capitulate eventually.

ParkRunner

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

If Pamela and her 2 children were granted refugee status they could apply for what is known as family reunification for Tony and Adrian, whereby a family member of those granted asylum can bring over immediate members of their family to re-instate family unity.

But, she won't be granted asyum at this stage and any application for re-admission to the asylum process is non-suspensive of deportation.

On another note I am amazed that RTE are going to go ahead with the Would You Believe programme tomorrow. They must know it will attract high viewing figures, that is the only reason I can think of why they would go ahead with it. I hope for their sake they have added in the recent revelations and taken a much more balanced approach than before. If not, the Broadcasting Complaints Commission will be hearing from me anyway.

I also await with great interest Pamela's replying affidavit in the Supreme Court. Anything she presents as evidence will be gone through with a fine toothcomb!

The legal profession are also coming across as remarkably generous and caring if a new firm is willing to work pro bono, unless Pamela has suddenly found the funds to actually pay for legal services. Given the fact I would put her chances of winning in the Supreme Court at the same level as the existence of flying pigs and the chances of hell freezing over I am gobsmacked that someone has taken on her case. Her previous legal representatives must be a few hundred thousand euro down after backing her for so long and not being paid a red cent, apparently?

Steo46

bluewolf wrote: »

I never said she should. But I also won't sit by and let 1-post posters come on this thread and claim FGM is not mutilation and that it doesn't exist in Nigeria. Her case may be a joke, but FGM is still extremely serious and barbaric and despite token action making it illegal over there, the attitudes of many [male] nigerians to take it for granted, not a big deal, and that it must be done otherwise women would be "out of control sexually" is absolutely appalling and ludicrous and it remains common practice.

So ppl with 1-post don't know what they are talking about?

Steo46

Steo46 wrote: »

So ppl with 1-post don't know what they are talking about?

No? This particular 1-poster apparently doesnt though

marcsignal

djpbarry wrote: »

I don’t understand these statements; what ‘damage’ are you both referring to?

This kind of damage.

HollyB

marcsignal wrote: »

This kind of damage.

Except in situations like this, there's more than one shepherd boy. The earlier ones may get the benefit of the doubt but if enough of them are found to have misled the public, then a point will come when few, if any, shepherd boys are given the benefit of the doubt by that public, even the ones who are telling the truth.

There's also a risk to the credibility of the villagers who believed in the early stories of the wolf and who ran to their aid, accepting their stories as true and wanting to help shepherd boys they believed to be at risk. What happens in the future when those villagers are trying to muster others to help them fight off the wolf, insisting that, this time, they are certain that the shepherd boy is telling the truth and their really is a wolf?

"Well, you believed __________ when he said there was a wolf, and look how that turned out!"