In another thread it was reported that a Taxi driver had committed this rape, however, the word "Taxi driver" as we know is often misused by journalists? When TDO investigated this incident we became increasingly suspicious of the fact that no one could identify the rapist as holding a Taxi license? I won't tell you how many licensing authorities in the NorthWest TDO actually contacted but I can tell you it was substantial. I took it upon myself to contact the NorthWest Traffic commissioner to see if the rapist was registered with an O license under them. Apparently he wasn't?
I can't reveal how I finally obtained the information that he wasn't a Taxi driver but that story in itself is quite remarkable. The fact is that every newspaper in the Northwest reported this rapist as being a Taxi driver, when in fact he was nothing of the sort. Not only that but the way the press release was issued might also lead one to believe that either Trafford or Manchester licensed the rapist?
Mr Mateen, the rapist, was due to be sentenced last Friday but I understand he "may" have been taken out of the court list, which means he might be sentenced sometime this week? You can guarantee that when the Newspapers report the sentence, they will say, "Taxi Driver gets x amount of years for raping woman".
If it hadn't been for TDO we would all have been oblivious to the fact that he wasn't a Taxi driver?
Several points are at issue here, first the status of the vehicle which I understand was operating under section 75.1.B and second the inability of the local licensing authority to supervise the activity of this vehicle, which as far as we are concerned, could have been operating under normal private hire contract conditions?
Any offence would fall on all three persons associated with this vehicle, namely the driver owner and Private hire operator? In the light of this incident I call on councils to be more vigilant in checking what vehicles a private hire operator, operates, regardless of whether they operate under section 75.1.B. Here's how TDO rectified the misinformation.
http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/weeklynews2.html
.................................................
Unlicensed Minibus Driver Rapes Woman in Partington!
On January 11th 2007 Greater Manchester police issued a press release in respect of yet another sad case of a woman being raped. Trafford CID informed Taxi Driver Online that the offender is a licensed Taxi Driver. The problem that TDO had is that no one seemed to know just exactly where this rapist was licensed? We didn't even know if he was a bone fide Hackney carriage or private hire driver? Trafford CID flatly refused to state where he was licensed or whether he was a hackney or private hire driver? After making extensive enquiries TDO can confirm that the rapist is not a licensed Taxi or Private hire driver but an unlicensed PSV minibus driver operating under section 75 1 B of the 1976 LGMPA.
Trafford licensing has had numerous enquiries about this gentlemen and are quite distressed that people are ringing up accusing them of licensing rapists. The Rapist is one Murtaza Mateen from Lime crescent, Old Trafford, which is a stone's throw from Manchester United Football ground.
Mateen aged 47 was driving a 12 or 15 seater minibus on Manchester road Partington, which is close to Sale, Altrincham, Lymn and other parts of Cheshire. His victim was a 42-year-old woman who either lived in Partington, which is primarily made up of a large council estate, or on the outskirts of Partington where you will find the occasional isolated private dwelling. Partington is surrounded by open countryside so it is rather obvious that a female walking home at 3-30 in the morning is taking a huge risk in exposing herself to the dangers of the night.
Mateen drove past his victim then stopped and waited for her to walk past his vehicle so he could entice her into his minibus. He then drove on for a short-distance, stopped his vehicle and committed the rape.
We have JD to thank for this diligent investigation in revealing the facts of this incident. JD would not believe this rapist was a Taxi Driver until he had concrete evidence that proved beyond all reasonable doubt that he was? As it is, JD's instincts were well founded and perhaps the Taxi trade owes him a debt of gratitude for exposing the facts.
We all campaigned for the removal of section 75.1.B of the 1976 Local Government Miscellaneous Provisions act but if any case highlighted the need for its removal, then surely this is that case?
........................................
Login
Register
FAQ
