Taxi Driver Online

oops - missed this on as well



Rotherham child abuse defendant has passport seized - as co-accused ‘too ill’ to attend court

Thursday 25 June 2015


Sajid Bostan leaving Rotherham Magistrates Court after his hearing today.

A defendant in a Rotherham child sexual exploitation investigation has had his passport seized – while one of his co-accused missed a court date on medical grounds.

Sajid Bostan, who has been vice-chairman of the Rotherham Private Hire Drivers Association, was granted bail at Rotherham Magistrates Court – on the condition that he handed in his passport.

At the same hearing this afternoon, a lawyer for Arshid Hussain, aged 40, who has been charged with 45 child sexual exploitation-related offences, said his client was unable to attend because he is too ill.

Riyaz Shaikh, representing Hussain, said his wheelchair-bound client is currently suffering from pressure sores.

District judge John Foster adjourned the hearing on Hussain until Tuesday, July 7, and asked for more information to be provided about Hussain’s medical condition.

Bostan, 38, will next appear at Sheffield Crown Court on Thursday, July 9.

The decision to take his passport follows reports that another man arrested as part of the same investigation has left the country and gone to Pakistan.

Mr Foster also accepted an application made on behalf of both defendants preventing the publication of their home addresses.

The application was challenged in court by The Star, but Mr Foster said he did not believe publishing their addresses was ‘in the interests of justice’.

Hussain has been charged with 16 charges of indecent assault, five charges of procuring of a female to have sexual intercourse, six counts of unlawful sexual intercourse, two charges of buggery.

He has also been charged with four counts of causing a child to be removed from their parent, five counts of procuring a female to become a common prostitute, two charges of assault, one count of unlawful imprisonment and four counts of procuring another to have sexual intercourse.

Bostan has been charged with 11 offences, including unlawful sexual intercourse with a girl under the age of 13, indecent assault and buggery.

As part of the same investigation, two of Hussain’s brothers have been charged - Bannaras Hussain, 35, with 22 offences and Sageer Hussain, 29, with four counts of rape of a girl under 16.

They have been charged under Operation Clover, an investigation into historic child sex exploitation offences in Rotherham.

source: http://www.southyorkshiretimes.co.uk/ne ... -1-7328087

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

New taxi rules unfair, say Rotherham drivers

03 July 2015

STRIKING cabbies claim they could lose a third of their numbers if new rules — including CCTV in all taxis — are adopted on Monday.

Drivers protested outside the Town Hall, withdrew services on Saturday and Wednesday and are continuing rush hour “go slow” convoys while demanding further talks with council bosses.

They insist the privacy issue of recording video and audio of journeys is one of several concerns, citing costs, rules on vehicle age and the “fit and proper person” test.

But Rotherham Borough Council commissioner Mary Ney, who is pushing through the new licensing policy, said: “We accept not everyone is happy.

“However, we need to enforce robust and high standards to make sure people feel safe and ultimately rebuild trust in an industry which employs many people.”

CCTV must be on during all journeys, the new policy dictates. Audio footage has to be taken at night and when carrying children alone, and can be activated at any time by passengers.

The running cost is estimated at £5 a week but drivers want further cost details about repairs and downloading footage.

Rotherham Private Hire Association chairman Abdul Tariq said: “The council don’t really understand the implications. Fares could have to go up 60, 70 per cent and we could easily lose a third of drivers.

“It’s not just about CCTV. There are affordability problems and we need precise definitions of how things will work.”

Vehicles have to be under ten years old and drivers must hold a BTEC Level 2 or equivalent. The fit and proper person test asks those making the call if they would be happy for a loved one to travel alone with the applicant.

The new policy was drawn up after last year’s Jay report highlighted the “prominent” role of taxis in child sexual exploitation.

Drivers held two 12-hour strikes but decided against further action this weekend, fearing it could be counter-productive.

The policy is expected to be adopted on Monday. Cabbies will be allowed three months to meet the new requirements.

Ms Ney has agreed to a one-hour meeting on Monday.

source: http://www.rotherhamadvertiser.co.uk/ne ... ivers.aspx

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

Thick as f***ing pig s**t.

Nothing more to add.

_________________
IDFIMH

I tend to agree - considering what's happened you'd think a degree of looking in the mirror and reflecting would be appropriate - but no - lets strike - lets make us out nationally to be complete tw@ts

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

I do not agree...it stands out in as much - they have got their meeting! Why should all be tarred with the same brush?

_________________
Common sense........is just not that Common.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/11712599/Rotherham-paedophile-gangs-are-still-abusing-young-girls.html



That's about as much as is mentioned about taxi drivers, but, it says it's still going on and I don't understand why drivers wouldn't want to protect their trade and reputation tbh. As for being tarred with the same brush I don't agree that they are I think it's a good preventative measure with regards to abusers using innocent drivers to move young victims about

_________________
Note to self: Just because it pops into my head does NOT mean it should come out of my mouth!!

Because they need to build up public confidence.

The cost of CCTV is a very small price to pay.

In fact if you get a good system and insure with Westminster they will get a discount which will pay for the system in three years.

So the issue isn't money, it's fear of being caught doing something they shouldn't.

_________________
IDFIMH

If I drove in Rotherham I would have no beef at all against in car CCTV, I would be more concerned about the changes to the maximum age of vehicles, in an ideal world I'm sure we would all like to drive new or nearly new vechicles but in a lot of northern towns the economy is on the bones of its a$$ still and the level of fares reflects this, as to the other measures such as more frequent DBS checks and other measures to raise the professional standards in the trade any opposition is indefensible.
I wonder what the policy in Rotherham is towards out of town Hackneys doing private hire work in the town as this would be an unwelcome but likely consequence to circumvent the measures the council are taking.

good post, great points

_________________
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
George Carlin

Toots make no mistake practically every driver up there will have had a comment aimed their way. I cannot remember whether it was "Worboys", or someone else from another part of the country who had done something awful, but we were 120 + miles away and getting snide comments.



I do not as such think that it is about building up "Public Confidence". To put things into perspective this was about "Young" in many cases easily led individuals - not the general population. However "Public Confidence" would also be enhanced greatly, if the LA's/Councils did their jobs thoroughly, by making sure that proper people were issued with licenses, and not just anyone who can drive - as such it is a broken system all round.

Imo if houses up your/my street are being broken into left right and centre, then it should be a personal decision as to whether you spend money on an alarm that alerts you/I and the police into catching them - I do not buy into this type of crime watching whereby I am now being told to buy equipment to help others i.e the police/the council/the LA's. If they want crime fighting equipment installed - then they should pay.

I can just see the Rotherham situation whereby they all have to have CCTV installed, to be then followed by snide comments from the wonderful public "Oh they did not trust then drive - did they"! Makes you feel good, doesn't it

Back to the more heinous crime of drivers being murdered! I hear nothing/very little mentioned re CCTV for the safety of drivers, with the exception of the Councils stating they have no money to implement life saving equipment. Unfortunately when it comes to the safety of others........WE have to splash out. On the basis that my life is of very little value to the hierarchy, I just cannot buy into.......... "I have to pay to protect others - but others will not pay to protect me" . As such I have no issues re CCTV in my cab.........if THEY want to pay. Other than that I do not see as to why I should be forced to do so because of the actions of the bad guys.

This IMO is a smoke screen about a broken society whereby the Authorities/departments have let them (the vulnerable) fall off of the "care" screen, so before we all go dipping our hands into our pockets, other departments need pulling over the coals, as to why Rotherham was so susceptible, (probably a shed load of deprivation).

As a futuristic thought coming soon to a town near you/me? Should we have CCTV over every entrance/ back door where we live and work tracing everyone and anyone going in and out? - now wouldn't that f%^k up politicians, celebs and their twisted world that has still not fully unravelled.

_________________
Common sense........is just not that Common.

They've only got to do a little bit of digging and they'll find out they can get it installed for a small fee. All they've got to do is do some advertising on their motors and it'll pay for itself.

So the Rotherham grooming was all caused by there taxi drivers? It certainly sounds like it, perhaps the council should put there own house in order before they start making scape goats out of taxi drivers, nothing wrong with cameras, but it should be gradually brought in, and they should look at funding, like Other councils have, one of the biggest problems in Rotherham was the police, they new it was going on and did nothing, another cover up, perhaps they should fund it. Strikes, nice to see the trade standing together, that's a first.

Not everybody can advertise on their motors

_________________
Note to self: Just because it pops into my head does NOT mean it should come out of my mouth!!

Most Councils allow it now to enable cabbies to earn money. Ours didn't allow it until they realised how much a driver could earn from it.