Air-rage thug who threatened to gang rape stewardess is set to have 'unduly lenient' sentence reviewed - after complaints Lucy Connolly was jailed for TWICE as long over migrant tweet
Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp called on the Attorney General Lord Hermer to consider recommending the Court of Appeal increase the 15-month jail term handed to Salman Iftihar.
Mr Philp said the sentence was evidence of 'two-tier justice', given Lucy Connolly was jailed for 31 months for a tweet about the Southport riots.
Mr Philp told the Mail: 'Iftikar was sentenced to only 15 months in prison last week for threatening an air stewardess with gang rape and for racially aggravated harassment. Iftikhar has multiple previous convictions.
'Yet Lucy Connolly got 31 months for a far less serious offence - a prosecution Lord Hermer personally authorised.
'This is two-tier justice in action.
'I have today referred the case to the Attorney General Lord Hermer for review under the Unduly Lenient Sentence scheme.
'We'll now find out if Hermer is willing to take action to fix Britain's two-tier justice problem.'
Recruitment tycoon Iftikhar, 37, was flying in first class when he launched a vile tirade of abuse towards Virgin Atlantic staff on a flight from London Heathrow to Lahore in his homeland of Pakistan.
Wealthy passengers aboard the flight watched in horror as the recruitment boss repeatedly called steward Angie Walsh a 'f***ing b****' at 39,000ft.
The father-of-three later threatened to blow-up the five-star hotel the cabin crew were set to stay in.
Isleworth Crown Court heard he left Ms Walsh 'broken' and 'traumatised' having declared she would be dragged out of her hotel room and assaulted.
The businessman had been binging on champagne, and also tried to fight another steward and even threatened to blow up the floor of the Avari Lahore Hotel, where the cabin crew were due to stay.
In one clip of Iftikhar's 100 rants during the trip, he can be heard repeatedly accusing Ms Walsh of being a racist and says: 'You called me a p*ki in front of everybody.'
All this unfolded in front of Iftikhar's wife and children who were crying and pleading for him to stop and had to be comforted by the cabin crew as he continued to hurl abuse for the entire flight.
Iftikhar was later arrested at his detached home in Iver, Buckinghamshire, and admitted making threats to kill and racially aggravated harassment.
The post, which she later deleted, said: 'Mass deportation now, set fire to all the f****** hotels full of the b******* for all I care... if that makes me racist so be it'
He and his wife Erum Salman, 38, run a London-based staffing company that provides training to businesses working in customer service and manufacturing.
Mr Philp compared his sentence with that of councillor's wife Connolly, who was jailed after admitting to making her 'racist' post on X, formerly known as Twitter in the wake of the Southport riots.
The post, which she later deleted, said: 'Mass deportation now, set fire to all the f****** hotels full of the b******* for all I care... if that makes me racist so be it.'
She lost an appeal to shorten her 31-month sentence earlier this year.
In his letter to Lord Hermer, Mr Philp said Connolly - who is due for release later this month - 'made a wrong and distatesful social media post', but said Iftikhar made 'over 100 sickening threats' to cabin crew, and has previous convictions.
Mr Philp wrote: 'I am sure you agree that this cannot be right.
'Given the severity of the threats and the vile language used by Iftikhar, I believe his sentence should be reconsidered and increased and I urge you to refer his case for review under the Unduly Lenient Scheme, which covers the offences for which Iftikhar was convicted.
'If you decide not to refer his sentence for reconsideration, then this would be yet another example of two-tier justice under this Government.'
The scheme allows anyone to ask for a Crown Court sentence to be reviewed by the Attorney General's Office (AGO).
If officers consider the sentence unduly lenient, they can ask the Court of Appeal to review the sentence.
It will then be up to judges to decide whether or not the original sentence was appropriate.
The offence of making threats to kill carries a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison, but can be dealt with by a community order.
Racially aggravated harassment carries a maximum jail term of up to two years' custody.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
3 hours ago
- The Independent
Rachel Reeves to take aim at environmental protections in bid to speed up infrastructure projects, say reports
Rachel Reeves is preparing to strip back environmental protections in an attempt to accelerate infrastructure building and boost the economy, according to reports. The chancellor is considering major reforms that would make it more difficult for wildlife concerns to hold up developments, according to The Times. Treasury officials are said to be drafting another planning reform bill, the publication reported. The move reportedly involves tearing up parts of European environmental rules, which developers have argued slow down crucial projects. While Labour ministers have previously insisted their current planning overhaul would balance growth with nature, Ms Reeves is understood to believe that the government must go further. The Planning and Infrastructure Bill going through Parliament overrides existing habitat and nature protections, which, if passed, would allow developers to make general environmental improvements and pay into a nature restoration fund that improves habitats on other sites. But Ms Reeves is considering more contentious reforms that are likely to trigger further backlash from environmental groups, according to The Times. Among the changes under discussion are plans for a smaller, UK-only list of protected species, which would give less weight to wildlife considered rare across Europe but relatively common in Britain, The Times said. Ms Reeves is also reportedly considering abolishing the EU 'precautionary principle' that forces developers to prove projects will have no impact on protected natural sites. Instead, a new test would assess the risks and benefits of building. The chancellor is also exploring limits on legal challenges from environmental campaigners. Speaking to the House of Lords economic affairs committee last month, Ms Reeves said: 'The reason that HS2 is not coming to my city of Leeds anymore anytime soon, is because I'm afraid, as a country, we've cared more about the bats than we have about the commuter times for people in Leeds and West Yorkshire, and we've got to change that, 'Because I care more about a young family getting on the housing ladder than I do about protecting some snails, and I care more about my energy bills and my constituents than I do about the views of people from their windows.' High-profile examples of costly protections include the £100m Buckinghamshire 'bat tunnel' built to protect wildlife from HS2 trains and the so-called 'fish disco' at Hinkley Point C nuclear plant, which uses sound to deter fish from cooling system intakes. The existing Planning and Infrastructure Bill already proposes a 'nature restoration fund' under which developers could offset environmental damage by paying for conservation schemes elsewhere. But the bill has faced criticism from both environmental groups and developers, who fear it will fail to speed up construction. Paul Miner of the countryside charity CPRE told The Times that targeting habitats regulations would 'take us backwards rather than forwards on nature recovery'.
Times
4 hours ago
- Times
Rachel Reeves to cut ‘bats and newts' in boost to developers
Rachel Reeves is preparing to strip back environmental protections in an effort to boost the economy by speeding up infrastructure projects. The chancellor is considering reforms that would make it far harder for concerns about nature to stop development, which she insists is crucial to restoring growth and improving living standards. The Treasury has begun preparing for another planning reform bill and is thinking about tearing up key parts of European environmental rules that developers say are making it harder to build key projects. Labour ministers have repeatedly insisted that their current planning overhaul will not come at the expense of nature, promising a 'win-win' system where developers will pay to offset environmental damage. But Reeves is understood to believe that the government must go significantly further, after expressing frustration that the interests of 'bats and newts' are being allowed to stymie critical infrastructure. She has tasked officials with looking at much more contentious reforms, which are likely to provoke a furious backlash from environmentalists and cause unease for some Labour MPs. A smaller, UK-only list of protected species is being planned, which would place less weight on wildlife — including types of newt — that is rare elsewhere in Europe but more common in Britain. Developers would also no longer have to prove that projects would have no impact on protected natural sites, under plans that would abolish the 'precautionary principle' enshrined in European rules. Instead, a new test would look at risks and benefits of potential projects. Further curbs to judicial review are also being considered by Reeves to stop key projects being delayed by legal challenges from environmentalists. No decisions have been made, but work is underway and Treasury sources acknowledged there was a growing belief that the government needed to go further, as Reeves says she wants to make boosting Britain's sluggish productivity the centrepiece of her autumn budget. She argued this week that building more infrastructure such as roads and railways were crucial to this aim. A Planning and Infrastructure Bill currently going through parliament attempts to encourage development through a 'nature restoration fund' through which developers will be allowed to press ahead with projects by setting up schemes elsewhere to offset their environmental impact. • The grid is struggling — and our green future hangs in the balance But the plan has been criticised by environmental groups while also attracting scepticism from some developers, who fear it will not work in practice and do little to speed up building. Lord Hunt of Kings Heath, who stood down as energy minister in May, is urging his former colleagues to go further to achieve Labour's promise of 150 major infrastructure projects. 'While I think the planning bill will work for housing, I don't think it is sufficiently focused on the major infrastructure projects, so it is encouraging that the Treasury is going to have another look at whether we've really got this right,' he said. 'The government has to face up to the tensions in the Habitat Regulations which are making it hard to build essential infrastructure and the reality is that at some point someone needs to make a hard decision and say 'on some things, you just have to press ahead'.' The rules, which incorporate the EU Habitats Directive into British law, ban killing of hundreds of species, including types of bats, news, voles, snails, spiders, insects and woodlice. Developers must prove there is no risk to protected sites and species before being allowed to go ahead with projects, under rules which critics say impose an 'impossibly high standard' on vital projects. Reeves is increasingly sympathetic to such criticism, after repeatedly hitting out at 'ridiculous' environmental protections. She said last month that she cared 'more about the young family getting on the housing ladder than I do about protecting some snails', after a speech in January in which she said developers should be able to 'focus on getting things built, and stop worrying about bats and newts'. Sir Keir Starmer has also expressed frustration with the ability of campaigners to delay projects through legal challenges, and is already introducing rules which limit judicial review to override the 'whims of nimbys'. Campaign groups and residents, who currently have three opportunities to apply for judicial review, which will be reduced to two, or one in cases deemed by a judge 'totally without merit'. Reeves is now considering allowing only one opportunity to bring any challenge. Some Labour MPs and peers want her to go further by using dedicated acts of parliament to prevent any legal challenge to specific named projects. The plans are at an early stage and are likely to cause tension with ministers in other departments who have pledged to protect the environment. Paul Miner, of the countryside charity CPRE, said targeting habitats regulations would 'take us backwards rather than forwards on nature recovery', adding: 'We urge the government to drop the worn-out 'builders versus blockers' narrative which wrongly frames climate and nature as being in conflict with economic growth.' Becky Pullinger, of the Wildlife Trusts, said maintaining environmental standards was 'essential if we are to achieve targets to protect and restore the natural world which is suffering huge declines, saying Reeves should abandon 'the myth that deregulation will lead to economic growth'. But Robbie Owen, head of infrastructure planning at Pinsent Masons, said: 'Ministers are finally realising that their rhetoric about reform doesn't match up up the reality of their bill. We have been saying to ministers and officials all year that the bill needs to go further and it seems that message has finally been heard.'
Scottish Sun
4 hours ago
- Scottish Sun
Illegal migrants brought to UK in ‘dangerous' £350 dinghies sold online by backstreet factories in China
The National Crime Agency said the dinghies were becoming 'ever more dangerous and un-seaworthy, increasing the risk to life' BORDER FARCE Illegal migrants brought to UK in 'dangerous' £350 dinghies sold online by backstreet factories in China Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) BACKSTREET factories in China sell £350 dinghies online to people smugglers bringing illegal migrants to Britain, a Sun probe found. Workshops 5,000 miles away churn out flimsy vessels to order for unscrupulous gangs in northern France — offering discounts for bulk purchases. Sign up for Scottish Sun newsletter Sign up 2 Backstreet factories in China sell £350 dinghies online to people smugglers bringing illegal migrants to Britain, a Sun probe found Credit: Alibaba The National Crime Agency said the dinghies were becoming 'ever more dangerous and un-seaworthy, increasing the risk to life'. Our probe found that the factories, all in Shandong and Zhejiang provinces, advertise through Chinese e-commerce site and state their main export market is western Europe. They say the boats, typically 8m-long, can carry more than 30. In reality, double that cram on them. Read More on immigration HERE WE GROW UK's immigration hotspots revealed... how does YOUR hometown fare? Last week, a 10m-long boat brought 106 into British waters. At least 469 fully-loaded dinghies have crossed to the UK so far this year, carrying 27,881, the majority young men. This week a shipment of 20 small boats destined to ferry migrants across the Channel to the UK was seized in Bulgaria. Another 25 were confiscated at the same location in July thanks to intelligence gathered by British law enforcement passed on to the Bulgarian National Customs Agency. It comes after the Foreign Office sanctioned Chinese firm Weihai Yamar Outdoors Product Co for advertising online inflatable boats for the specific purpose of people smuggling. Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp said: 'The Labour government claimed it would smash the gangs but can't even stop the Chinese-made boats being sold in France. Small boat crossings under Labour are on brink of hitting 50,000 - one illegal migrant every 11 mins since the election 'This is a weak government which has lost control of our borders. They aren't prepared to take the tough action needed to end this madness so the situation will get worse.' Alibaba said: 'Search terms or product listings such as 'refugee boat' or 'immigrant boat' are in violation of our listings policies and won't return positive search results.' It said the inflatables advertised were 'designed, certified, and intended for lawful purposes'.
