One for ‘call me Dave’s’ new ‘reforms’…

Unfair: Maite De La CalvaMaite De La Calv

The mother of an alleged looter who faces eviction from her flat now says her son is the victim of police brutality.

Daniel Sartain-Clark, 18, was photographed bleeding outside a branch of Currys in Clapham Junction, South London, after it had been ransacked by looters.

It is alleged he was attempting to steal electronic goods and attempted to resist arrest.

But his mother, Maite De La Calva, 43, claims police pushed him to the ground and struck him on the head with a baton, leaving a deep gash.

She said his 18-year-old girlfriend, J-Niel Starkei, who was also arrested, was hit in the face and suffered a cut lip.

Sartain-Clark denies burglary and violent disorder, and is in custody awaiting a further hearing on Wednesday.

In the first case of its kind, he and his mother have been served with an eviction notice as council bosses seek to turf them out of their £225,000 taxpayer-subsidised flat in Battersea.

Spanish-born Miss De La Calva says her human rights have been violated and she is seeking legal advice.

Well… I guess Miss De La Calva is very lucky on a number of counts:

1. They live in a subsidised flat worth £225,000 thanks to you and me…

2. Her son didn’t riot in Spain… he would as like been beaten to the point of death, never mind having a ‘bump’ on his head…

In all fairness, why would should her home be at risk for the actions of her fcukwit son?


4 responses to “One for ‘call me Dave’s’ new ‘reforms’…

  1. Any takers willing to bet against her getting free govt legal aid? ./facepalm.

  2. Call me thick, but I really don’t understand.

    If she and her son are evicted from their flat, they will be homeless and the Council will be obliged to find accomodation for them.


  3. No, it doesn’t seem right “in all fairness” that a mother should be punished for the actions of her 18 year old son, who in law is considered to be an adult.
    She wasn’t a party to inciting him to riot and loot.

    She should not be punished by the state. It seems to be spiteful and malicious government policy.

  4. To save money and promote a ‘crime as opportunity’ paradigm changing agenda, 27 years ago the British Home Office deliberately cooked up a junk science myth to facilitate arguments against calls for more police officers. This led to the gradual withdrawal of officers from our streets. The myth is still being used today. the e-petition contains a link to the myth busting article by Dr Mike Sutton and calls for a funded evaluation of traditional random assignment, non-directed foot patrol:

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s