What's new

Asylum seeker who claimed to be 15 and joined school is an adult

shaaik

First Class Star
Joined
Nov 14, 2010
Runs
3,984
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Asylum seeker who claimed to be 15 and joined school is an adult <a href="https://t.co/QU2BF1ghvo">https://t.co/QU2BF1ghvo</a></p>— Sky News (@SkyNews) <a href="https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1066274917388292096?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 24, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


He spent six weeks as a Year 11 student in Ipswich, with fellow pupils asking: "How's there a 30-year-old man in my maths class?

An asylum seeker who claimed he was 15 and joined a Year 11 class at a secondary school is now being treated as an adult.

An investigation was launched earlier this month when children at Stoke High School in Ipswich raised concerns about the age of a new student, who enrolled in September.

The question of his age came to light when students sent Snapchat photographs of the man with the caption "how's there a 30-year-old man in my maths class?"

The Home Office has now confirmed that an age assessment, completed by the local authority, has verified that the man is over the age of 18.

A spokesperson said: "We are fully committed to safeguarding children and are looking into the circumstances of this case to understand how it was handled."

Parents were furious over the incident - with the Mirror reporting that some students were pulled out of school as a result of the man's presence in the classroom.

One mother said: "The question is, how didn't the Home Office or the teachers see what was blindingly obvious to everyone else?

"Heads need to roll and us parents won't rest until we get a full explanation of what went wrong."

Students reportedly discovered photographs on Facebook where he appeared to have a beard and drink beer.

The man, who is believed to be from Iran, was suspended from the school and could be deported as he is now being processed as an adult asylum seeker.


In 2016, 580 child asylum seekers - of a total 9,800 applications - had their status challenged by the Home Office. In 61% of those 580 cases, it was decided that the child was over 18.

If there is a doubt about someone's age as part of an immigration case, the Home Office can arrange for social workers to undertake an age assessment.

The claimant must be treated as an adult if their physical appearance and demeanour "very strongly suggests that they are significantly over 18 years of age".

Assessments of physical appearance can include indicators of age such as height, build, facial hair and voice pitch when there is no reliable documentary evidence to support their claimed age.

The age of teenage asylum seekers became an issue of national scrutiny in 2016 when unaccompanied child migrants were admitted to the UK.

MP David Davies tweeted photographs of them saying "these don't look like 'children' to me".

Groups working with child migrants say child asylum seekers are left traumatised by invasive age checks built on a culture of disbelief toward those claiming sanctuary in the UK.

http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/s...ed-school-is-an-adult&p=10001829#post10001829
 
Last edited:
He must have been listening to Shahid Afridi as how to reduce his age every year!!:kakmal
 
If he identifies as a 15 year old he should be treated as such, stop being age-o-phobic :P
 
This is not an isolated incident- going back a few years i had an Afgh lad who was sitting in my year 9 group, he was to put it conservatively 20+. I reported it my SMT in school but they said it would look racist if they did anything.
 
I wouldn't be surprised if he has 'converted' to Christianity as well. These immigrants from Iran have previous.
 
I wouldn't be surprised if he has 'converted' to Christianity as well. These immigrants from Iran have previous.

Can't blame them for switching alliances if their previous God didn't do much for them back in the old country. If converting to Christianity benefits them currently then I see no problem with that, neither should anyone else.
 
I wouldn't be surprised if he has 'converted' to Christianity as well. These immigrants from Iran have previous.

We PK's are not the best of muslims, but even the worst ones identify as muslims and It may be a generalisation but i have yet to meet an Iranian who doesnt eat haraam or drinks.
 
Can't blame them for switching alliances if their previous God didn't do much for them back in the old country. If converting to Christianity benefits them currently then I see no problem with that, neither should anyone else.

I have a problem with it. They're liars. They're no more Christian than they were practicing Muslims in Iran.
 
I wouldn't be surprised if he has 'converted' to Christianity as well. These immigrants from Iran have previous.

You're most likely correct.

It's one of following things:

Christian Convert
Part of some political movement
Homosexual
Had an affair with some woman
 
I have a problem with it. They're liars. They're no more Christian than they were practicing Muslims in Iran.

Who are you to decide who is a practicing Muslim/Christian or not? This is the hate mongering and judgment passing you thekedaars of religion believe in. Whatever they do is between them and their God, and he will judge them accordingly. Not you.
 
Who are you to decide who is a practicing Muslim/Christian or not? This is the hate mongering and judgment passing you thekedaars of religion believe in. Whatever they do is between them and their God, and he will judge them accordingly. Not you.

Who am I?

I work for the government in this field.

Take your presumptuous, prepackaged response to unpar jahils elsewhere, I know what I'm talking about.
 
Last edited:
Who am I?

I work for the government in this field.

So just because you work for the government you think you can decide who is a real Muslim/Christian or not? Wonder what you will do if you actually had some real power some day.

Take your presumptuous, prepackaged response to unpar jahils elsewhere

The irony.

I know what I'm talking about.

Keep telling yourself that.
 
We PK's are not the best of muslims, but even the worst ones identify as muslims and It may be a generalisation but i have yet to meet an Iranian who doesnt eat haraam or drinks.

And to extend it I am yet to meet one who doesn’t integrate well or is intolerant to other faiths
 
So just because you work for the government you think you can decide who is a real Muslim/Christian or not? Wonder what you will do if you actually had some real power some day.



The irony.



Keep telling yourself that.

I already had the power to make those decisions. It was my job. I am not God, but then nor is their asylum claim a spiritual deed. So religion doesn't come into it. Only evidence.

Learn something about the asylum system and get back to me. Even then, you won't be able make any relevant points, because you're unaware of the tests and measures of how an asylum claim is given weight.

I'm not going to apologise for being able to detect rubbish. If I knew his grounds for asylum, I'd write you his story out now without knowing his case. Of what I'd write, 80% would be correct.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I already had the power to make those decisions. It was my job. I am not God, but then nor is their asylum claim a spiritual deed. So religion doesn't come into it. Only evidence.

Learn something about the asylum system and get back to me. Even then, you won't be able make any relevant points, because you're unaware of the tests and measures of how an asylum claim is given weight.

Many have escaped their countries like Iran as you pointed out to escape persecution (religious) or otherwise. If claiming to be Christian helps their cause to stay away from danger and enjoy basic human rights then I'm all for it. Their religious views do not matter if they are suitable to successfully integrate into Western society which as you claim if they are non practicing Muslims would be a lot easier.

I'm not going to apologise for being able to detect rubbish. If I knew his grounds for asylum, I'd write you his story out now without knowing his case. Of what I'd write, 80% would be correct.

So you're just going to write down the story about an individual case as a generalization just because you can detect rubbish without any actual research? Wow, just wow.

Wonder who made you in charge of handling this and I feel sorry for the people whose cases you are handling.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Many have escaped their countries like Iran as you pointed out to escape persecution (religious) or otherwise. If claiming to be Christian helps their cause to stay away from danger and enjoy basic human rights then I'm all for it. Their religious views do not matter if they are suitable to successfully integrate into Western society which as you claim if they are non practicing Muslims would be a lot easier.



So you're just going to write down the story about an individual case as a generalization just because you can detect rubbish without any actual research? Wow, just wow.

Wonder who made you in charge of handling this and I feel sorry for the people whose cases you are handling.

So genuine asylum seekers should suffer so someone with a fake asylum claim can enjoy some booze and women? I guess the safeguarding of the children in the classroom don't matter to you either.

There's a reason why I've progressed to where I am now. I'm good at what I do. I put the needs of my family, this society, genuine asylum seekers and this country above the needs of a foreign national making fake asylum claims.

I do it with professionalism.

Everything I've said is hard fact.

You sound like someone with some asylum baggage.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Contradiction much :13:

How do you know?

What can you tell me about trends and patterns of Iranian asylum claims?

How do you know what weight and measures are applied?

How do you know what in the remaining 20% of his story will lead to a grant or refusal in his case?

How do you know what information I've taken from the article and my own knowledge to come to the conclusion I have?

This guy will have wished he was straight up and declared his age from the start. Credibility already ruined.

You are out of your depth.

I'm still waiting for why you think this chancer has more right to be in the UK as a refugee than genuine asylum cases.

I'm also waiting for you to tell me why your morally corrupt approach to letting in fake asylum claimants is beneficial to the UK in any way whatsoever.

As well as why this man has the right to be a threat to our children under the banner of freedom.
 
That is true but it also shows that there is an inferiority complex when you see nothing good about your culture or religion.

It also shows that you have critical thinking and don’t feel the need to blindly follow dogmas because they were relevant a few centuries past
 
How do you know?

What can you tell me about trends and patterns of Iranian asylum claims?

How do you know what weight and measures are applied?

How do you know what in the remaining 20% of his story will lead to a grant or refusal in his case?

How do you know what information I've taken from the article and my own knowledge to come to the conclusion I have?

This guy will have wished he was straight up and declared his age from the start. Credibility already ruined.

You are out of your depth.

I'm still waiting for why you think this chancer has more right to be in the UK as a refugee than genuine asylum cases.

I'm also waiting for you to tell me why your morally corrupt approach to letting in fake asylum claimants is beneficial to the UK in any way whatsoever.

As well as why this man has the right to be a threat to our children under the banner of freedom.

Go and read back my initial post. It has got nothing to do with this specific case. I was just poiting out your gross generalization by lumping all Iranian immigrants into one group.

It was you then who started acting all high and mighty about how you are an immigration officer who is a real professional but does not judge on a case to case basis but instead just uses his "experience" to confirm his assumption that the applicant is a 80% fraud. Your job is to look at each case subjectively without pre conceived notions. If you reject even one applicant based on your obvious bias then you shouldn't be doing this job.

I personally would not have someone judging immigration cases with such predisposed biases.
 
Can't blame them for switching alliances if their previous God didn't do much for them back in the old country. If converting to Christianity benefits them currently then I see no problem with that, neither should anyone else.

No problem with them switching alliances if it is genuine, obviously I don't believe it is, that is why I put the 'converted' in quotation marks. We Brits have tolerated enough immigration from every corner of the world, is it too much to ask that at least those who come here don't lie about their age or any other details which they find convenient?
 
No problem with them switching alliances if it is genuine, obviously I don't believe it is, that is why I put the 'converted' in quotation marks. We Brits have tolerated enough immigration from every corner of the world, is it too much to ask that at least those who come here don't lie about their age or any other details which they find convenient?

People coming from warn torn countries or fleeing persecution may make up lies to try to be applicable, although I understand that, it is up to the authorities to review their case and judge their application according to the laws of the land as is right. If it poses a risk to the host country in any way then very well reject the application. I was just pointing out the generalization that was going on by lumping everyone into one group.

However I find this case quite amusing and probably scary to those affected that how could the guy in the OP could have passed for 15 and gone through the checks and measures put into place when even children could point out that he is obviously an adult.
 
Can't blame them for switching alliances if their previous God didn't do much for them back in the old country. If converting to Christianity benefits them currently then I see no problem with that, neither should anyone else.

In response to "converted", you are clearly saying you find it acceptable that someone puts in a fake asylum claim on the grounds of religious persecution.

To which I responded that I deem them liars, and stated why, because that is exactly the history that fake Iranian asylum applicant's give. Histories of non-Islamic practice, poor Islamic knowledge and contradictory views on religion. That is why a conversion story is the best to go with for those who submit fake claims. I know this because it is my job, I have seen it over, and over and over, and over again, and the reason I am so good at my job is that when 80% of the story of a claim is the same, I am able to delve into the remaining 20% to isolate the genuine cases from the fake ones.

The ones which are rejected, ALL have the same flaws. These are the trends and patterns. That is how you know WHAT to ask and HOW to ask it when conducting the interview. That is exactly WHY you take each case by its merits, but hello Sherlock, you don't think it's wise to investigate why so many people are saying the exact same thing? You don't even know what I'm referring to.

At no point did I say that if I wrote out 80% of the story, it would dictate whether the asylum decision would lead to a grant or a refusal. You have made all those assumptions out of ignorance. I have documented EVIDENCE of what to consider for Iranian asylum cases. This is public information, that if you had any awareness, you would know what to look for.

What I absolutely ABHOR is people like you that justify lying and putting people at risk, under the justification of Human Rights. You have shown yourself up that you have no objection to such moral bankruptcy, and are willing to let genuine people be affected to their detriment in favour of of chancers and fraudsters.
 
Last edited:
It also shows that you have critical thinking and don’t feel the need to blindly follow dogmas because they were relevant a few centuries past

I see this as a lack of critical thinking rather than critical thinking. Unlike you i dont see white culture is perfect and i dont rubbish ours- both have strengths and weaknesses but for you apeing the white man means critical thinking, i see it as lack of.
 
In response to "converted", you are clearly saying you find it acceptable that someone puts in a fake asylum claim on the grounds of religious persecution.

To which I responded that I deem them liars, and stated why, because that is exactly the history that fake Iranian asylum applicant's give. Histories of non-Islamic practice, poor Islamic knowledge and contradictory views on religion. That is why a conversion story is the best to go with for those who submit fake claims. I know this because it is my job, I have seen it over, and over and over, and over again, and the reason I am so good at my job is that when 80% of the story of a claim is the same, I am able to delve into the remaining 20% to isolate the genuine cases from the fake ones.

The ones which are rejected, ALL have the same flaws. These are the trends and patterns. That is how you know WHAT to ask and HOW to ask it when conducting the interview. That is exactly WHY you take each case by its merits, but hello Sherlock, you don't think it's wise to investigate why so many people are saying the exact same thing? You don't even know what I'm referring to.

At no point did I say that if I wrote out 80% of the story, it would dictate whether the asylum decision would lead to a grant or a refusal. You have made all those assumptions out of ignorance. I have documented EVIDENCE of what to consider for Iranian asylum cases. This is public information, that if you had any awareness, you would know what to look for.

What I absolutely ABHOR is people like you that justify lying and putting people at risk, under the justification of Human Rights. You have shown yourself up that you have no objection to such moral bankruptcy, and are willing to let genuine people be affected to their detriment in favour of of chancers and fraudsters.

My wife is also a lawyer here in Germany and handles a couple of immigration cases pro bono per month. There are many factors where people lie about their age/religion for various reasons. Many of these people have been traumatized due to war, persecution etc and will do anything to not go back.

My point was that a person who deals with these cases should not have biases and should judge each case according to its merits. It's like if a Jewish person appearing before a Nazi judge and the judge saying "80% of you people are a thieving, conniving, inferior race but I will keep an open mind and give you a fair verdict.

If a person is given a fair assessment and is then given a negative or positive decision after weighing the pros and cons then I have no problem with it, as is the rule of law.

Anyway all I see is more self back patting about how good you are and how you are able to detect 80% of the fraudulent cases due to experience and some form of ESP then I have nothing more to say to you.

Hope you keep the average up at 80% or thereabouts. Good luck.
 
My wife is also a lawyer here in Germany and handles a couple of immigration cases pro bono per month. There are many factors where people lie about their age/religion for various reasons. Many of these people have been traumatized due to war, persecution etc and will do anything to not go back.

My point was that a person who deals with these cases should not have biases and should judge each case according to its merits. It's like if a Jewish person appearing before a Nazi judge and the judge saying "80% of you people are a thieving, conniving, inferior race but I will keep an open mind and give you a fair verdict.

If a person is given a fair assessment and is then given a negative or positive decision after weighing the pros and cons then I have no problem with it, as is the rule of law.

Anyway all I see is more self back patting about how good you are and how you are able to detect 80% of the fraudulent cases due to experience and some form of ESP then I have nothing more to say to you.

Hope you keep the average up at 80% or thereabouts. Good luck.

You're bleating on about something you clearly don't understand. You have no context of what I'm referring to.

80% of a story for a fake Iranian religious persecution claim. For EACH case. It is the 20% of particular detail which establishes whether it is genuine or not. On it's OWN merit.

Why are 80% of stories the same? Because people use successful Iranian religious persecution applications of the past to shape their story of today, thinking it will benefit their claim if they just repeat what is established common occurrences.

I'd rather talk to your wife about this than you, because I am sure she is more informed and will actually understand how asylum interviews work, and that includes both the pro's and con's of an asylum interview and the process of coming to a decision.

I don't have to claim any of my relatives do something to make out like I know what I'm talking about.
 
Last edited:
Additionally, your point was the fact that you would let any Tom, Dick and Harry into a country without any scrutiny, and if they get away with it, power to them.

Don't try to pull this reasoning about why people may conceal or lie about information, I'm aware of it better than you are. That was not the original sentiment you were expressing.

You assume you can lecture me on bias when your posts reek of your own biases and prejudice all over the forum, as well as a clear inferiority complex.

It should not be surprising to you that I am qualifying my responses including my own experience and knowledge considering you were the one who asked me "Who are you?"

I could simply leave it at "More qualified than you" on this subject matter.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top