Now Starmer claims he’s champion of domestic violence victims – but he covered up abuse by Labour staffer

Right-winger’s hypocrisy plumbs Marianas-like depths

Labour ‘leader’ Keir Starmer is today attempting to brand himself as the champion of domestic violence and sexual assault victims – again attempting to use Liverpool, a city where he’s hated, for propaganda purposes.

Starmer tweeted that he’d an ‘important discussion’ on the topic with Liverpool’s mayor, then boasted that he’d personally ‘worked with victims and their families’ – and promised that Labour would ‘fast-track rape and domestic violence cases’:

After the obliteration of the ten promises he made to con Labour members into voting for him to lead the party, a Starmer promise isn’t worth the pixels it’s depicted in. But the reality is far worse, because Keir Starmer was repeatedly made aware by a Labour whistleblower that one of his front-benchers was protecting a staff member who was involved in the abuse of domestic violence victims she exploited through a now-defunct domestic violence ‘charity’ – and did nothing, leaving Khalid Mahmood on his front bench until Mahmood eventually decided to step down over political differences.

Worse still – and almost entirely ignored by the so-called ‘mainstream’ media – in whistleblower Elaina Cohen’s tribunal case against Mahmood, Mahmood and his legal team accepted ‘Victim A’s sworn statement about the abuse she had suffered at the hands of Mahmood’s office manager and alleged lover into evidence as truth without challenge.

And Victim A told the tribunal that she had suffered ‘sadistic’ abuse, threat and blackmail as Mahmood’s paramour tried to force her into theft and fraud and used domestic violence victims as entertainment for the rich and powerful:

The moment that evidence was accepted as fact, without challenge, in a legal proceedings Keir Starmer should have been forced by media coverage and a storm of public outrage into resigning. Yet so far, the ‘mainstream’ media have almost entirely ignored the revelations – and actively misreported the unfolding of the case.

And today, thanks to media collusion, Starmer is shamelessly boasting of his credentials as a champion of victims of domestic violence and sexual assault after he and his party cronies ignored the repeated warnings of a parliamentary whistleblower that such victims were being further abused and exploited, neither suspending Mahmood nor, according to Cohen, bothering to investigate her warnings and safeguarding victims.

That Starmer remains in post is bad enough, but to then try to exploit domestic violence victims for political gain is doubly unforgiveable.

SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and can afford to without hardship – please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep doing its job.

If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.


    1. Did you actually bother to read the full article before you posted this link?

      1. nellyskelly – Why would you want to rely on my opinion when you can enlighten yourself in just a few minutes.

      2. nellyskelly – Maybe you should read the article that Maria has linked to before embarrassing yourself further.

      3. Is asking you to enlighten us instead of trolling and puffing bubbles from your butt supposed to be embarrasing. What a warped individual you are BlueSteveH. To think that “you are a headhunted”teacher”” the must be head hunting “teachers” to the same standard as politicians.
        Simple question, enlighten us instead of blowing fart bubbles of sheer arrogance, ignorance and patronising.

      4. SteveH, I did read it with far a more analytical mind that you do.
        Starmer shouldn’t have waited for a Judge revoking the sentence after hearing an appeal. The woman should have never been prosecuted in the first place. She shouldn’t have spent a single day in jail and separated for her child, get it!

      5. Maria – Not really, there is no reason at all why Keir should have had any fore knowledge of this case or any involvement in it. Once this young woman had been convicted only a higher court could quash that conviction. Given your dislike of Keir Starmer I’m a little surprised that you have posted an article that is so complimentary to Keir for recognising and acknowledging the issue and for taking the steps to ensure that this couldn’t happen again.

    2. Maria – If you choose to esponmd to the usual tripe, I suggest this wording
      “So what, if you are expecting me to apologise then you are in for a interminable wait. In the context of the comments on this page I’m quite happy to stand by my original comment.”

      1. goldbach – You had to work hard to shoehorn that in. Did you read the article that Maria linked to before commenting?

      2. If you think that was working hard you’ve never worked as a swing grinder.

      3. goldbach – You’re right I’ve never worked as a swing grinder whatever that is, have you, was it a job that you enjoyed?


  1. The simple fact is that the MSM is not involved in reporting the “ttruth” or anything that approximates it. Surprise at that is whooly misplaced at this stage and we need to start considering alternative to promoting the truth (as this website does).

    1. David – I thought that the article that I linked to above was reasonably balanced.

      1. How very noble of the shithouse

        ‘Dont worry missus… I’ll make sure your abusive partner is prosecuted (but not if they’re Tory or a so-called celebrity)…Although you’re fooked if you think I’m gonna direct my party to vote to give your kids a free school meal while you abide in the refuge’

    1. This is code for:

      “I’m gonna introduce new laws which will allow plod to delve even further into people’s private lives, under the charade of improving the conviction rates”

      There is no habeus corpus; there is no right to silence as it was.

      And double jeopardy has been abolished, too.

      Pretty soon you’ll be as guilty as the state says you are. You’ll have to prove your innocence instead of the prosecution proving your guilt – like it or lump it**

      It’s coming. And all because they say rape convictions are too low… Well HOW do they KNOW?

      Rape is subjective. It is a bastard to prove AND should stay that way. And there are plenty of cases of malicious allegations. There is NO conclusive evidence that the odds are stacked against victims….especially female ones.

      Those that pander to the call for a vast increase in rape convictions can have zero complaint once the day comes when your innocence is to be proven, rather than your guilt.

      **Unless, of course, you happen to be a Tory or other member of the establishment…😙🎶

  2. Speaking of victims of domestic violence, I wonder if Starmer has spoken to Apsana Begum, yet.

    I’m sure she could have done with a kindly, word after, first, her court ordeal, and then, her subsequent acquittal on trumped-up charges. Especially, after it emerged that she – Apsana – had, also, been a victim of DV.

    Or, although, she’s no longer an MP of his party, counselled Claudia Webbe MP, on the DV she suffered at the hands of a former partner.

    That’s what a real Gallant Knight, championing DV victims, would do. Right?

    1. No chance, he would rather have red hot nails stuck in his eyes than speak to a muslim, black, “fringe Jewish” Socialist woman.

      1. nellyskelly – . You’re being silly and making stuff up again. Keir has taken a leading role in saving the lives of literally 100s of black and brown skinned people which is significantly more than most people can claim to have done.

      2. nellyskelly – Well yes he has, you really should do some research.

      3. Isn’t that good of him, wonder what happened to him since then, to turn out to despise Non/Anti-Zionist, Sosialist, Black, Muslim, Fringe Jewish women so much, it must have been quite profound.

  3. Oh, and by the way, I’m stunned to find out, Starmer was DPP at one point in his career.

    Can that be right? 😉

      1. I’m stunned you didn’t know what a ‘wink’ emoji indicates.

        On second thoughts, no, I’m not.

    1. Exactly! Supposedly a Human Rights Barister and all!
      It must be wrong! Is there such a thing as a Human Rights Remover?
      Oh yes of course there is, The UN. Are you sure he was not The Director of Human Rights Removal for the United Nations? Perhaps that was his passtime! When he wasn’t loopholing and fine tooth combing the Capture of the Good and Innocent and Releasing the Evil and Guilty.

      1. nellyskelly – Yes, you are more than welcome to trawl though them if you think it will help your cause (if you’ve worked out what that is yet)

  4. FS! Two minutes and he posts a ‘reply’ to George! Yep, constantly monitoring the site every day. Oh, but he’s not a paid full-time shill of course!

  5. “When I was working as director of public prosecutions, I worked with victims and their families to strengthen domestic abuse legislation”

    And then as so called “loto” you pretty much fucked up when it came to protecting MPs and Staff from barrages of constant abuse. Especially if they are Non/Anti-Zionists, Black, Muslim, “Fringe Jewish” women, Socialist, etc. Your rotten behaviour is noted, by all weilding a pencil at the next GE. You are a Fraud and a Liar!
    Oh, the Rivers of Tears when the “Any “labour is better…..” crowd finds out you are a far worse kettle of TORY than Johnson, Truss and Sunak combined. If ever there was a Charlatain, then you’d be it!

    1. nellyskelly – What did Corbyn do during his almost 5 years in office and did it make an iota of difference.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: