Gypsy child crime wave grips Europe

By Mark Bannerman

Updated Mon Mar 29, 2010 9:13am AEDT

One of Romania's most powerful criminals has warned his country must do something to stop the wave of Gypsy child crime that is sweeping Europe or face a backlash against Romanians.

Simply known as Breliant, he freely boasts a pedigree rich in thieves. But this week on Four Corners he explains that unless gangs run by his countrymen stop using children to rob and steal, the Romanian Gypsies will be driven out of other EU countries. 

READ MORE: http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/03/29/2858403.htm?section=justin 

Gypsy Child Thieves

This World: Gypsy Child Thieves
Wednesday 2nd September 7.00pm BBC2

Produced/Directed/Presented by Liviu Tipurita

From Madrid to Milan to London, European cities have experienced a surge of street crime since the accession of Eastern European countries to the European Union in 2007. Much of it – pick pocketing, theft from bags, stealing from cash machines – is carried out by Romani Gypsy children from Romania. This World investigates this disturbing phenomenon: the adults who force the children on to the streets to beg and steal and the increasing evidence of Gypsy organised crime, trafficking children around Europe.

Romanian film maker Liviu Tipurita, who has spent many years investigating child trafficking and exploitation and who has made several films about Romania’s gypsy community, filmed in Spain and in Italy, where Gypsy crime has hit the headlines and where the right-wing government has introduced draconian measures to target the Gypsies. With remarkable access to Gypsy camps, the film charts how child crime has become increasingly common within the community. And covert footage shows just how hard these child thieves work to earn their adult controllers many thousands of pounds.

In Madrid police say that 95% of the children under 14 who they pick up are Romanian Gypsies. Their crime of choice is robbing people as they withdraw money from cash machines. Liviu filmed covertly as children as young as ten, who appeared well trained in distraction techniques, fearlessly targeted people withdrawing money. It often took several bystanders to force them off.

In a squalid, rat infested camp outside Madrid, 13-year-old Daniela explains that how the police are powerless to stop them: “When you steal, you can make 300 in one go. It’s only the police that catch us, they take the money we have on us, they take us to the day centre, and the centre lets us go.” Girl thieves like Daniela can be sold into marriage for as much as 25,000 Euros. The value of the Gypsy child brides is directly dependent on how skilled they are at stealing.

In Milan, Italian police launched a major investigation following an explosion of pick pocketing and theft at the city’s central station. The operation, involving covert surveillance and phone tapping, revealed a sophisticated international organisation that shipped hundreds of thousands of euros stolen by children on the streets to criminal gangsters back in Romania. A police raid discovered 15 children locked in a shed, and resulted in the conviction of 25 adults for their enslavement and exploitation. However, This World discovered that some of the children taken into care during the operation have escaped and are once again stealing on the streets of Milan under the control of adults.

At the end of his journey, Liviu Tipurita travels to Romania. Here the majority of Roma Gypsies live in abject poverty. They have been the victims of racism for centuries and live outside mainstream society. Organised crime exploits the desperation and poverty that blights the community. However even a senior figure in the Gypsy underworld, interviewed for the programme, believes that the stealing has gone too far. Revealing the fabulous mansions and expensive cars that have been bought with the proceeds of crime abroad, Breliant believes that the current level of crime could lead to further problems for the Romani Gypsies: “Our country won’t understand us any longer, the Western countries will chase us away. And then I ask myself… where are we going to go? Where will we live?”

Ombudsman in firestorm over ‘gypsy crime’ comments

Written by Attila Leitner
Thursday, 16 April 2009

Although civil rights ombudsman Máté Szabó clarified his comments on “gypsy crime”, human rights associations continued to demand his resignation last week.

President László Sólyom met with Szabó, reportedly telling him that his remarks had endangered the public’s trust in his office and warned that the protection of rights can only be effective if the four ombudsmen work together.

The president expressed his hope that Szabó will manage to get the trust of the people back by continuing his civil rights work, which has already revealed numerous irregularities. A statement from the ombudsman’s office said Szabó felt the meeting had been instructive.

In an interview with the news weekly Figyelő, Szabó said that Hungarian society needs to be warned about “gypsy crimes”. According to the ombudsman “gypsy crime” is a special type of “livelihood delinquency”, often carried out in groups. “This is a collectivist, nearly tribal society, which stands in sharp contrast with the Hungarian society’s individualist approach”, Szabó said, adding that the state has a crime prevention role and “if a criminal profile is seen, then society needs to be warned, and it has to be called what it is”.

“I am glad that the ombudsmen for data protection and minority rights would like to solve this problem, but without the majority commissioner, myself, this is not possible”, said Szabó adding again it is in the best interest of society to be warned if it is threatened by a specific group of criminals.

The Hungarian Civil Liberties Union (TASZ) said that such comments coming from one of the most important persons in human rights protection were unacceptable and requested that the ombudsman put out a statement making it clear that his words were improper and offensive, instead of trying to blame the press.

In his statement the commissioner said an “unfortunate, but not malicious” headline was the cause of the outrage, adding that, just as before, he condemns racism in all its manifestations, whether in words or in actions.

A joint statement by a number of Roma and human rights organisations said that the interview and statement afterwards made it clear that the ombudsman cannot properly fulfil this high office.

The Eötvös Károly Institute noted that, besides the fact that the ombudsman’s comments were unacceptable, they make it clear that he believes the office is there to protect the majority against the minority, which shows that the ombudsman has no clear idea of what the protection of civil rights means.

In order to remove an ombudsman from office, the commissioner needs to resign or must be dismissed by a two-thirds parliamentary majority.

‘Gypsy crime’ versus ‘political crime’

Written by Jan Mainka, Publisher

Monday, 16 February 2009

The Veszprém murder made it clear that protection rackets remain a problem in Hungary. Secondly, and more emphatically, it demonstrated that relations between ethnic Hungarians and their fellow Gypsy citizens are at breaking point.

In public debate this social tension has overshadowed the real motive for the crime – namely extorting protection money. Enraged citizens were less worked up about the state’s inability to protect its citizens from the crime than the fact that the Veszprém knife killers were “once again” Gypsies. The focus was less on their terrible act of murder, than on the climax of an escalating ethnic conflict.

“Gypsy crime” was denounced, rather than inadequate public safety. The murderers of the Veszprém handball idol Marian Cozma and their relatives earned the hatred and the thirst for revenge of the majority of society, not only because of their crime, but also because they are Gypsies. All the pent-up frustration of highly problematic daily interaction seemed suddenly to find an outlet with the new martyr figure of Cozma. The prominence and widespread popularity of the victim, as well as the brutality of the crime caused the floodgates to open. The fronts in Hungarian society have rarely been so clearly personified. On one side there was the good-hearted sportsman who came to the aid of a restaurant employee in trouble, and on the other side the three ruthless killers whose faces the whole country has now seen. In view of this clear division of roles, regard for political correctness was abandoned and the public expression of anger became uninhibited.

Political correctness

Anyone daring to make mention of racism or ethnic prejudice in the current charged atmosphere is also guilty! Carried along by the wave of anger, politicians of all colours who generally take an evasive approach, particularly in the case of the Gypsy question, have now turned their attentions to this taboo topic more conspicuously than at any other time. After all it must gradually be dawning on them that Hungary is sitting on an ethnic powder keg that could explode at any time. Again we can see how little has been done in the two decades since the change of regime to put an end to this smouldering conflict. It is increasingly clear that the billion-forint social transfers of the past years have had barely any effect, and may even have exacerbated the issue. Not to mention the ridiculous attempt to solve the Gypsy problem by using the neutral term Roma when the Gypsies in Hungary describe themselves as Gypsies. It is surely no consolation for the relatives and friends of Cozma that he was stabbed to death not by invidious Gypsies, but by Roma citizens. In any case, if the problem is not tackled at its roots, then the term “Roma” will soon also be on track for political incorrectness.

In dubio pro reo

The term “Gypsy crime” that is increasingly used in populist and fundamentalist circles similarly ignores the crux of the problem. Even in the case of statistically proven correlations between skin colour and crime rates, we should be wary of making such unfounded generalisations in the heat of the moment. Regardless of the fact that this form of prejudgement cannot be reconciled with the principles of a state based on the rule of law, this term is misleading and tendentious. Verbally it turns a more-or-less probable correlation into a certainty. It suggests that there are only two types of Gypsies: criminals and future criminals – which, fortunately, is not the case.

Speaking sweepingly of “Gypsy crime” is just as misplaced as speaking of “political crime”, instead of referring to the suspected crimes of a certain János Zuschlag or György Hunvald, to mention the two most prominent cases of the past week. Even the fact that purely statistically there is more talk of politicians in connection with corruption and embezzlement than, for example, teachers or postal officers, does not give us the right to prejudge them.

The comparison with politicians throws light on a surprising parallel: the lax handling of state funds has contributed to both groups becoming problem groups. Access to tax money was and is made too easy for these groups, whether we are speaking of social benefits in the first case, or subsidies (Zuschlag) and revenues from the sale of state assets (Hunvald) in the second case. It is said that opportunity makes a thief. In the case of the two problem groups, this consists of too easy, opaque and inadequately monitored access to funds. Members of the underclass – not only those of Gypsy origin – continue to receive excessively generous direct and indirect social benefits without sufficient controls or requirements to do anything in return (for example ensuring that children attend school or carrying out community work).

In this way, such citizens are kept quiet, but are given no preparation for playing a successful part in the labour market. Their peripheral position in society is further cemented by this form of help. Likewise, through too easy access to state funds and positions, politicians lose their motivation to improve their material situation primarily through exemplary service to their country. Expecting this situation to change itself is just as naive as waiting for a cat that until now has been comfortably fed on pet food to suddenly turn from a cuddly toy into a proper mouse hunter.

The fundamental problem is that at the expense of society a standard of living has been put in reach of both groups that is higher than can be justified by their actual contributions to society. What was morally dubious in times of reasonably sound state finances, now simply cannot be financed any more. The state can as little afford to indiscriminately throw around social benefits, as it can to satisfy all officials on the take.

The gradual reduction of funds to both groups will lead to unwanted, but unsurprising side effects. The underclass which is comparatively lacking in motivation to work and training will increasingly try to compensate for the reduction in social support in other ways, and will do so not only by entering into employment relations on the labour market which in any case is shrinking. The possibility of violent protests, similar to those of a few years ago in Slovakia, cannot be excluded. In the case of politicians the drying up of illegal additional income sources will probably result in even stronger negative selection. Increasingly incapable politicians will have to struggle with even bigger problems. There is little that a few idealists can do to change that.