Now This Ghanaian Thug is Ours: Progressive judge spares violent loan shark criminal record to avoid deportation

Jamie Sarkonak

Updated Mon, May 11, 2026 at 6:00 a.m. EDT

5 min read

Add Yahoo as a preferred source to see more of our stories on Google.

Add Yahoo on Google

[The reality is that our courts are peopled by many social justice warriors who hate Whites — stupid traitor Whites appointed them — and give a break or a sentence discount to Third Worlders or native Indians, whever possible. One such judge i “

Justice Renu Mandhane, who was previously the chair of the Ontario Human Rights Commission, a role she used to champion progressive politics in the Ontario government. She pushed the notion that police were racist based on mere differences in statistics, that race should play an even bigger role in public service hiring and that gender identity should be taught in schools.

Mandhane has been a judge since 2020, and has used her post to continue her activism. In one case last year, for example, involving a Black man accused of possessing an illegal gun, she excluded the gun from trial because she felt the police had been racist despite admitting there was “no direct evidence of racial profiling” to substantiate the accusation. She scrutinized the police officer’s behaviour, found that he fell ever so short of perfection, and concluded he was somehow racist.”]

s

Last month, it wasn’t just a judge who excused a Ghanaian work permit holder for beating a woman in the street over an unpaid loan. It was also the Crown prosecutor.

The 34-year-old, known only as E.A. due to a publication ban, admitted to the Ontario Superior Court of Justice that he lured a woman who owed him money into a basement to demand repayment. The victim’s account was that, at this point, he put her in a choke hold, tried to rape her and took her phone as collateral, but in court only the phone theft was established to have occurred. (E.A. had countered that there was no attempted raping or choking, that the woman had a motive to fabricate such a story, and that the woman chased him out).

Security footage showed them both returning to the street, where they fought until E.A. pushed the woman to the ground and sped off in his car, leaving her alone on a dark, suburban road without a way to contact anyone for help.

Later, at the woman’s request, E.A. returned her phone. But a theft had still occurred, and a jury ultimately convicted him for it.

That left the question of sentence, which was to be answered by Justice Renu Mandhane, who was previously the chair of the Ontario Human Rights Commission, a role she used to champion progressive politics in the Ontario government. She pushed the notion that police were racist based on mere differences in statistics, that race should play an even bigger role in public service hiring and that gender identity should be taught in schools.

Mandhane has been a judge since 2020, and has used her post to continue her activism. In one case last year, for example, involving a Black man accused of possessing an illegal gun, she excluded the gun from trial because she felt the police had been racist despite admitting there was “no direct evidence of racial profiling” to substantiate the accusation. She scrutinized the police officer’s behaviour, found that he fell ever so short of perfection, and concluded he was somehow racist.

She’s not the only Ontario judge to do this: another former racial justice advocate and recent Liberal appointee, Faisal Mirza, has let illegal gun-toting Black men go for similar reasons at least twice.

In the case of E.A., however, Mandhane didn’t have to do much logic-bending to get to a result that let him off easy. Both the man’s defence lawyer and the Crown prosecutor agreed that he should receive a conditional discharge: instead of a conviction, he would be given a few tasks by a probation officer to complete to repent for his actions, and, as long as he fulfilled them, no criminal record.

Mandhane agreed. She noted the sympathetic aspects of his case: he was “relatively youthful” at 34, and didn’t have a criminal record (though, he’d only been in Canada since 2015).

“The offender is married with three children — one of whom has autism — and he is actively involved in their lives,” she continued. “The offender’s wife attended his trial and continues to support his rehabilitation. The offender is self-employed as a contractor. He has a valid permanent work permit and has applied for permanent residency in Canada. Because he is not a Canadian citizen, however, he will only be eligible to remain in Canada if I grant him a discharge.”

And from here, Mandhane showed us one of the many ways in which Canada’s system of screening out undesirable immigration candidates is broken. Temporary residents are technically on a shorter leash and any conviction should trigger the deportation process — but she got around that by simply not convicting him.

“I am willing to accept the joint submission because it would not bring the administration of justice into disrepute and is not contrary to the public interest.

“I also accept that — on its face — it would be disproportionate for the offender to be potentially removed from Canada and have his ties with his children forever severed for stealing a phone that he eventually returned to the rightful owner.”

Mandhane treated a case of loan-shark violence by a foreigner against a petite, young woman in a dark street as if it were a toy-sharing dispute between children at a daycare. Every day, courts see a good number of low-stakes, wrong-place-at-wrong-time cases where a conditional discharge is appropriate; this was absolutely not one of them.

The suitable result would have been jail, or at least house arrest or probation. That’s what you see when crime is committed in the course of debt collection: for example, a man in Newfoundland was sentenced to one year in jail in 2022 for participating in a group break-in during which “PAY THE DEBT” was written on the victim’s walls (among other acts of vandalism) and during which he stole some cannabis from the house; the organized crime factor worsened his case, but he was a young, first-time offender like E.A., and he didn’t physically attack anyone. He was a citizen though, and he was evidently not before a soft judge, resulting in a much more appropriate sentence.

But what stings most about E.A.’s case is the Crown prosecutor’s failure to pursue a proper punishment. No one at court that day stood up for the public interest — not even the guy whose job was specifically that.

This can change, but it’s going to take Ontario’s attorney general toughening up his prosecutions, Parliament prohibiting immigration status from being considered in sentencing, and people making sure that judges know when their decisions bring the administration of justice into disrepute. If we tolerate authorities who do everything they can to keep violent non-citizen rulebreakers in Canada, it’s going to keep happening.