The Southport Murderer

L

Led By Donkeys

Roofer
It's all coming out now

At the time the police stated that it was not a terrorist incident despite them not having the opportunity to even start an investigation.

Having eventually completed the investigation they have charged him with terrorism.

The cover up failed miserably at the time of the murders - now they look like fools and agents promoting State propaganda. Embarrassing ineptitude
 
So...
You lose everyone's confidence in the political system.
You lose everyone's confidence in the idea of justice and the legal system.
You fuel the impression of living in a nation with nothing worth preserving from the past, nothing but racism and hatred today and nothing but hopeless decline for the future.
International relations... Down the Swanee And flirting with WW3 madness.

This is just my opinion, I suppose. Anyway, I remain optimistic.
 
RegiRoka said:
So...
You lose everyone's confidence in the political system.
You lose everyone's confidence in the idea of justice and the legal system.
You fuel the impression of living in a nation with nothing worth preserving from the past, nothing but racism and hatred today and nothing but hopeless decline for the future.
International relations... Down the Swanee And flirting with WW3 madness.

This is just my opinion, I suppose. Anyway, I remain optimistic.
Click to expand...
Have you got a spare room?
 
Led By Donkeys said:
At the time the police stated that it was not a terrorist incident despite them not having the opportunity to even start an investigation.
Click to expand...
Well they couldn't say it was, as they hadn't started the investigation.
Led By Donkeys said:
Having eventually completed the investigation they have charged him with terrorism.
Click to expand...
Correct. It takes time to get data from an encrypted phone or computer. Testing substances can't be done with a bit of litmus paper.

Also, they're charging him with terrorism, not the offences of murder.
 
What? said:
I wonder if this will mean there are some "unsafe" convictions to consider
Click to expand...
I hope so. Many of the convicted protestors were effectively railroaded and given very poor legal advice

At the same time the Police lied and misled the public, aided by the MSM, on instructions from twotierkeir and the poisonous goblin that is Yvette Cooper
 
What makes it worse is they are saying that the murder of 33 children is NOT being considered a terror related inceident, despite the other charges. Apparently he told the police at the time that Allah made him do it!! Absolutely baffling!!

The Liebour party reckon they only knew about the terror charges a couple of weeks ago. Think we may have been bulshiited once again. After what 2 tier Kier said about the riots and people, surely his position is untenable?
 
FoxInEssex said:
What makes it worse is they are saying that the murder of 33 children is NOT being considered a terror related inceident, despite the other charges. Apparently he told the police at the time that Allah made him do it!! Absolutely baffling!!

The Liebour party reckon they only knew about the terror charges a couple of weeks ago. Think we may have been bulshiited once again. After what 2 tier Kier said about the riots and people, surely his position is untenable?
Click to expand...
3 - Not 33!
 
From the Telegraph:

Senior government figures knew weeks ago Southport attacker could face terror charges​

Law officers were consulted on charges, Government confirms amid row about withholding information
 
Club_B00k_Crutchless said:
Well they couldn't say it was, as they hadn't started the investigation.

Correct. It takes time to get data from an encrypted phone or computer. Testing substances can't be done with a bit of litmus paper.

Also, they're charging him with terrorism, not the offences of murder.
Click to expand...
Your analogy doesn't add up lad! If they couldn't say it was terrorism ahead of an investigation then how the fuck can they claim it wasn't terrorist related ahead of said investigation?
 
FoxDownunder said:
Your analogy doesn't add up lad! If they couldn't say it was terrorism ahead of an investigation then how the fuck can they claim it wasn't terrorist related ahead of said investigation?
Click to expand...
It's not an analogy. They said it's not being treated as a terrorism related incident. The information they had at the time obviously didn't indicate it was. Just because a certain demographic is baying for blood, they won't confirm anything without firm evidence. Which, in this case, took time to put together.
 
Club_B00k_Crutchless said:
It's not an analogy. They said it's not being treated as a terrorism related incident. The information they had at the time obviously didn't indicate it was. Just because a certain demographic is baying for blood, they won't confirm anything without firm evidence. Which, in this case, took time to put together.
Click to expand...
Think you're missing my point bud but I'm not going to lose sleep over it 👍
 
Club_B00k_Crutchless said:
Well they couldn't say it was, as they hadn't started the investigation.

Correct. It takes time to get data from an encrypted phone or computer. Testing substances can't be done with a bit of litmus paper.

Also, they're charging him with terrorism, not the offences of murder.
Click to expand...
they already knew about him you wanker.
 
In the Bible it says that liars are people who hate themselves, apparently - I'm repeating. this as haven't read the Bible.


Adds up though.


I think his whole deluded world is on verge of collapsing around him to be honest.

He actually twists every single thing into woke bull shit, amazingly predictable.

Bet he wouldn't define what a women is🤣 fuck know how he had kids.
 
bnet said:
In the Bible it says that liars are people who hate themselves, apparently - I'm repeating. this as haven't read the Bible.


Adds up though.


I think his whole deluded world is on verge of collapsing around him to be honest.

He actually twists every single thing into woke bull shit, amazingly predictable.

Bet he wouldn't define what a women is🤣 fuck know how he had kids.
Click to expand...
We really missed stuff like this.
 
"not currently being treated as terror-related”

Easy to misunderstand if you're frothing at the mouth at the time, getting your pitch forks and torches ready.
 
Three out of five ain't bad:

The Terrorism Act 2000 defines terrorism, both in and outside of the UK, as the use or threat of one or more of the actions listed below, and where they are designed to influence the government, or an international governmental organisation or to intimidate the public. The use or threat must also be for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, racial or ideological cause.

The specific actions included are:

  • serious violence against a person;
  • serious damage to property;
  • endangering a person's life (other than that of the person committing the action);
  • creating a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public; and
  • action designed to seriously interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system.
Source: Crown Prosecution Service
 
Club_B00k_Crutchless said:
"not currently being treated as terror-related”

Easy to misunderstand if you're frothing at the mouth at the time, getting your pitch forks and torches ready.
Click to expand...
What point are you trying to make? It wasn't but now it is?

Incompetence and shambolic misleading from the police and government. How on earth do you think people will react the next time it happens (and it will) when they come out with the same thing. All they needed to say is that we are exploring all avenues and can't comment until we know the full facts. Not hard.

As it turns out, all the villification of people commenting on line was a PR disaster because they would have known from an early point that he was a terrorist. They tried to make him out to be a good little choir boy from Wales. What if next time something happens and it is not terror related? Who is now going to believe it?
 
Led By Donkeys said:
Three out of five ain't bad:

The Terrorism Act 2000 defines terrorism, both in and outside of the UK, as the use or threat of one or more of the actions listed below, and where they are designed to influence the government, or an international governmental organisation or to intimidate the public. The use or threat must also be for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, racial or ideological cause.

The specific actions included are:

  • serious violence against a person;
  • serious damage to property;
  • endangering a person's life (other than that of the person committing the action);
  • creating a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public; and
  • action designed to seriously interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system.
Source: Crown Prosecution Service
Click to expand...

Like I've said before recently. This disgusting murder of three children, may be turn out to fit the criteria above.
But at present we have no known intent or motive.
Something that instils terror in us all, is not necessarily terrorism.
A PDF is not enough.
Anything else is speculation at this point...
 
sixthswan said:
Like I've said before recently. This disgusting murder of three children, may be turn out to fit the criteria above.
But at present we have no known intent or motive.
Something that instils terror in us all, is not necessarily terrorism.
A PDF is not enough.
Anything else is speculation at this point...
Click to expand...
How does it not fit the criteria?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top