Nick
Administrator
The other thing is if he really got kicked out of school for taking in knives and all of that stuff and if it's true.
Southport Stabbing (3 Viewers)
- Thread starter Grendel
- Start date
The other thing is if he really got kicked out of school for taking in knives and all of that stuff and if it's true.
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
So he wasn't born in Wales?
Nick
Administrator
Could probably go round all day with this one, probably depends on his upbringing and how he saw himself. You could have one family from Rwanda who bring their kids up to see themselves as Rwandan but the Rwandan family next door see themselves as British.
Haaland is a proud Norwegian isn't he?
Could go on all day with examples for either side.
Again, the fact the police etc were so secretive and actually misled just opens up people to have theories about it.
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
In that case, are those of us with non-British parents not actually British? I've got as much claim to be British as him.
Nick
Administrator
It probably depends on how you see yourself and how you were raised to see yourself?
There are plenty of people born in Britain who won't or don't see themselves as British.
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
I don't disagree but the stuff about "he turned out not to be Welsh" are based on what?
mmttww
Well-Known Member
...including some people whose whole ancestry is British. When huge swathes of the population here let Australian and South African billionaires shape the way they think and act without any critical thinking, it gets harder to see being 'British' as such a good thing.
Take some of the stuff shared on here and the views people chuck around. It's a forum that exists because of what started as a factory team and it's full of divisive sh*te which tends towards blaming immigrants and poor people for endemic issues caused by the wealthiest.
Doubt I'm alone on here in wondering when caring about Britain or considering yourself British meant blaming marginalised people for so many things. Years of that at the expense of solidarity vs. vested interests takes its toll and can leave you feeling pretty alienated.
Last edited:
Como
Well-Known Member
According to the media he was born in Cardiff, I have no reason to believe that was also a lie.
I said he is not Welsh.
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
Last time I checked Cardiff was still in Wales.
rob9872
Well-Known Member
But they play in the EFL ...
Nuskyblue
Well-Known Member
Bloody immigrants
Sick Boy
Super Moderator
I have Irish parents but was born in England. I take it you don’t consider me English?
mmttww
Well-Known Member
Southport attack: What questions are being asked about the case?
The complexities of how our prosecutions work can mean there are limits on what the public can know.
www.bbc.co.uk
In case people feel like getting some facts in the mix.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Southport attack: What questions are being asked about the case?
The complexities of how our prosecutions work can mean there are limits on what the public can know.www.bbc.co.uk
In case people feel like getting some facts in the mix.
Other than the fact it’s nonsense
mmttww
Well-Known Member
What do you suggest as a trustworthy source? I'd put money on you not having read the article, either. You're giving off strong 'Stop the Count' vibes now.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Yes I have read the article.
There are actually numerous examples where suspects before arrest have been identified and the relative crime that has been committed.
If we are to take an extreme example we could look at Raul Moat. Mr Moat was identified as a suspect in a killing spree and people were warned to stay away from him. Mr Moat may have been entirely innocent and surely therefore should not be named at all. If he had been apprehended and pled not guilty would his trial not have been prejudiced.
The reason the police appear to be saying it was not revealed at the time is because it cannot be related to the original knife attack and was therefore a separate investigation which has only just concluded for pre trial.
They also made a statement their was "very low risk" to the public with the substance found. I assume even if it was extreme high risk the argument deployed here would still stand? Namely that the evidence could not be revealed as juries would be influenced (I am sure the fact we already know he is a knife wielding maniac would not influence anyone at all). So I guess people would have had to be poisoned so the individuals rights are protected. Good job the Salisbury poisoners were not Welsh.
Otis
Well-Known Member
Where's Van Helsing when you want him?
Always seemed to be the only one able to stop the Count at times.
CovValleyBoy
Well-Known Member
Southport attack: What questions are being asked about the case?
The complexities of how our prosecutions work can mean there are limits on what the public can know.www.bbc.co.uk
In case people feel like getting some facts in the mix.
I
The BBC in my opinion has lost the impeccable news credibility it enjoyed many, many years ago. I would like to cancel my TV licence but don't wish to break the law. With Labour in power I guess I will be paying for at least another 5 years. They won't be ending the compulsory subscription I suspect.
Mcbean
Well-Known Member
It’s a travesty that it’s a criminal offence to not pay it and for those who were jailed That’s just effing ridiculous
Skybluekyle
Well-Known Member
As always, I will defer to those who know more, but to my knowledge this is not entirely accurate. The starting point of criminal investigations is that suspects have the right to privacy and their name should not be released until charged. With that being said, in the example given, the suspect would be considered an exceptional risk to the public, and here is where the situation becomes nuanced.
If Moat turned out to be innocent and no charges were made, he could have had the right to sue the police for defamation, but the police would argue it was a risk assessment and it was considered less risky to release Moat's information risking a law suit than if they had withheld the information and a member of the public was harmed.
Ring Of Steel
Well-Known Member
Very often they only release once a verdict has been reached.
in the case of Moat- if there’s a murderer on the loose they’ll release a mugshot despite usual procedure, because they want people to be able to avoid the individual, it’s public safety. This guy was in custody so there was no need to be protecting anyone, so he still has the right to not have his picture shown until the inevitable guilty verdict.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
So if the poison was deemed life threatening they still couldn’t say anything?
Ring Of Steel
Well-Known Member
I don’t think so, but happy to be corrected.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
They cordoned off areas of Salisbury didn’t they?
Ring Of Steel
Well-Known Member
They are hardly comparable are they, in terms of public safety. One case there’s traces of the stuff in public places and people getting poisoned, the other it’s contained and there’s no risk to public safety. I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make, does it matter?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
They said there was low risk in Southport - which suggests there was some
Ring Of Steel
Well-Known Member
Bearing in mind the nature of the substance I would imagine there is no such thing as “zero” risk. But it was a very different scenario- in Salisbury people in the street were coming into contact with it, nobody knew the scope of where else it could be, who had it & how much there was. Bit different to a small bit in one house and you know what’s going on. However again- what is the point you’re trying to get at here?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
I’ve made my point in one of the posts above.
What is your point and why are you so invested?
Ring Of Steel
Well-Known Member
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Well once again you were wrong, and needed to be corrected
I don’t see where I am wrong at all - you as usual are just flapping around trying to defend the indefensible
Ring Of Steel
Well-Known Member
lol- what exactly are you saying is indefensible?
CovValleyBoy
Well-Known Member
Remember when Question Time was actually a "thing". Along with Football Focus it has become unwatchable. Just look at the viewing figures !?
mmttww
Well-Known Member
What do you suggest as a reliable source of news and fact checking for an issue like this? A straight answer would be good. If this one is nonsense, assume you can point to one that isn't.
Edit: please FFS can the pointless licence fee sh*te stay out of this thread, see also 'BBC bias!'. jfc