The Southport Murders

[dextrous63]

But it's only 7.30 pm😬😬

[Diasi]

One cannot but wonder why the police (and presumably the CPS) are reluctant to refer to it as such then 🤷🏻�♂️

So they don't have to explain why a terrorist wasn't on their radar & being monitored.

[GrannyMac]

I won't be surprised if he's sent to Broadmoor or similar. 

[muddy]

Nice new facility .
Terribly expensive .
For the rest of his worthless life .

Some crimes are so heinous there really is only rational solution 

Euthanasia .

[Diasi]

I'm a member of the Free Speech Union & I've just received this email.

As you may have seen, the 17 year-old charged with the murder of three schoolgirls in Southport last July has now been charged with terrorism offences, i.e., downloading a military study of an Al-Qaeda training manual and manufacturing Ricin poison.

In light of this news, I wanted to remind you that the Free Speech Union has an arrangement in place with xxxxxxxxx, a criminal solicitor at the firm of xxxxxxxxxxx, whereby you can call him if you're contacted by the police in connection with comments you've made on social media about the Southport attacks and subsequent civil disorder.

We're now extending that to include any comments about today's news.

Provided you're a member, we will pay for a telephone consultation with Luke or someone from his firm about your case and may, at our discretion, pay for a solicitor to attend a police interview, as well as further legal work on your case, including your entire defence.

Just call xxxxxxxxxxxxx and ask for xxxxxxxxx. That's an office number, but it will connect to an out-of-office mobile if you're calling outside office hours.

We hope none of our members will get into trouble. We've provided legal assistance to several who did get into difficulty over the summer for saying things about the Southport attack on social media, including one veteran of the Royal Marines charged with stirring up racial hatred who has pleaded not guilty. His trial is forthcoming and we're paying for a solicitor and a barrister.

Given the track record of the police and Director of Public Prosecutions over the summer, please think carefully before you say anything about these events or today's news on social media. Remember, one man was jailed for reposting three supposedly 'Islamophobic' memes on Facebook (although that prosecution may now be unsafe). You might think that prosecuting people for reposting memes is more reminiscent of a tin-pot dictatorship than the birthplace of parliamentary democracy – and I'd agree with you. But this is Starmer's Britain where free speech is not considered a human right worth defending.

If you are planning to say something on social media about any of this, we published some FAQs on online offences related to civil disorder which offer some guidance on what you can and can't say without getting into trouble. I suspect the authorities will be quick to pounce, particularly if there are more outbreaks of civil disorder in response to the latest news.

Another thing to bear in mind is that you're not supposed to say anything publicly about a forthcoming trial that risks prejudicing court proceedings. This is the rule of 'sub judice' and anyone who breaks it may be found to be in contempt of court. While it isn't usually enforced against non-journalists for saying things on social media, it could be. The maximum sentence for contempt is an unlimited fine and/or two years in prison.

In addition, you could conceivably be prosecuted for describing the attacker as an Islamist, with Merseyside Police maintaining that the motive for the attack still hasn't been established.

And remember, if the police do contact you in connection with something you've said on social media about these events, call xxxxxxxxxx. This is particularly important if you're charged with a criminal offence. Whatever you do, don't plead guilty until you've spoken to xxxxxx or one of his colleagues.
With kind regards,

Toby Young
General Secretary
The Free Speech Union

[muddy]

This was also on their website .

https://freespeechunion.org/southport-attacker-charged-with-having-al-qaeda-material-and-making-ricin-poison/

[Diasi]

Thanks for posting the link.

"And what about the many people arrested in August for social media posts about the Southport attack who came under enormous pressure from the police to plead guilty? Did the police know at that time that the news about the link to an Islamist training manual would eventually come out and that once it had it would be more difficult to persuade a jury to convict these people?" 

Which mirrors what I said in an earlier post, "The Establishment is trying, with no success I hope, to trivialise the three murders in the eyes of the public in order to keep a lid on them & to make the ensuing social media posts look unwarranted."

An MP has posted this but he has Parliamentary protection for whatever he says.

He said: "Any suggestion of a cover-up will permanently damage public trust in whether we're being told the truth about crime in our country.

"Keir Starmer must urgently explain to the country what he knew about the Southport attack and when he learned it.

"Across the board the hard reality of mass migration is being covered up. We need the truth – and we need to change."

[klondike]

But it's only 7.30 pm😬😬

Some free advice...  never adjust your clocks when legless. 

October 30, 2024, 08:44:49 AM

So they don't have to explain why a terrorist wasn't on their radar & being monitored.

Or alternately not monitored very well....

[Diasi]

Or alternately not monitored very well....

  Indeed, they'd be even more desperate to cover up that.

[klondike]

They've even said on the news in the past that there are so many it is difficult to monitor them all. Now I wonder why that might be 

[Ashy]

They keep letting them in, that's why. 

[klondike]

Oh surely not. That is far to obvious a reason. Surely they would have seen that and stopped them if they thought that. Maybe.

[JBR]

They keep letting them in, that's why.

They do.  In fact, proportionately cross-Channel invasions have increased since Labour took power.  I wonder why?  Is it:
- that Labour want as many as they can get, on the agreement that they will always vote Labour?
- that Son of a Toolmaker simply doesn't have a clue what to do?
- some other reason?

[klondike]

- some other reason?

To be honest I'd go with the weather being the main variant. Both Tory and Labour follow the same policy albeit under different names (Rwanda v Smash the Gangs). The correct name for both though is DO SFA ABOUT IT.

[muddy]

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-strange-silence-around-the-southport-attacks/