How Could The Authorities Know This Is A "terrorist Incident"?

[sandyRoe]

It could have been perpetrated by someone who is mentally ill.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35018789

[VHG]

They would not say it WAS terrorist related if they were not sure.

Generally they err on the side of caution and say things are NOT terrorist related (to avoid worrying the public) unless they are certain.

[vulcan42]

Heard on another news channel the person shouted this is for Lybia, presume the Police believed him.

[Buenchico]

Surely it's standard police procedure to assume the worst scenario initially and then to downgrade the investigation later if they've got it wrong to start with, isn't it?

For example, when I worked on the railways every incident of someone being hit by a train was always initially regarded as a crime scene until proved (or, at least, strongly indicated) to be otherwise.

Similarly, when the old lady across the road from me was found dead at the foot of her stairs, the street was buzzing with coppers making door-to-door enquiries (on the assumption that they might be dealing with a murder) until it was established that she'd simply had a stroke and fallen down the stairs (or the other way round).

So, until the Leytonstone incident is found not to have been an act of terrorism, the police must naturally start from the assumption that it was.

[sandyRoe]

If he'd shouted, 'This is for Syria', it would have been more topical.
It's a bad business whatever the reason.

[douglas9401]

If they're treating it as a terrorist incident let's holster those tasers and break out the proper gear.

[Baldric]

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/12/05/machete-wielding-man-stabs-victim-in-tube-station_n_8728846.html?utm_hp_ref=uk&ir=UK

///A man wielding a machete has stabbed a man and injured two others at what appears to be a terrorist attack at a London Tube station. The suspect reportedly shouted "this is for Syria" and "all your blood will be spilled" during the incident.///

[Baldric]

And again here

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/dec/05/suspect-custody-after-stabbing-leytonstone-london-underground-station

///The victim was believed to have been stabbed in the neck and was seen by fellow travellers lying in a pool of blood. Police officers Tasered a suspect who, as he was led away, said the attack was in response to intervention in Syria.///

[Svejk]

Actually, I think they always downplay terrorist incidents.
I'm with Sandy on this one. It's too soon to classify this as an organised terrorist attack as opposed to a lone nutter masquerading as a terrorist.

[Baldric]

I'm just surprised the BBC used the word Terrorist, thought they preferred the name Militants

http://www.theanswerbank.co.uk/News/Question1460538.html

[Baldric]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7RIgs3eygo

[vulcan42]

I think the BBC have said they will use the word terrorist if they are quoting other people, in this case the Police.

[Buenchico]

^^^The BBC editorial guidelines (which I've linked to elsewhere twice recently) allow the use of the word 'terrorist' when it can be attributed to another source.

In Sandy's link, the words "terrorist incident" are clearly used as a quote from the Met Police.

[Gromit]

We could bomb somewhere 3,000 miles away to make our streets safer.

[dieseldick]

isnt that their usual cry, " he was mentally retarded" wise up. he was a fanatic

[anotheoldgit]

/// How Could The Authorities Know This Is A "terrorist Incident"? ///

According to some sources it is all dependant on race.

http://www.theanswerbank.co.uk/News/Question1459970.html