He Might Not Have Done It? Right Oh!

[ToraToraTora]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bradford-west-yorkshire-68767898

He was already on bail for assault and threatening to kill her! Well I'll go to the foot of our stairs. I hope the apologists are having a little iternal review.

Why was he on bail? Why wasn't the scum in the slammer? I think we know, once again someone dies because we are petrified of offending muslims. Madness.

[naomi24]

//They operate on facts, and evidence.//

 

That's why they've arrested him.

[andy-hughes]

naomi - // 

//They operate on facts, and evidence.//

 

That's why they've arrested him. //

Of course they have, that's what I said.

But they haven't arrested him because they 'think' he has done it - that's your nonsense inserted into the debate.

[Gromit]

// Surely it is incumbent on West Yorkshire Police to raise their objections to bail for the original charges. //

The original charges related to events in Manchester which is not in West Yorkshire Police's juristiction. The victim was from Oldham which is in Greater Manchester. The murder took place in Bradford which is in West Yorkshire.

The real scandal is not that a muslim got bail because he was given the benefit of the doubt, but that a woman was not listened to and a man* was free to carry out his threats against her.

 

* 93% of convicted murderers in 2022 were male.

 

[ToraToraTora]

AH: "The 'known facts' are, a woman is dead, a man is in custody under investigation.

That's it." - + he was on bail for assault and threatening to murder the victim that was subsequently murdered. Cherry picking are we? If I was allowed I'd bet you any money you like for charity that he's a muslim and he did it? Lets have a ghost bet, how sure are you of your position? I'm 100% certain and I would back it with any amount of money.

[ToraToraTora]

gromit: "The real scandal is not that a muslim got bail because he was given the benefit of the doubt," - steady on gromit, we don't know he's a muslim! do you want the wrath of Hughes?

[naomi24]

andy-hughes, //They operate on facts, and evidence.//That's why they've arrested him. //

Of course they have, that's what I said.

But they haven't arrested him because they 'think' he has done it //

 

You're meeting yourself coming back.  Of course they've arrested him because they think he did it.  They wouldn't have arrested him otherwise.  We all know the law has to take due process.  You're not telling anyone anything they don't already know.

[andy-hughes]

Naomi  - Have you read Tora and Dave's posts?

HAHAHA!!!

[naomi24]

Which posts?

[ToraToraTora]

13:32 looks like the debating god has no more in the locker! Will you take the ghost bet Andy?

[ToraToraTora]

Naomi: "You're meeting yourself coming back.  Of course they've arrested him because they think he did it." - Indeed plod usually has a belief that an arrestee did it! Andy would like the entire UK population eliminated from their enquiries first! PMSL!

[jackthehat]

1. A man was captured, on a variety of CCTV films, stabbing to death a woman who was pushing a baby in a pushchair.

2. The suspect was named, his photograph was published but his relationship to the victim was not given.

3. The suspect was shown, in footage he filmed himself, assembling a baby's crib. He was confirmed as originally hailing from Bangladesh and as being known to the victim.

4. The victim was named and also reported as originally coming from Bangladesh.

5. The suspect was confirmed as being 'the only' person of interest to the police. It was also confirmed that the victim had approached 2 difference police services reporting her concerns that the suspect had been, and would continue to be, a threat to her safety. It was confirmed that she had been in a relationship with him.

At any one, every one, and all points in between those facts as they were released by the police and the press, it was not unreasonable to infer (using the most basic of common sense), that the couple was Muslim and he had stabbed her death.

Doing so is no reflection on the person making such an assumption.

 

 

 

[davebro3]

//But they haven't arrested him because they 'think' he has done it - that's your nonsense inserted into the debate.//

 

They've arrested him because they KNOW he did it.

[andy-hughes]

Of course Dave.

Shall we bang him up now, save a load of mither and expense?

[andy-hughes]

Jack - I have never said differently. 

My only point, repeated ad nauseum, is that assuming and knowing are not the sake thing. 

I'm sure you would agree with me on that.

[davebro3]

he is banged up - it's for the courts to decide for how long

[retrocop]

//At any one, every one, and all points in between those facts as they were released by the police and the press, it was not unreasonable to infer (using the most basic of common sense), that the couple was Muslim and he had stabbed her death.

Doing so is no reflection on the person making such an assumption.//

Some sound Common Sense there JTH. Looks like your bet is a cert in anycase TTT.

[jackthehat]

andy-hughes - There is a point where assumption + intuition = knowledge. At a later date the facts (which don't change although they may be revealed slowly) can confirm whether someone is correct, or not.

The probability of an occurrence can be extrapolated using information from previous examples.

But I don't think it is unreasonable to talk about events as knowing how/what occurred even before they have been confirmed.

 

[andy-hughes]

Jack - I know you as a seasoned and highly intelligent contributor to the site, and I am happy to accept your reasoned argument over the bloodthirsty, raving, tub-thumping, vigilante trash pedaled by the usual suspects.

[davebro3]

//bloodthirsty, raving, tub-thumping, vigilante trash pedaled by the usual suspects.//

Or those who just know the score?

[andy-hughes]

No, the first, definitely.