Wisbech Eagle
Member
- Location
- Truro Cornwall
- Country
England
We can only speculate on what they were told but there must have been a reason.In that case why wouldn't they wait until more evidence became available before arresting him?
We can only speculate on what they were told but there must have been a reason.In that case why wouldn't they wait until more evidence became available before arresting him?
Your second sentence is correct but not your first. This was about the police investigating. Until they did that the first didn’t exist.My point still stands, it was about protecting girls toilets not inciting violence. Police saw no case and that is what matters.
That's alright then. Proper use of limited resources.We can only speculate on what they were told but there must have been a reason.
Unfortunately this happens when there is a lack of resources, competing demands and unclear guidance. Whatever priorities are determined someone will disagree, get upset and suggest they and their kind are being ignored.My friend was nearly run over by a car going the wrong way up a one way street. She reported it to the police who did not even investigate. They told her unless she had video evidence there was insufficient data to open an investigation. She pointed out that this happened at traffic lights in the high street so there was bound to be traffic cameras at the very least one of the shops would have CCTV. They couldn't care less.
But apparently hurty words gets the blue lights flashing.
I trust so. Obviously you know better. Or think you do.That's alright then. Proper use of limited resources.
Maintain that opinion when they knock on your door after Tommy Robinson complains about on-line criticism. After all if one person reporting a post is enough to warrant police intervention so is another's.I trust so. Obviously you know better. Or think you do.
Your second sentence is correct but not your first. This was about the police investigating. Until they did that the first didn’t exist.
Only fools try to hold onto imaginary points.Police investigated found no incitement, just a push for girls toilet safety. My point holds 👍🏻
I suspect that the police do an initial assessment of the possibility of the complaint having validity. That would be coloured by either the complainant or who is complained about having any previous. I don’t. Yaxley-Lennon and Lineham both do.Maintain that opinion when they knock on your door after Tommy Robinson complains about on-line criticism. After all if one person reporting a post is enough to warrant police intervention so is another's.
Looks like you are the one with imaginary points. The police investigated and found no incitement. Just one man who was concerned for girls in toilets.Only fools try to hold onto imaginary points.
It’s the definition of a pointless exercise.
That's grand except your suspicions don't have any legal validity. Do the police look at these complaints and conclude "fair enough. He's got a point"?I suspect that the police do an initial assessment of the possibility of the complaint having validity. That would be coloured by either the complainant or who is complained about having any previous. I don’t. Yaxley-Lennon and Lineham both do.
So I am in no fear of door knocks. I welcome my visitors. Right now they are bringing cards and flowers!
The fact that the police investigated is the point. What they subsequently decided isn’t.Looks like you are the one with imaginary points. The police investigated and found no incitement. Just one man who was concerned for girls in toilets.
No, they look at the evidence and of the probability of the CPS being willing to prosecute. Hearsay evidence, without anything else, would not reach the threshold and my guess is that’s why no further action was taken. They investigated, because of who was involved and the history, and it went no further.That's grand except your suspicions don't have any legal validity. Do the police look at these complaints and conclude "fair enough. He's got a point"?
If so the contention that there is no two tier approach is well and truly blown away.
No, they look at the evidence and of the probability of the CPS being willing to prosecute. Hearsay evidence, without anything else, would not reach the threshold and my guess is that’s why no further action was taken. They investigated, because of who was involved and the history, and it went no further.
The police investigated and found no incitement. Seems after investigation they agreed with my assessment and everyone else's that it was just one man who was concerned for girls in toilets.The fact that the police investigated is the point. What they subsequently decided isn’t.
Peaceful prayer is done quietly. Away from the media, the glare of TV cameras and political speeches. Generally at home and not in huge stadiums.
Peaceful prayer when a conservative dies.
Riots and city burning when a criminal drug overdoses tho.
I see reports of protests outside the funeral. Protest at a funeral! And that's the left in a nutshell.
I explained that a few posts ago.But they still arrested him. Why should it be any different following a complaint from Tommy Robinson?
Peaceful prayer is done quietly. Away from the media, the glare of TV cameras and political speeches. Generally at home and not in huge stadiums.
This wasn’t peaceful prayer. This was a political event which exploited the personal tragedy of a man who held controversial views. It was noisy, staged and completely contrived. I feel sorry for the bereaved who were dragged into this. It’s more evidence of just how sick the political right in the USA have become.