Met police are erasing the third victim of the Golders Green stabbing

[tulippetals]

https://x.com/metpoliceuk/status/2050114417405132857?s=46

I am actually horrified. A third, Muslim, man was stabbed in the attack but he isn’t being mentioned anywhere. How is this allowed?!

Explain how it paints a very different picture.

Isn't it just to do with how typical news reporting works?

A man stabbing a man at home, who are known to each other, is not an unusual event. It happens all the time and large numbers of these attacks don't really make the news. It's generally considered low interest by news reporting (or so I was taught in sociology at college a decade ago...)

A politically motivated, terror stabbing doesn't happen very often and so is of high interest.

In this case, it seems Essa Suleiman appears to have first commited the first, low news interest, type of murder then followed by the second high news interest type of murder.

It makes sense that in this case there would be some reporting on the first murder but a focus on the second and third. It entirely fits with how reporting is generally done on murder. Lots of murders never make the press (or go beyond basic local news reporting). I've certainly known one that never went beyond a single story in the local press on the culmination of the trial and sentencing.

That claim will remain untrue no matter how many times you repeat it.

No, because he isn't (except in your complicated mind).

HTH.

I didn’t know about the third victim and I’m sure people that just read the headlines didn’t know either.

For god's sake, nobody is saying that the first victim didn't matter.

As far as we know based on the limited information available, the first victim was stabbed in what was effectively a domestic dispute - he and the attacker were known to one another. Very sadly, this is not that unusual in this day and age, which is part of the reason why it has attracted less attention. At the risk of sounding callous and dismissive, which I don't mean to, a seriously mentally ill person attacking someone known to them is not uncommon enough to make national news, although it is of course very sad.

The other two victims were unknown to the attacker, they were attacked in broad daylight in a public place, and based on the information available to us, they were attacked because they were Jewish, in a place which is known to have a large Jewish population. That is unusual, far more unusual than the first scenario. It also needs to be placed in the context of an increase in attacks against Jewish people and the Jewish community - namely, the Manchester synagogue attack and the arson attacks on the community ambulance service (and many other smaller instances of anti-Semitism and harassment reported by British Jews).

The narrative you're trying to push is really disingenuous and unpleasant.

Oh bore off. You are just trying to create drama. Leave it to the professionals who are privy to a lot more information than you are to release information to the public as appropriate, not you sat on your sofa. Nobody said a victim didn’t matter. Stop making stuff up.

This man also has previous history of violent attacks. I am sick of this media narrative

He’s not been erased at all. But there is a very clear distinction between the attack of a friend of the suspected perpetrator who had apparently been a close friend for 20 years ( the reason behind this is unclear but potentially he might have been trying to stop the terrorist attack, it almost certainly wasn’t a random attack based on his ethnicity or religion though), and the terrorist attack and resulting in the serious injury of two men because they were Jewish.

The concentration on the victims of a terror attack almost always happens when there have also been domestic victims in the run up to the attack. It’s standard reporting as the terror attack has the widest implications for society at large.

The third man has been widely named in the media and court.

What you cannot do is try and turn the abhorrent antisemitic terrorist attack into a side show of Muslim victimhood.

The attempted victim status of the terrorist suspect didn’t work and now this! We will not be distracted from the main issue, the abhorrent rise in anti semitism.

I finally decided which one this is.

Stop feeding it, people!

Go on, what narrative? Why don't you spell out exactly what it is that you think is happening here, instead of dancing around it?

No it doesn't he stabbed his friend and then he went on his racially motivated terrorist attack.
It is quite possible that his friend tried to stop him or a dispute with the friend was the trigger for his terrorist attacks.
The fact is we don't know yet because all the facts wont come out until the trial and that is normal.

I wonder if the person he stabbed first at a residence was a family member or friend that was trying to stop him from leaving to carry out his planned attack on anyone Jewish.

The report stated
”Police were called at approximately 08:50hrs on 29 April to an incident at an address in Great Dover Street, SE1. The suspect, who is reported to have been armed with a knife, is believed to have had an altercation with the occupant before leaving. The occupant received minor injuries and police arrived within around six minutes of being called. Officers carried out searches in the local area for the suspect, but he was not located. Officers also carried out enquiries to locate the man at an address connected to the suspect, but again, he was not located.”

So it looks like the police were searching for him but since they failed to find him, he managed to carry out his attack after all:
“At 11:16hrs on Wednesday 29 April, officers responded following reports of people stabbed in Highfield Avenue.”

Except for the fact that the police statement that YOU linked in your opening post DOES mention him. And the Guardian link that readers of twitter linked to that post also mentioned him. So both of your own opening sources mention him.

What narrative would that be?

You haven't answered my question: tell me what narrative you are talking about. Spell it out for me.

I think this comment is inappropriate - that person deserved to be mentioned.

I knew there was a third victim because that information was made available. I do not understand why you think anyone is denying there was a third victim, or trying to hide it.

It seems like you are trying to either rage bait or just be angry for the sake of being angry. That is a big problem with society these days.

Also, a personal attack on someone and a terrorist attack are very different.

It's deliberate so they can attribute it as a racist attack when in fact it's just a random psycho

Presumably because it wasn’t part of the same attack?

What's your point about Covid and the attack on the mosque?
How is that linked to the Golders Green incident?

The guy is from South East London. Was previously referred to the prevent programme. Stabbed someone he knew then travelled nearly 10 miles so what? Half an hour? 45 minutes? From his home in southwark to Golders green to stab 2 more people but that wasnt racially motivated?

Come on. Of course it was.

That doesnt mean that its ok he stabbed his first victim or his first victim doesnt matter.

Its ok to say he stabbed someone in a personal attack and traveled to stab people in an antisemitic attack you know.

it didn’t receive little to no media coverage at the time of the attack.

It’s the opposite of erasing. They didn’t know the two stabbings were connected, now they know they are they are updating the reporting.