To ask why there are no riots?

[Firetreev]

Where are the rioters today? If the roles were reversed and a man of colour was going out and terrorising white people it would be the number one story on the BBC and Herr Farage would be calling for action on the streets. Right now it's the sixth story on the BBC.

Similarly, with the atrocious and heartbreaking case of the baby who was abused and murdered. If the perpetrators hadn't been white there would have been bedlam on the streets by 'degenerate thugs concerned citizens'. The issue is clearly men, but rabid racists, the media and the malign agitators who whip them up into a frenzy never seem to be outraged when it's one of their own.

BBC News - Man charged after suspected anti-Muslim attacks in Edinburgh
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2xg6lwz5jo

You think people should have rioted? You really think it would have been good if people had rioted for Preston? Do you riot?

What do you mean by ‘anti immigration rhetoric’?

You do know what the responsibilities of Home Office are? Is ‘border control’ in your definition of anti immigration rhetoric?

Huh? So reform want to govern the whole of the UK but will pick and choose what they want to govern on. And innocent babies being murdered by anyone don't count? I don't need you to make it make sense. It doesn't.

Going back to 1993 for 3 examples kind of proves the point. How far back would you have to look for 3 racially motivated Islamist attacks? Certainly not 1993!

There has been cases of immigrants killing babies, and people haven't rioted then either.

You're another person spreading this narrative that every time a Muslim or immigrant commits a crime that there are riots, which quite clearly isn't in any way true.

That was just a quick Google to show it’s not unheard of.

I see you haven’t provided any stats but you expect me to, even though you made the assertion,

Given the current climate, that’s not really an imaginative stretch.

Who is telling white girls that they deserved to be raped?

Are you saying that report claims known perpetrators were ‘let off’ or that these crimes were reported but not investigated?

I believe that there has been a long history of women being seen as the property of men

Gosh, really? Has there??? Well I'll g' t' foot.

We don't need to believe that, do we? We know that.

That's exactly what the report says.

I can't believe that poster is politicising the murder of a baby. Isn't what they accuse Farage of doing?

Incidents aren't stats. You need percentages. This is from gov.uk stats on ethnicity and the CJS 2024

In the latest year, 65% of principal suspects convicted of homicide were from the White ethnic group, followed by 20% from the Black ethnic group and 9% from the Asian ethnic group. For each ethnic group, victims were most often associated with a principal suspect of the same ethnic group (White: 89%, Black: 60%, Asian: 56%).

From the ONS UK population by ethnicity White 81.7, Asian 9, Black 4

So a rough look would be 82% of the population (white) is committing 65% of homicides and 90% of those are against white people. 10% of the population (Asian) is committing 10% of homicides and 56% of those are against Asian people. 4% of the population (black) is committing 20 % of homicides and 60% of those are against black people.

Although the excerpt from gov.uk states that victims were most often associated with a principal suspect of the same ethnic group, the correlation is much stronger in the white ethnic group than either of the two others by quite some margin.

But let me know if I've read this wrong.

And do you actually believe there were known perpetrators that were ‘let off’ by the criminal justice system because of fear of being seen as racist?

That’s a much bigger claim than the evidence which has already shown that victims were often not believed, or that shoddy investigations took place because of the belief that victims were in relationships with perpetrators rather than victims of abuse, or that allegations by third parties were ignored and there was a lack of curiosity by authorities because of fear of being seen as racist.

All of which is horrific of course. But to claim that crimes (ETA including the murder of a baby) were reported, investigated, evidence found, perpetrators arrested and then let go at some stage purely because of a fear of being seen as racist is a massive one.

To be accurate on this you would need to factor in multiple defendant homicide cases. Young black men in particular more frequently charged as multiple defendants, whereas white people are less likely to be charged jointly.

No routine govt stats but the CPS has piloted and reported on it. https://www.cps.gov.uk/publication/crown-prosecution-service-joint-enterprise-pilot-2023-data-analysis

And age. Perhaps Nomas would like to give it a whirl.

I think I might have misread your question as if you were asking if either of those things happened, but re-reading it it seems you're asking was the poster suggesting one thing or the other thing?

It seems that they just didn't investigate at all or did shitty investigations and closed them or else on some occasions they were shut down by people higher up.

That’s a much bigger claim than........

I actually disagree with completely. I think they are both equally as bad and neither is bigger or smaller or worse than the other. The culture of it was so bad that I believe that if people had a fear of being seen as racist and being afraid to rock the boat that they were getting that idea from somewhere.

I also don't believe the nonsense about them believing they were in relationships with the perpetrators, they would have known they were in highly abusive situations. There's lots of nonsense in it about how the police thought this was consensual even though the girls were 13 etc, right well it's against the law then isn't it seeing as they're underage, and also clearly not consensual in other ways if they weren't blatantly trying to pretend otherwise.

I also don't believe for a second that there wasn't a mountain of evidence that this was going on on such a wide scale and that those who were higher up weren't aware of it.

There’s plenty of evidence from Casey and IICSA and others that authorities across the board failed and in some cases were complicit. I have no difficulty believing that. This is well known and is why I say the ‘bigger claim’ (ie the one that is less evidenced) is that police actively let off perpetrators.

Police have a long history of disregarding women and children who have been victimised and numerous inquiries into children’s social care have shown how little the lives of children were worth to the state. It’s clear and obvious that many victims were ignored, disbelieved and let down.

What is not clear to me is that these authorities let girls down because they were afraid of being seen as racist. I know some have claimed that but come on. I’m a police officer, I joined the force either to help or to have some power and I feel paralysed by the idea that people will think I, an employee of a famously racist organisation, am a racist? Or I’m a social worker, working for a pittance to keep kids safe, and yet I’m afraid to actually do my job?

Isn’t it more likely that the police and social workers who disbelieved, ignored, overlooked and gaslit these girls (and maybe even ‘let the perpetrators off’ for crimes including the murder of a baby) were just careless, incompetent, ignorant or even complicit in the abuse? All of which we have mountains of evidence of.

Why would age make a difference if you’re looking at ethnicity?

Of course I don't riot.
I said I can't beleive the Tommy Robinson and farage brigade didn't get angry and had riots.
Had it been immigrants they would of been out in force.
'Save our kids' bla bla bla.

Why didn't Preston cause the same outrage for them?

Why do you continue to use Preston Davey for your narrow minded narrative? You are doing exactly what you accuse Tommy Robinson and Farage of doing. Stop politicising the murder of a little boy when it has no bearing here.

Because when we're looking at population statistics for specific purposes (such as crime) we have to exclude the number of individuals who are not old enough to commit that crime. For instance, a count of 100 blue people might include 40 children, 100 green people might include 5 children and 100 purple people might include 20 children. The children skew the stats.

We might also want to look at ethnicity and adult crime stats and ethnicity and youth crime stats so we need to know the population statistics for each age group.

Grooming gangs made up almost exclusively by Pakistani Muslims

There are an estimated 250,000 victims, I believe some have been prosecuted but the majority have not. The girls were let down massively by institutions that were supposed to protect them including the NHS, child services and the police

I’m not sure what you mean. The age of criminal responsibility is 10. Data on perpetrators will include anyone 10 or older. You don’t need to exclude anyone by age.

Age group data is routinely published, and separate regular bulletins on youth and adults crime/sentencing data.