Ann Widdecombe Thread 2

[dapsnotplimsolls]

Continue ...

I think the neighbours have told them what's on their footage or possibly shown them.

I don't think there are restrictions until a suspect is charged.

The same description of the CCTV is on BBC R4 thus morning so if any poster wants to avoid that they’ll have to avoid all media atm.

That’s a very pompous statement, right now the investigation and family is the priority, you are simply a member of the public who will find out in due course.

A person could react to things she said without being affiliated to a particular group I guess, and in that sense it isn' t political. He may be a lone actor with a deranged mind. Maybe not.

Unfortunately the police have lost the public’s confidence somewhat lately. They may well be doing a fine job here, but I think that a) people are sceptical b) it is a high-profile person who was murdered and c) sleuthing is a “popular” pastime (eg poor Nicola Bulley).

Yes -the police have lost people’s confidence recently by being politically partisan will all the hounding of people tweeting (but not left left vile tweets of course/Henry Nowak/sending riot police to peaceful protests/ pandering to the a Palestine lobby etc.

A lack of confidence mixed with the fact that some people are desperate for this to be a politically motivated murder by a "lefty". The man isn't an immigrant so this is second best.

For example, someone has posted that the police are bullshitting and that the murderer myst be a "lefty" radicalised by Bluesky.

Most people though just want the police to be left to get on with the job. Hopefully the suspect will be charged soon.

Mostly because the massive spotlight on times things don't go smoothly, and absolute silence on all the times they swiftly bring the right person to justice. We get a very skewed perspective from the media and from the public jumping on that with all their speculation.

I don’t think tweets from the left have incited violence or encouraged burning people in their beds. Happy to consider evidence to the contrary if you can provide it. The police are underfunded and stretched too thin.

That's a prime example of public speculation. The police obviously have to deal in facts and evidence, and currently there is no evidence of political motivation.

That is a really good point. For example, they police did a good job of tracking down the man who fled to South Africa after murdering his wife Zandile Tshuma and their daughters Natalie and Nala. Not a massive amount of media coverage of that.

All the threats to JKR and other women....

The man Heather is in discussion currently on other threads. That was hoping for violence and pain.

I suppose it all depends if you think she would like justice to be done, or if you think she would be happy for the case to be thrown out as long as people could air their uninformed opinions on social media without constraint.

I know very little about Ann Widdecombe, but I think she would have said that she valued law and order.

I asked for evidence of incitement to violence from the left, not allegations about trans activists.

That person is completely unhinged as are the people who threaten gender critical women and attack them. I don't think they are representative of the left in general, though. Just as the likes of Tommy Robinson and the Raise the Colours lot are representative of the right in general.

I didn’t realise there was a thread 2
It’s so strange that she was killed at 12.30 lunch time in broad daylight. The killer could easily be identified and his van seen. It’s still so sad

It's giving me a lot of "main character" vibes.

My first thought was that the neighbours had sold the papers the footage.

Personally I think if we're at a point where cases can be thrown out because people on social media post about them, we need to rethink how we deal with prejudice in the courts in the social media age. It's one thing to control a semi-regulated press - quite another to control everyone on the internet.

Anyway, I think driving 300 miles with a pole/bar to kill someone indicates that it was a targeted killing. I don't know why they'd pre-emptively say no evidence of a political motive if they just mean they have no evidence of ANY motive and are keeping an open mind...

There have been several killings recently where there's been some effort to claim that they weren't "political" because the killer had an uncertain or mixed ideology - but they were clearly radicalised in some way. Like the guy who killed Charlie Kirk - he was clearly extremely online and active on discord and targeted him personally because of Charlie's opinions/activism, but because he wasn't clearly a Democrat activist either people said there was no political motivation. It could be the same here, maybe this guy won't come out to be someone who targeted her because she was, say, a Reform political party spokeswoman, but Bluesky told him she was a danger to trans rights or something. Which is political but not party political. (I have no information on this, just speculating.)

Absolutely. The reason the police ask people not to speculate is so to avoid a defence lawyer saying the defendant has no chance of a fair trial, and thus getting the case thrown out. How would that be a good outcome?

@RoyalCorgi exactly.

I think some people don’t always understand what fair trial means, as I have seen on other threads where posters have said they don’t care if a certain scumbag doesn’t get a fair trial, not realising it means a defence lawyer can get the case thrown out

The credibility of witness testimony is also affected.

On the one hand we have the integrity of the legal system.

On the other hand we have people who want to chat shit on-line.

Swings and roundabouts I suppose.

Why? We have seen many examples of people maimed/murdered by someone with mental health issues.

It doesn’t seem like a burglary, but no one knows what happened.

It wasn’t flippant - I think it’s very sad that a lone, older woman was attacked in her own home.