Ann Widdecombe Thread 2

[dapsnotplimsolls]

Continue ...

Sorry used the wrong words, arrested not charged. But my point stands, do we need to know that today? Does it impact anyone on this thread?

AW had a variety of views that could be seen as contentious. If the person arrested had taken against one of these doesn't necessarily mean terrorist, as these views covered a variety of things and beliefs. He could have been a stalker and took it to extremes

Agree. What would be wrong with saying we don’t know the motive at this time, and that’s it. We will update when we have more information. Don’t do the no suggestion line

What are they supposed to do when there is no evidence of a wider risk? Tell us we are all doomed?

An individual was murdered by someone who had already left the scene at least 24 hours previously. Due to the profile of the victim there was already extensive local investigation going on before they said there was no evidence of wider risk to local people. Its not “undermining public confidence” when they say “at this point in time we have no evidence of Terrorism”. Even if it is politically motivated that does not contradict their statement that they considered there was no wider risk to local safety.

The police have been forced into releasing more info earlier than they used to due to wild and often deliberate speculation on SM by individuals whose only interest is whipping up hate and trouble.

If the public want more info earlier then they need to bloody well listen to it including the “at this point in time”. Its not NCIS where everything is fixed and wrapped up in an hour.

You're suggesting they shouldn't answer questions from the press? Or that they shouldn't answer them as honestly as they can at the time?

Don't get too excited. I'm not taking about the minority you're always thinking of.

Do they have to list everything it doesn't appear to be?

They shouldn't be saying anything appears to be anything at that stage.

It's very easy to say we are still at the gathering evidence stage, it's very early in the investigation and as soon as we are in a position to provide an update, we will.

For those who aren't clear. This is the police statement and press conference. The police statement makes no mention of whether or not this was politically motivated. It was only mentioned in response to a question from Sky

https://news.devon-cornwall.police.uk/news-article/7abc2259-8b7c-f111-9d98-6045bdd24049

You’re doing it again, making assumptions.

It doesn't matter what minority. Sowing these seeds of suspicions about minorities before we know the facts contributes to an atmosphere of fear and blame and polarisation.

It’s the Nigel Farage / Tommy Robinson gambit: Blame minorities and then stay silent if it doesn’t turn out to be a minority culprit. Because they know the damage in the minds of their targets is done.

Like this?

Our murder enquiry is in its early stages but moving at a significant pace. We are deploying all of the necessary resources to find out exactly what has happened.
I would appeal to anyone who may have information about this incident, however insignificant it may seem, to come forward and speak with us.
We will release further information when we are able to do so. In the meantime, I would ask people not to speculate about what might have happened, particularly on social media.

Hmm, I'm not sure. I would say I think 28yo loners might be the exact group that does have a problem with her. The kind of person active on discord/bluesky who has heard that she e.g. wasn't keen on gay marriage and spins that out into a fever dream of her being a hate-filled bigoted witch hag with no redeeming qualities. There are some culture war topics that have unusual salience for younger people.

I've been in conversations with people who are able to understand that e.g. immigration is a "political" issue on which reasonable minds might differ, but [LGBT rights/abortion/etc] are "just basic humanity" because they came of age at a certain time when it was only acceptable to have one view on those. Ann was outspoken on multiple such topics.

I wonder if older people just view her as an MP they might or might not have agreed with on certain topics, and have memories of a time when e.g. gay marriage was a question up for public debate.

Not saying she was definitely killed for her views on gay marriage but I think there are many young people who have cast her in the "witch hag" role for those various culture-war-associated views.

@Whyohwhy1974 problem is people will just fill in the blanks or just demand more information

You've made a massive and wrong assumption yourself. I'm not arguing with you on this thread.

Because if they were particularly evasive in response to media questions, people like you would say "good for them, let's just let them get on with their job". Yea, sure. Chinny reckon.

No but that's exactly the point. By singling a particular motive out, they shoot themselves in the foot when they have to circle back just a few short hours later and say, whoops, it could be terror related after all. They're like the bloody keystone cops.

No they simply have to state that they are in the process of gathering evidence and have not yet established a motive. Rather than categorically exclude one particular motive and then have to back track on it.

The 'singling out' was done by the media. they asked the question.

Why does it matter? Perhaps they will reconsider this approach.

A statement becomes less certain anyway in future cases as each one is overturned.

People like me would appreciate their use of a more thought through statement. There seems to be quite a few on here who are being very defensive on this issue. I won't be changing my mind and neither will you, so that's my last word on it.

No it shows they are being thorough imo and investigating all possible routes. If new info comes to light of course they will act on it.

What assumption have I made?

You said ‘it’s not the minority you’re thinking of’, means you did make an assumption.

Let them. Standing firm and being clear and precise in your comms builds trust, even if people are frustrated in the interim.

@OneAmberFinch but if she was killed because of her view on gay marriage, would that be deemed political/terrorist? It's based on her beliefs. It's possible that the police thought it was one of those type of views that she was killed for, then when investigating further found it was something else. If he had smashed a cross/crucifix or written a slogan in the house that might have led the police to think that way (we don't have all the evidence, the police don't always disclose all the evidence to the public)

Then maybe they shouldn't have to press conferences, or stand in front of a camera giving a statement. Just release a statement on social media/news website. But how many people on here would be happy with that. How many people will be going 'why haven't they said more, what aren't they telling us"