Terror Attack Outside Parliament.

[hackey lad]

Nobody is saying that it wasn't.

 

I said that the police would not have made any comment about whether he was cooperating or not.

 

It is true what they say about the reliability of eyewitness testimony. One guy being interviewed on a number of TV stations has said that the car was being driven at high speed, 'at least 50mph'. This claim was repeated by a number of news organisations. If you actually look at the CCTV footage and it is in real time, which it looks to be, the car was probably doing no more than 15 or 20 miles per hour at the time it hit the barrier.

 

The police did comment about him not cooperating , they also gave his age and where he lived , although you said they would do none of these things in an earlier thread . Seems you know more about this ,than the police

[Top Cats Hat]

The police did comment about him not cooperating , they also gave his age and where he lived , although you said they would do none of these things in an earlier thread . Seems you know more about this ,than the police

 

First off, the police comment about him not cooperating did not come from the Met but Scotland Yard which is usually a euphemism for 'unofficial briefing'. There is no operational advantage to be gained by claiming that someone is not cooperating which can mean anything from being in a coma to 'no commenting' an interview. There is no lawful obligation for anyone to cooperate with the police after arrest and I suspect that this briefing was either sloppy PR or politically motivated to push the same idea that you are trying to push.

 

Secondly, they did not give his age and where he lived. This was first released by the press and social media and later confirmed by 'government sources' which probably means the Home Office, not the police. He was only named by police once he was further arrested for attempted murder.

 

No I don't know more about this than the police but I do know more about it than you. And you may think that I'm being picky but in these days of fake news and 'evidence free' comment, it is more important than ever to be as precise as possible in these matters.

 

He may well turn out to be a terrorist but at the moment, apart from the facts of what happened on the day itself, there is NO evidence to suggest that his actions were motivated by any terrorist intent other than that he is black, had a foreign sounding name and came here as an asylum seeker.

 

For some on here, that seems to be enough!

[hackey lad]

Please leave the out of it . The fact is like it or not, the police were treating it as a terrorist incident . Please leave out the racist angle . People are rightly upset by this incident . I will leave it there

[melthebell]

hes been charged

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-45236971

 

Three people were injured in the incident which is being treated by prosecutors as terrorism due to the location, methodology and alleged targeting of civilians and police officers.

[mafya]

hes been charged

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-45236971

 

I thought terrorism was committed with a political or ideological aim yet this guy was an unknown with no links to radicals etc but due to the location and method it is classed as terrorism?

The welsh guy who ran the mosque worshippers over wasn’t charged with terrorism and neither was the guy who killed the woman mp.

[Top Cats Hat]

"Three people were injured in the incident which is being treated by prosecutors as terrorism due to the location, methodology and alleged targeting of civilians and police officers."

 

That sounds well dodgy.

 

Presumably the reason he has only been charged with attempted murder is because terrorism charges would be immediately thrown out by the first court that heard them.