Police launch an investigation into Ann Widdecombe death

fancythat

Casdon you are right and wrong in my opinion.

Yes the Police said this and that.

But looks like they were wrong. Which means that what Primrose said was correct.

Which means your not quite is wrong.

The police said nothing wrong. They did not at any point rule out terrorism as a possible motive. They reported on the basis of the information they had gathered, at each point a statement was made. I suggest you read every police statement to verify that, because you clearly don’t believe me.

Chestnut I see you may think from my use of both I thought it was two people, I meant I hope the person is question is both arrested and dismissed from work.

fancythat

^I am quite speechless at how evil and cruel some people are^

Twas always thus.

I never underestimate this in life.

I suppose my words should have been 'I am quite speechless at how such an evil, cruel person could be working at a university'. I realise there are much worse people in the world, but this person is working in the vicinity of hundreds of young people and may have the opportunity to spread their hateful rhetoric. It's not something you should say of anyone just because you disagree with their beliefs. I hope there are serious repercussions.

Cossy

Chesnut I cannot bring myself to use she in this instance so I’m using the pronoun they.

Yes, I've tried to avoid saying 'she' but let it slip once I think. You can see evil inside and out from that face.

The police said nothing wrong. I've followed all their reports because I live in the constabulary. They used phrases like no information to suggest or nothing to suggest it is a terrorism related or politically motivated crime. I agree, they were a bit wooly, (we have a lot of sheep in Devon), there were omissions, but they didn't flip flop with the facts or mislead.

I realise this is not a lighthearted thread before anyone takes offence. 🐑 🐑

www.bbc.co.uk/news/videos/c1ly3glepr1o

In the link

The police also said the situation is not being treated as a terrorist incident after consulting with counter-terror policing as part of "initial enquiries"

I notice there is now "some links have been removed blah blah".
They may have missed this one.

I think the police should have initially kept very quiet about what they did or didn’t think about this murder.

Cossy, yes.

I think it would be more truthful to say something along the lines of - it’s too early at this stage to give any information about the killer of Ann Widecombe. However, we’re investigating this with all resources available to the counter terrorism unit and information will become available to the public in due course …. Or something like that….

Widdecombe

ronib

I think it would be more truthful to say something along the lines of - it’s too early at this stage to give any information about the killer of Ann Widecombe. However, we’re investigating this with all resources available to the counter terrorism unit and information will become available to the public in due course …. Or something like that….

Yes.

I was surprised how on earth they could have dismissed the possibilty so early on.

I said on page 2 at the outset that there was already criticism of the local force and their handling of the situation. It was only going to get worse for them whatever they said.

It has been confirmed that he was not known to Prevent.

I find this increasingly bizarre, if you are going to target a politician, Ann Widdecombe is one of the last people you would choose. She wasn't in government, she ( and I am not trying to be hurtful here) didn't have an enormous amount of influence, it is all utterly baffling.
Perhaps I am trying to make sense of someone who wasn't thinking in the way most of us do.

Releasing information is a balancing act that is difficult to get right.

Whenever something big happens, the info vultures immediately start circling, eyes peeled for the slightest titbit. If the police keep quiet, they demand to know why the police aren't feeding them something. If the police do say something based on what they know at the time, and that later turns out wrong due to information subsequently received, the vultures then complain they've been fed incorrect info.

Damned if they do, damned if they don't.

At the end of the day, the police can only talk about what they know at any given time. And that can change if and when new information is received.

Fallingstar

I feel that whoever made such sick and sadistic comments should be arrested for hate speech.
I really can’t imagine why anyone would say this.

I hope they get the sack, too.

Cossy

Chestnut I see you may think from my use of both I thought it was two people, I meant I hope the person is question is both arrested and dismissed from work.

In the workplace at which I volunteer, staff and volunteers may choose either 'he', 'she' or 'they' if they wish to add a pronoun to their security pass.

Galaxy

I find this increasingly bizarre, if you are going to target a politician, Ann Widdecombe is one of the last people you would choose. She wasn't in government, she ( and I am not trying to be hurtful here) didn't have an enormous amount of influence, it is all utterly baffling.
Perhaps I am trying to make sense of someone who wasn't thinking in the way most of us do.

someone said this at work today, why Ann?

BoggledMind

Releasing information is a balancing act that is difficult to get right.

Whenever something big happens, the info vultures immediately start circling, eyes peeled for the slightest titbit. If the police keep quiet, they demand to know why the police aren't feeding them something. If the police do say something based on what they know at the time, and that later turns out wrong due to information subsequently received, the vultures then complain they've been fed incorrect info.

Damned if they do, damned if they don't.

At the end of the day, the police can only talk about what they know at any given time. And that can change if and when new information is received.

If the police do say something based on what they know at the time, and that later turns out wrong due to information subsequently received, the vultures then complain they've been fed incorrect info.

They're doing just this on Facebook. Each poster 'congratulating' the other. One says, "I notice they keep stressing xxx or xyz". "Yeah", says another, "so right, what are they hiding?"

I've refrained from commenting that it's vultures like them that are causing this because the police are afraid they'll swoop on Dartmoor or wherever, demanding to know "the truth", if they are not fed sufficient information.

fancythat

^I think the police should have initially kept very quiet about what they did or didn’t think about this murder.^

Cossy, yes.

In an ideal world, yes. In the UK at the moment, no.

JaneJudge

Galaxy

I find this increasingly bizarre, if you are going to target a politician, Ann Widdecombe is one of the last people you would choose. She wasn't in government, she ( and I am not trying to be hurtful here) didn't have an enormous amount of influence, it is all utterly baffling.
Perhaps I am trying to make sense of someone who wasn't thinking in the way most of us do.

someone said this at work today, why Ann?

Low-hanging fruit?

The police said nothing wrong. They did not at any point rule out terrorism as a possible motive. They reported on the basis of the information they had gathered, at each point a statement was made. I suggest you read every police statement to verify that, because you clearly don’t believe me.

You are absolutely correct, Casdon. The Police reports were very carefully worded; they stated only what factual information they possessed at that time. They did not dismiss the idea of terrorism or political motivation, simply said at one point they were keeping an open mind.As soon as fresh evidence was discovered they announced a change in the leadership of the investigation to that of Counter Terrorism.
No cover-up as some posters seem to imply.

Galaxy

I find this increasingly bizarre, if you are going to target a politician, Ann Widdecombe is one of the last people you would choose. She wasn't in government, she ( and I am not trying to be hurtful here) didn't have an enormous amount of influence, it is all utterly baffling.
Perhaps I am trying to make sense of someone who wasn't thinking in the way most of us do.

I feel the same. All extremely odd!

I don’t believe, even for one second, that there’s any conspiracy or cover up.

I do still think should not have released quite so much information early on, but then again they are damned if they do, damned if they don’t.

To me it’s still a very puzzling murder.