Sunday, August 4, 2013

Legal reasons...

A 12 year old girl was raped in Walthamstow a couple of days ago, the BBC are naturally being rather coy about the identities of those now arrested for this dreadful barbaric crime. In a classic MONA* (Julia's famous Men Of No Appearance) moment the BBC have declined to describe or name those arrested for legal reasons. Not that you have to dig very far to come up with a few more details...
A third teenager has been arrested over the rape of a 12-year-old girl in east London.
The Metropolitan Police said the 17-year-old was arrested after going to a police station.
The girl was attacked at about 00:15 BST on 27 July at a row of garages in Walthamstow after talking to three people
Two other 17-year-old boys have been charged with rape and are due at Snaresbrook Crown Court on 21 August.
One boy was remanded on custody and the other has been released on conditional bail.
They cannot be named for legal reasons.
Ok, I understand the reasons for needing to protect the girl, but 17 year old males hardly need anonymity, except if they fir the profile for a certain religion or their skin colour isn't the norm for those being newsworthy by the BBC.
Still the Independent has a few more details...
The attackers were said to be aged between 17 and 19.
The first was dark-skinned and of mixed race, with a diamond stud in his left ear and a London accent. He told the girl his name was Mo and that he was 17.
He had big brown eyes, short hair, was very skinny and wore a black puffa-style jacket with a hood, black chinos, black trainers and a grey/black T-shirt.
The second was black and very tall with big lips. His hair was partly shaven and he wore black trousers and a red and blue shirt.
The third, who did not rape the girl, was black and had a moustache. He wore a blue-coloured hooded top and a red and blue cap, and told her his name was Miles.
Well, shock, horror... None of them are indigenous whitey's and one can't help but wonder assuming the details are correct if Mo, is short for Mohammed? I mean it could be Maurice I suppose, but considering the description and the style of attack it does seem to fit the profile of a follower of the Pedo-Prophet.
Still, I might be wrong, though certainly not about the BBC and the powers that be not wanting the identity of the attackers becoming widespread and alerting the general populace over the barbarians in our midst.

2 annotations:

JuliaM said...

I can't claim credit for MONA - that honour goes to the irrepressible DumbJon... ;)

Mac said...

Do you remember this from RubinReports back in 2010?

In 1870, Mark Twain, the great American writer and journalist, had just moved to Buffalo, New York, where he was part-owner and an editor of the newspaper. One Sunday morning Twain saw smoke pouring from the upper window of the house across the street, whose residents he had not yet met. The couple were sitting on their porch, unaware of the danger.

Twain calmly strolled across the street, bowed politely, and introduced himself;

"We ought to have called on you before, and I beg your pardon for intruding now in this informal way, but your house is on fire."

Dear readers, every day I am strolling across the Internet street to you in Western Europe and North America and as politely as possible pointing out that your house is on fire. As politely as possible I'm trying to explain that arsonists are pouring gasoline on the blaze while the fire department says all's okay and either you are imagining the fire or are to blame for it.

Since the houses here are built so closely together, unless we jump to action the whole neighbourhood will go up in flames.

It would be a good idea to develop a foreign policy strategy to put out the blaze, but you can't do that until you recognize who set it and then drive them off or round them up.