“It is believed the driver of the Ford Galaxy car involved in this incident was able to follow an ambulance on to Water Street after the roadblock was temporarily lifted so that the ambulance crew could attend to a member of the public who was having a suspected heart attack,” Merseyside’s assistant chief constable Jenny Sims told a press conference.
And did Merseyside plod make no attempt to stop the vehicle? Did they not notice it?
“There was no intelligence to suggest an incident of this nature would take place,” she added, reiterating that it was not being treated as terrorism.
Really? So, is it normal to have snipers on rooftops for victory parades?
And is it normal to take so long to question a suspect for an event that took place on live tv, such that the newspapers have had time to get interviews with his family and neighbours?
Liverpool city council confirmed that hostile vehicle mitigation measures had been in place on Water Street as part of a rolling road closure to support the traffic management plan for the parade. Sims defended the policing operation during the parade, saying the force planned for “all contingencies” - including road closures and an armed police presence.
Didn't plan for those 'hostile vehicle mitigation measures' to be overridden by your Keysyone Kops on the ground though, obviously...
10 comments:
I'm sure in out time of diversity and enrichment, snipers on roofs are normal for policing a large gathering, but what on Earth happened here?
From the little I've seen, I'm thinking the driver may have just been defending themselves against a hostile crowd of scousers
Angry people from Liverpool - sort of reminds me of forty years ago today.
Did anyone from Liverpool ever apologise to Turin for that?
Whisper it quietly, but it seems to me that the initial terror in this appalling incident was that experienced by the driver when his car was violently and repeatedly punched, kicked and eventually opened by shouting members of the surrounding crowd. If the police removed a barrier and allowed his car to pass without question, does he also have a case for being placed in a dangerous situation by their negligence?
I rather doubt that aspect will even be admitted in mitigation; given the injuries to children and the allegation that the car hit a pram (and, arguably, the location) this looks likely to be one of those of those cases where the word ‘justice’ comes to mean exactly the opposite of its definition in British law.
Just read it in Liverpool Echo … utter bollox. We saw the photo of the driver.
The person charged is male, white, served his country in the military, has a job, married to the mother of his children, and probably voted Reform at the last election. Either death sentence or will die in prison.
Penseivat
Me too. I'm sur that will be the defence case too.
Of course not - they are always the sinned against, never the sinners.
That's my assessment too. Perhaps the defence can successfully request a change of venue?
It didn't seem a close match for the man paraded in front of the cameras, did it?
Sadly true!
Post a Comment