Doesn't Look The Type...

A self-proclaimed misogynist with a history of violence against women has been banned from accessing 'incel forums' and loitering near female toilets.

And no, it's NOT a tranny, although it might as well be... 

The 29-year-old self-described misogynist and member of an online incel group received the order at Cheltenham Magistrates' Court after he persistently breached the terms of several Civil Orders.

He is now prohibited from using any computers or mobile devices that can access the internet.

A good idea? Yes, undoubtedly! But wait... 

But Valentine can still access the internet if he notifies the police VISOR team within three days of acquiring a device and registers it with the team.Valentine must have the device's location and data on at all times and again ensure no relevant information is deleted.

By the time he's misused it, it's too late, isn't it, for the victim?  OK, you'll have the evidence, but so what? We have a prison space crisis, so he won't be put behind bars anyway.

In addition to the terms of the order, Valentine is not allowed to enter, use or loiter near any female toilets, changing rooms or women only spaces.

Detective Sergeant Paul Howell said: 'Valentine is well-known for his misogynistic hostility and violence towards women, and we are pleased to have secured this SHPO against him. 

'Even though Valentine has not been convicted of any sexual offences, this is a preventative measure to keep women and girls in the county safe from harm. 

Have you got the Social Media Flying Squad on it, then? However will they find the time for this as well?  

'This order will reduce Valentine's ability to further explore his ideology and gives police the opportunity to monitor his behaviour in the community to help reduce his risk of further offending. 

'Tackling violence against women and girls (VAWG) is a priority for Gloucestershire Constabulary and we will do all we can to prevent crimes, bring offenders to justice, and protect women and girls.'

Really? It's not as though you've got a spotless reputation in that field, although you've gone overboard at times, is it! 

Oh, But He Is...

...he's focused on the risk to his premiership and political career that the prison overcrowding crisis represents.

The Prime Minister is facing a new backlash after changing the policy to keep PC Andrew Harper's killers behind bars, but at the same time opening the cell door to hundreds of dangerous offenders .In yet another U-turn on the controversial scheme, Mr Burnham said anyone convicted of unlawful killing will be excluded. But to make the change, ministers are finding extra cell spaces by releasing inmates serving indefinite terms under imprisonment for public protection sentences (IPPs) – which were given to offenders considered a significant risk to the public between 2005 and 2012.

One of Mr Burnham's own senior ministers condemned the plans, saying: 'The Prime Minister has been too focused on media response rather than actual risk. 'He's bowed to public pressure over the reaction to PC Harper's killers and not focused on the actual high-risk, high-harm perpetrators.'Are those who've committed manslaughter likely to come out of prison and commit manslaughter again? No. But I can guarantee you that the obsessed stalker or domestic abuser will come out and relentlessly pursue their victim again.'

Well, no doubt you voted for this weak-willed vacillating popinjay to replace the fatally-wounded Starmer so the fact you've now realised your mistake gives me no pleasure, but as a Labour MP you'll simply have to deny reality, won't you?

Sir Robert Buckland, a former justice secretary, said: 'I know first-hand the crisis facing the criminal justice system in Britain, but changing the early-release scheme from favouring one set of dangerous criminals to another set of dangerous criminals does very little to protect the public.'

As if that was a concern for a politician who is guarded by armed police everyehere he goes in his chauffeured limousine? 

Mr Burnham said spaces will also be created by deporting foreign prisoners.

How? Most countries don't want them back and human rights lawyers backed by middle class white women will fight toothaa nd nail to keep them here.

Being Prime Minister isn't what you hoped, eh, Andeh? 

Coming Soon To An Asylum Hotel Near You?

A search is under way to find a group of migrants after a man in his 20s was stabbed to death on a French beach. 

French police launched an investigation after a body was found on Terminus Beach, in the popular seaside resort of Berck-sur-Mer (Ed: popular with whom? Surely not French tourists!) on Thursday. 

It is feared that the suspected murderers fled across the Channel to the UK by small boat soon after.

And indeed, they have good reason to suspect this: 

That same day, at 6am, a small boat set sail from the same beach carrying 165 migrants. The vessel was later escorted into Dover for its occupants to be processed.

It's ok, I'm sure Border Farce and Immigration have vetted them all carefully, eh? 

So Shame Does Still Exist...

Four councillors who voted to allow a rapist taxi driver to keep his operator's licence have quit Highland Council's licensing committee.

Good!  

David Brown, 50, was jailed for six years and nine months in May after attacking an 18-year-old female passenger in December 2023. Last month, following a request from Brown's family, the committee's six male councillors voted to allow his operator's licence to continue, while its four female councillors voted against it.

 What were they thinking?

After criticism of the decision, the chairman Sean Kennedy along with John Grafton, Duncan Macpherson and Willie MacKay have resigned from the committee. Independent councillor MacKay has also resigned as a councillor, while Grafton has been suspended by the Scottish Liberal Democrat group on Highland Council.

SNP councillor Chris Birt, another one of the six male councillors, has been asked by his party's leader on the council, Raymond Bremner, to resign from the committee.

Asked? He should have been fired! 

Here Comes The Whitewash

A council is investigating the care given to a disabled man accused of throwing a three-year-old boy into a crocodile pit over suspected neglect concerns.

Yes, he is alleged to have thrown a toddler into a pit of crocodiles, but he's potentially the real victim here... 

Norfolk County Council has opened a safeguarding inquiry into the support provided to the 30-year-old after he was arrested on suspicion of attempted murder on June 18.

A spokesperson for the local authority said it was working with 'partners in the health and care system to identify and review all those individuals receiving care from this provider and to ensure the care they are receiving is of the quality and consistency they expect and deserve'.

In case carers from the same agency are in the habit of taking potential public dangers to zoos that might have enclosures of dangerous creatures?

While the suspect was from Norfolk, it is understood his care was not commissioned, provided or paid for by Norfolk County Council.

Interesting...will we ever find out why? I suspect not. 

All The Usual Hallmarks

Three Staffordshire Bull Terriers attacked a woman as she was carrying her six-day old baby who was left with a cut to their head after being bitten and clawed.

Gosh, is it Wales again? 

Jason Stafford, 49, was the owner of the three dogs which became dangerously out of control and latched onto the victim's feet and wrist during the savage attack in Cardiff. The three Staffordshire Bull Terriers have been destroyed as a result of the incident.

Is it a case where the owner did nothing and left it to others to act? 

A friend heard the woman's screams and saw one of the dogs had latched on to her wrist. He managed to get the dogs off of her and she left the area with her baby.

Eventually, Stafford was able to pacify the dogs but the injuries sustained by the victims were described as "appalling".

And is it a case where there have been previous issues with the mutts that, if dealt with properly, would have prevented this attack? 

The court heard there had been a previous incident in December where the dogs had attacked another individual and a safety plan had been put in place, but the defendant had "chosen to ignore" this.

And is the owner a known criminal? 

Among the defendant's previous convictions are offences of affray, robbery and drink driving.

*sighs* And is he hoping to get a lesser sentence? 

In mitigation, Derrick Gooden said  the dogs have since been destroyed and the defendant has been out of trouble for more than 20 years, but has a number of health issues.

And did it work? 

Stafford was sentenced to a total of two years imprisonment. The defendant was also disqualified from having custody of dogs for 10 years.

A classic case which ticks all the modern boxes! 

When Is Enough Going To Be Enough?

A dog was shot dead by armed officers after a man was attacked earlier today. Armed police officers were called to Hillside at around 10.45am today, April 7, to reports two dogs were on the loose on Lynton Road.A spokesperson for the force said in order to prevent further harm and stop threat to the public, a decision was made to destroy one of the dogs at the scene.The force did not say anyone had been arrested at this time.

Why onlt shoot one loose mutt? Wht not both? When are the police going to shake off the fear of critiscim from the owners and idiots on social media and man up and do the job of keeping the public safe?  

Perhaps because of it's clossness to Wales, a hotspot for aggressive breeds, Liverpool has had yoo mani of these attacks: 

A woman has pleaded not guilty after a vicious dog latched onto a schoolgirl's leg and sank its teeth into her skin. Kerris Gledhill, 16, from Norris Green, underwent surgery after the suspected XL Bully attacked her in the street.Barbara Kukla, 37, of Beversbrook Road in Liverpool was charged by Merseyside Police with owning a dog dangerously out of control causing injury. She appeared at Liverpool Crown Court on Tuesday, April 7 where she plead not guilty. She will go on trial next March.Following the incident Merseyside Police confirmed a dog had been seized following the attack.

Why wasn't it too shot at the scene?  Meanwhile, in one recent case, it appears the cops didn't shoot enough out of control ill-bred bitches:

The girlfriend of an XL Bully breeder whose vicious dog mauled and killed a "confused" pensioner who wandered into their garden has said her life has been "ruined" thanks to the actions of the victim.

We should, no doubt, expect such from a denizen of Self Pity City... 

Following Garner's guilty verdict, his girlfriend Lauren Lawler made a series of public posts "liked" hundreds of times on Facebook, raging: "The police and this government are the biggest load of vile corrupt people I’ve ever come across."

Living in Liverpool? I doubt that even more! 

Garner, of Dinaro Close in Belle Vale, was remanded in custody. He will return to Liverpool Crown Court for sentence on April 17.

He should do life.  

Another Of Those Things That 'Never Happens' Has Happened...

...and produced this surreal situation for the judge:

The jury was told they will be taken to the scene of the incident in a site visit. Judge Daniel Sawyer said: 'Ordinarily I would tell you not to go to the location but in this case it's just out the back of the building and it would be utterly pointless, you can see most of it from your jury retiring room.'

I'm surprised he didn't just tell them anyway, since the justice system loves futile gestures. 

What Are We Paying These People For?

Lord Anderson's report described how a Prevent 'intervention provider' met Ali, then a sixth former, only once after his school raised concerns he was being radicalised. Following the meeting at a McDonalds in Croydon in January 2015 the intervention provider described Ali as a 'pleasant and informed young man' in a report. They added that Ali 'does not agree' with extremists including Islamic state and al-Qaeda, and 'has no grievances against the west or other faiths or groups'.

...because it's certainly not 'to keep us all safe from terrorism' is it? 

An unnamed Prevent counter-terrorism case officer – a Scotland Yard civilian police worker - then emailed their colleague: 'He seems to be a great person, are you still all right to do a lesson at his school, do you think it is worth it?'

A 'great person'? That's a value judgement, not one of risk posed by the subject.

Lord Anderson's report went on: 'Ultimately, the intervention provider accepted what they described as a decision taken by others that no further meetings were required.'

‘Not me, guv, big boys did it and ran away!’ 

The 156-page report also said a document describing the intervention provider's contact with Ali was 'overlooked' by the Home Office. It had been sent to civil servants in 2021 but was not provided to a previous review of the case, and has only now come to light. It was disclosed to Lord Anderson only on June 25. 

Where was it? Who failed to provide it? We’ll never find out. 

'I told the Home Office that I considered this a significant matter, and asked that checks be made to ensure that no further sources of relevant evidence had been disregarded,' yesterday's report said. 'The Home Office responded with an assurance that it has conducted a thorough search and that no additional information has been detected.'

And you accepted that assurance? 

And They Will Keep On Failing, Because There Are No Consequences For Failure

Another day, another failing by the State' agents:

Police and social services failings may have contributed to the fatal stabbing of a 'peaceful and loving' musician by a mentally ill teenage girl, a coroner has ruled.

And of course, in that modern day inversion of reality, the mad one with the lethal weapon is the one who is considered the ‘vulnerable’ one and not her innocent victim:

The girl - who was known to be vulnerable and was on a Child Protection Plan - had been flagged as posing a 'high risk' and often 'carried a knife' around with her.

And no-one thought that might be a good enough reason to ensure she didn’t simply wander the streets? 

Just four days before the fatal attack, the girl - referred to as Child A - had gone missing from her home in Three Bridges, Crawley in West Sussex. Police located her but were unable to return her home, because her mother was away in London. Officers decided not to take her into protective custody and instead allowed her to stay with a woman who claimed to be her 'cousin'.

Well, perhaps they didn’t have a good reason to disbelieve th….

Oh! 

However the woman was not a relative and was known to police as a drug user with previous criminal convictions.

*sighs* 

Ms Schofield also said social services had failed to hold an emergency strategy meeting which had been organised when the child went missing.Ms Schofield added: 'It is possible that had these matters been addressed, the perpetrator may not have been in a position to carry out the act which led to Mr Hendrick's death.'

Mr Hendricks said: 'The police and authorities failed, they failed in every sense of the word.'

Yes, as they've done so very many times! And because there are never any consequences for failure, they will keep on doing it. 

Police arrested the girl, who had a criminal record, and she was later judged to be suffering from a 'significant abnormality of mind'. The teenager pleaded guilty to manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility at Bristol Crown Court in 2022 and was sentenced to nine years - five in custody and four on extended licence.

Meaning, 'in a town near you, at some point', never anywhere senior judges or police officers live, of course. The risk of her reverting to type is for you to take, never them. 

” It’s shocking that some people think this isn’t a serious public safety issue.”

Most visitors to Texada Island, a 30-mile sliver of land off the west coast of British Columbia, choose one of two main methods of arrival: a provincial ferry service with 10 daily sailings or a 3,000ft air strip, which welcomes the occasional chartered plane. But a four-year-old grizzly bear recently took a far more challenging route, braving strong currents and frigid water to swim nearly three miles across the Malaspina Strait. The exhausted young bear, named “Tex” by locals, hauled himself ashore on 25 May, unleashing a fierce dispute between residents, conservation officers and First Nations over his future – and prompting a broader debate over the relationship between the Canadian province and its wildlife.

 A top predator makes it to a small inhabited island? Sounds like the plot of a late Seventies made-forTV creature feature, doesn’t it? And this bruin is already a habituated nuisance animal into the bargain! 

Before his odyssey, the four-year-old bear was known to conservation officers on the mainland, who had twice been forced to relocate him to avoid conflicts with human residents. On both occasions, he returned to urban areas within weeks.Before his swim, he was spotted breaking into fishing boats at marinas to access bait and once stalked two walkers on a trail.

But these are enlightened times, and a massive carnivore roaming within snacking distance of townsfolk no longer brings the response it once would have done.

Despite his somewhat checkered past provincial officials said in a statement that there was a no “kill order” on Tex. But, they added, “if further behaviour by the grizzly bear occurs that threatens public safety, Conservation Officers will respond to those situations … It is our hope that it will not come to this, and the bear will move on independently.

Perhaps if you call rangers because the thing is in your garden eating your dog, they turn up to sing ‘Kimbayah’ until it decides to leave?

“They should euthanize him if they aren’t going to relocate him – he can’t stay here, someone is going to get injured/killed,” wrote one resident on a local Facebook message board. “It’s only a matter of time before something horrible happens.

But the concern from the authorities appears to be all about something horrible not happening to the predator, and no concern for the tax paying residents. And they can always squeeze some minority pandering in at the same time:. 

“Right now this grizzly bear is a ticking timebomb,” John Powell, elected chief of Mamalilikulla First Nation, told the Times Colonist. “I think inevitably the bear is going to run into a human or animal and it’s going to have a negative engagement. Texada is not a big place … It’s going to die there.” In 2019, British Columbia enacted legislation meant to harmonize its laws with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and it has signed a string of treaties or reconciliation agreements with nations in the province. The case of Tex represents a test of that new relationship, says Scapillati, whose foundation has worked with both First Nations and the province.

Utter insanity. Good luck, residents of Texada. You're going to need it! 

.

“Bison are no more dangerous than domestic cattle…”

Oh my, a sadly departed Blogger would have laughed himself hoarse at that...

When Europe’s heaviest land mammals were introduced into a woodland on the edge of Canterbury, it was hoped they would flourish and make space for other wildlife. But the European bison have been so successful in West Blean and Thornden Woods that more space must be made for them – in the form of Britain’s first ever bison bridges.

Whut? 

Four bridges costing a total of £1m are being built in to allow introduced bison, which are classified as dangerous wild animals in UK law, to cross the maze of public footpaths in the ancient woods without interacting with people.

At least the taxpayer's not entirely on the hook for this one:

The bridges, which are funded by the National Lottery Heritage Fund alongside National Highways, the Michael Uren Foundation, Veolia Environmental Trust, Garfield Weston Foundation and private donors, will enable the herd to traverse 200 hectares.

We really should be looking to the continent to see the potential hazards of this sort of thing. 

Simon Bateman-Brown of Kent Wildlife Trust said:“We recognise that miles of fencing and bridges is a barrier to rewilding projects, but we must demonstrate what can be achieved so we can advocate for change. Bison are no more dangerous than domestic cattle and, in other parts of the world, they roam freely in public areas.

“Our long-term vision is to remove the steel fencing and have the herd contained via electric fencing, but until the government makes the law fit for rewilding, we will continue to make a case for projects like this, so they can be replicated.”

You mean, until the government abandons health and safety entirely, Simon?