Agreed.What a day~
Let's think positive. I think we are definitely making progress.
Now back to Sleuthing.. where were we?
so what's the difference when everyone was referencing GR as a possible perp!
I think I was the first here to mention VT, simply because somebody said they thought the 32-year-old chap arrested was Dutch. And maybe I was wrong in saying that that chap was VT. Just because that was a guy I knew lived there and was Dutch. Since of course maybe the person here (I forget) who said the guy arrested was Dutch could be wrong.
Certainly, if the chap who's arrested is *not* him then mods should delete a whole bunch of posts.
If it *is* him, I can't see that it's a big deal to be naming him. [Although I can guarantee that rather more will be said ]
Either way, I'm happy if my posts go since they don't really add anything worthwhile to the discussion.
Big difference! Keep digging away in my post history, and make your excuses.
There are no excuses for this. I don't think some of you realise how serious the consequences are. But please, carry on.
What is your major objection to looking at and discussing another possible suspect in this case?
Please remove his name from your post. We should also remove photos and links to his website. VT, 32, architect, 44 Canynge Road, it should be enough for us.They've allegedly arrested [VT]!
Yes well said indeed. :goodpost:
The name will be out soon enough anyway.
I repeat, please tread warily. Be patient.
There might be more water to run under the bridge.
Maybe surprises in store.
I kind of agree with this [and certainly with the polite tone -- let's not be getting rude with each other, which looks to be creeping in].
Myself, I don't see a big problem with saying who we think has been arrested (although if it turns out to be wrong then I'd suggest the relevant posts be deleted.)
But certainly I don't think we should start stating ideas of why the arrested person might have done whatever, how, and all the rest.
Discussing GR's strange reactions etc is one thing -- most of the UK has been doing so, and half of those having been doing so online. Likewise CJ.
But this is a fresh person and I personally think we shouldn't speculate at the moment. Because so little has been said about this chap that a thread like this genuinely could be damaging.
I doubt it could lead to a case falling through [but our US buddies should be aware that the idea that defendants can't get a fair trial if the case has been prejudiced by discussion of it in public forums is a far bigger deal here] but I think we've a moral duty, at least, to hold our horses.
At least for a little while
BBM
You can't post a person's name unless they have been named by the media. Its against the Terms of Service (TOS) here.
I wish I had read that earlier. So much easier and probably more effective.
Thank you!
Thank you. I don't know if you saw my edited post but I apologised to you. I should never have called you an idiot. I was getting quite upset with some of the carefree attitude that was going on with naming this guy.
It may be this guy they have arrested but I really think until he is charged and named we should not name him.
I disagree with someone else who has said if it is not him we can delete it later. So much damage could be done to this person in naming him if it is not him. Speculating as to what happened is different and in my opinion part of sleuthing, no damage can come from that.