Skip to content

This is why the police should leave Twitter alone

And all that nonsense about policing social media and hurty words:

Residents of a Mexican town lynched a woman whom they believed was involved in the murder of an eight-year-old girl after police arrested three people on suspicion of involvement in the child’s murder.

The girl disappeared from the tourist town of Taxco on Wednesday and her body was found on a highway the next day.

She appeared to be the victim of a financial kidnapping following reports that her family received anonymous telephone calls demanding a ransom.

Locals immediately suspected a man and a woman as being behind the crime after security footage apparently showed them loading a black bag thought to contain the body into the boot of a car.

On Thursday, residents blocked one of the main streets of Taxco and gathered outside a house where the woman and two men were located, demanding justice.

Because if the populace don’t believe that the police will tackle serious crime then the populace will douse in petrol and burn alive those even suspected of serious crime.

It’s not wholly and absoluitely true, this following, but the purpose of having police – and courts and prisons and all – is to stop vigilantism, to protect those suspected. By actually finding and sorting through and then punishing those actually guilty.

14 thoughts on “This is why the police should leave Twitter alone”

  1. We aren’t Mexicans, though. We don’t behave like them.

    And it’s not as though we’ve imported thousands of Third Worlders who do, and who have been excused other excesses by our government is it?


  2. “Excused” ????

    I would say enthusiastically supported by government, the opposition (don’t waste your time playing spot the difference), unaccountable civil servants, law enforcement and the judiciary.

    The otherwise normal looking “swastika in context” PC is merely the latest manifestation of establishment submission – the real institutional racism.

  3. I think Tim might be alluding to the new hurty feelings law in Scotland which begins today. 500 hate crime champions there are. I don’t think it means 500 full-time equivalent police championing hate crime, but it’s got to mean at least some resources not being used for normal policing.

  4. Bloke in North Dorset

    Police Scotland’s submission to today’s April Fool stories:

    A senior police officer has said new Scottish hate crime laws which take effect on Monday could risk damaging public trust in the force.

    Its a bit lame though, who in their right mind thinks senior police officers give a toss what the public think?

  5. I’ve been going through the online papers this morning trying to work out which stories were the April Fools Day gags. Eventually I concluded it was impossible.

  6. @BiS: I felt the same, but something about the ‘Edinburgh One O’Clock gun to be silenced’ story didn’t ring true. Close run thing, though.

  7. I think the plod who refused to arrest people displaying swastikas was right. I know of no law that says you can’t. Explaining the law while sipping a takeaway latte is not a good look though.

  8. Bongo: PlodJockland is simultaneously rolling out a policy whereby it won’t actively investigate “minor” crimes for which the complainant can’t provide his own evidence, while promising that every single thoughtcrime will be taken seriously.

    Frankly, I lost most of what trust I had in them when they were nationalised, adopted a silly name (and a new badge that they “didn’t know” had to be approved by the Lord Lyon), and started routing all their calls through a call centre in Aberdeen or somewhere.

    Occasionally, when I saw something suspicious – someone lurking around a house across the street, or trying the doors on the cars – I used to ring up my local police office to let them know about it. No point in bothering 999 for something like that. The bloke I spoke to on the other end would know the name of the street I was on, and sometimes say that there were a couple of officers in the area and he’d tell them to take a butcher’s. Now they’ve stopped publishing the local numbers; you’re supposed to dial 112 – or whatever it is – and get “What city are you calling from?” (And, presumably, if you can’t email them CCTV footage they’ll just log the call and tell you to get knotted.) Sod that for a game of cops and robbers.

    “I know of no law that says you can’t.”

    As apologists for the Hurty Words (Scotland) Act have been pointing out, it’s been illegal to “stir up racial hatred” since the 1960s. I mean, I tend to agree with you – let the buggers show, literally, their true colours – but it’s an arguable point as to whether or not it’s legal.

  9. Bloke in North Dorset


    Does Italy get the traditional opportunity to change sides?

    Apparently the treaties are written in such a way that Italy is obliged to come to the protection of San Marino in a war and that means that if San Marino attacks Italy then Italy will have to declare war on itself. I guess that would make it a sort of Schrödinger’s army and we wouldn’t know whose side they were on until we looked.

    Its not clear in this situation if NATOs A5 will be triggered.

  10. In Italy it’s traditional that the Forest Rangers take one side and declare war on the Land Army Reserves.

  11. Blokes in ND and Spain: Funnily enough, I was reading about San Marino a couple of days ago. It remained neutral during the unpleasantness of ’39-’45, but for some reason the Trusted and Reliable™ New York Times reported that it had declared war on Britain. The Captains Regent (the Heads of State; I’m not sure why such a tiny country needs two, but there it is) had to send a letter to HMG explaining that no, honest, it was still totally neutral squire so if we could just lay off the bombing that would be great.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *