https://video.dailymail.co.uk/previe...6326174546.jpg


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...tle-girls.html

It just makes me mad that this could have been prevented. His behavior was flagged many times, but nothing was done.

…the Prevent scheme has always been a farce/a broken and flawed scheme …I can’t imagine how angry the parents of those girls must feel that the system didn’t work to protect them, that it failed them completely …there has been one accountability of the evil attacker but there has to be more…

The prevent scheme was a charity.

https://liveblog.digitalimages.sky/l...8e7a0fa0b5.png


https://liveblog.digitalimages.sky/l...1e51f21faf.png

https://liveblog.digitalimages.sky/l...b9d28b5cf8.png

https://liveblog.digitalimages.sky/l...24e8b6fcc7.png

Prevent was a box ticking exercise....

We had to do Prevent course in a special needs school with kids who could not do anything for themselves, how they were supposed to be involved in terrorism is anyones guess

The murderer should have been put down. I can't see him lasting long in prison

People have been sent to prison for fatal mistakes at work. Many times it's been pure accidental.

How many times do the employees of Prevent have to make fatal mistakes before they face justice?

But not just the employees of Prevent, but also, The Government, MP's, the Police, social services, the media. When do they face justice for their mistakes and negligence at work?

Absolutely diabolical. 52 years is not enough!!


I'm too traumatised to read this properly, just like I couldn't follow the Gisele Pelicot case and other traumatic cases, just too much trauma, but, has it been established that IT specifically targeted white people or did he just live in a predominantly white area?

It's being made a race and culture issue on social media when monstrous evil comes in all forms.

…with the few personal dealings I had with it, I didn’t feel that it was a box ticking thing…I do think that it had the intent to Prevent …(…that could have been that 3 word slogan that was so well used…/…Intent to Prevent…)…it was broken and flawed because as with many things, the funding wasn’t there and the communication between agencies wasn’t there and the focus wasn’t correctly placed, imo…

Good points, Alfie. I agree.

I think it didn't fall under Prevent's "jurisdiction", as he wasn't known to have the Jihadi material, and his racism against whites wasn't apparent. They deal with radicalised people, not every who's violent.

…it fell under the jurisdiction of concerning actions and behaviours being reported on three occasions and the whole premise of the scheme is an attempted intervention to prevent, which didn’t happen on any of those occasion's so far as is being reported…wasn’t it the whole thing of Prevent to reinforce that it’s everyone’s ’jurisdiction’ to report any concerning behaviour that someone is displaying which may indicate an intention to harm others in any type of attack…and if something doesn’t fall under ‘one jurisdiction’ then it’s the sharing of that information to the agency/organisation and all agency/organisations involved which is something that doesn’t always happen….there is no doubt that those children were butchered in an act of terrorism and there seems no doubt also that concerning behaviours were reported before the event so there is a broken system that needs to be addressed and that needs to be answerable to those parents…

It isnt being classed as terrorism, is it?

Wasn't it reported that he had some sort of a terrorist guidebook downloaded or something?

Not that it takes much planning or strategic genius to simply walk into a class and stab a bunch of helpless children, but still.

I do what you're saying, and potential terrorism is, like safeguarding, everyone's business... I don't know why I'm simping for Prevent tbh :joker: it was absolutely their (and many others) failure ... but I gather the excuse is that they deal with radicalisation, and he didn't seem radicalised into any single ideology, and was just generally a violent psycho? In which case they should have passed his case on, rather than dismissing him.

I think that was since his referrals? Either way, trying to paint it as anything but terrorism is daft.

Yes and it still isn't classed as terrorism :bored:

…I think you’ve used the completely correct word, Oliver…’excuse’ ….don’t give us a broken system that isn’t well thought through for something so serious as trying to prevent harm and life loss through information being given and gathered and then give us excuses when that giving and gathering has led to no action being taken in an attempt to prevent…no reasons, just excuses…

Oh it's undoubtedly a failure for everyone involved.

Re his parents - I don't see the problem with them being protected. They had called the police on him a number of times, and I gather they were Christian, so his (apparent) religious fury didn't come from them.