What are we to make of Nicky Reilly?
Plod has made it clear it will be some time before he is questioned. That will mean very little to most people, but that's a dog-whistle to newspaper editors... 'No imminent charges... it's green for go!'
Expect a load of old shit from his next-door neighbours, pictures of him maybe looking a bit shifty, and articles about the influence of Islam on his life, when you open your newspaper tomorrow morning.
Mind you, not that the media gave a fuck about contempt of court when a man in Bristol was arrested a few weeks ago. You'll recall the Express called him 'The convert to terror', essentially stating that Islam is terrorism, and basically saying he was guilty before any evidence had even been heard. Either their investigative skills were so brilliant they were in no doubt about being wrong, or they just took plod's word at face value and didn't give a shit about a man's right to a fair trial. Hmm I wonder which. The local Mail-owned shitrag, The Bristol Evening (printed at 10am) Post didn't do much better, printing a picture of the gentleman concerned with and without a beard, saying it was 'A RADICAL CONVERSION'. Do you see what they did there? Do you see?! Oh I bet whoever came up with that choice headline wanked himself into a frenzy that night over the sheer brilliance of what he'd done. Pat on the back for you, sir.
'Radical' and 'radicalised' have taken on new meanings for plod and press alike in recent times, you see, and my local paper can't possibly try and hide behind the waffer-thin excuse of not trying to imply that the chap in question had been radicalised towards some kind of jihadism and that they were just trying to comment on his natty beard. Don't make me fucking laugh. They knew what they were doing, and what the implication of those words was. For someone who hadn't been tried yet - is that all right? Did they have the evidence to back up their claims? Did they fuck. Just a nod and a wink from PC Backhander, but not to worry, it's just some brown bloke with a beard, therefore it's all right to say what we like!
From what PC Backhander's cousin, PC Propaganda, has been saying in Devon, you'd be forgiven for thinking that it's quite easy to be 'radicalised'.
He was preyed upon, radicalised and taken advantage of
Ah I see. Well I might pop down the shops this weekend and go and get myself radicalised, seeing as it's so bloody easy. Might just get myself radicalised down the Co-op between the delicatessen counter and the booze aisle. Sounds like having your hair done or something. As Septicisle points out, it's also rather odd in this case that the police should come out and exploit their libel-free legal position to say stuff about the person concerned - which he is in no position to argue against - without fear of it being scrutinised or even questioned by the news media. They'll just parrot what they're told, no fear. Is it legal? Then let's do it!
Who knows if this guy has been 'radicalised' or not? He's changed his name to a Muslim name, so what - aren't people allowed to do that without fear of being labelled terrorists? If he's a vulnerable individual, who knows why he did anything? What conclusions can we possibly come to? Who knows what is behind any of these incidents?
We will never truly find out until court, but then when we get to court, we get acres and acres and acres of coverage of the prosecution, including lie upon lie upon lie of the supposed effects of whatever devices could possibly maybe one day have been improvised, but bugger all of the defence.
What really is the truth behind all this? It's hard to tell. But whatever this man in hospital has done, he's in hospital and in no position to defend himself. Isn't that right worth respecting, seeing as no charges have been brought against him and the police haven't even questioned him? No, apparently not. Let's just let plod try and convict him by media in public without questioning it at all.
Why bother with the courts at all?