>A bail document seen by The Telegraph refers to an allegation of possessing a firearm with intent to cause fear of violence and a further allegation of stalking related to a photograph of a house that appeared on his social media... re-arrested in October for allegedly breaching his bail conditions. However, that charge was later dropped...The firearms and stalking allegations were also dropped but Mr Richelieu-Booth was charged with a public order offence relating to a different social media post...charged with an offence of displaying “any writing/sign/visible representation with intent to cause harassment/alarm or distress”. However, that charge was also later dropped, he said.
Something very strange is going on in this case. Reading between the lines, there’s someone specific (forgive the cliche but, perchance, an ex wife) who either is being intentionally and subtly threatened, or feels that way.
The article is just missing some really obvious key points - what was written in the LinkedIn post? Whose house was in the image?
The headline is written for maximum clicks in the US advertising market. If an ex husband is posting pictures of his ex wife’s house and cryptic threatening messages on LinkedIn (not saying he was, but if he was) that’s a very different story from “man is arrested for photo with gun”.
On the other hand, the police in my beloved country (including the WYP) never cease in their hard work to make mistakes in some new unfathomable way. So it’s entirely possible that this story is just exactly what it seems on first inspection.
As far as I’ve been able to gather, the image of the house was posted BY SOMEONE ELSE. The image of the firearm was posted from a country where firearms are legal. There was no threatening language in his post of the firearm. All charges were ultimately dropped (though he was arrested and spent time in jail over the post)
The thing you fail to understand is how afraid of guns British people can be.
There was an article a few years ago about a British man, ex army. The story goes someone threw a bag of shotguns over his fence. He found them. Brought them inside for safekeeping overnight, brought them to the police station first thing in the morning. Arrested and charged for possession.
As far as I can tell he posted a picture containing a gun. This scared someone who reported it. The police arrested him. No further evidence of a crime was found and he was not charged.
"A bail document seen by The Telegraph refers to an allegation of possessing a firearm with intent to cause fear of violence and a further allegation of stalking related to a photograph of a house that appeared on his social media."
just variant #9812981837 of the "which opinions, MFer??" goose meme merry-go-round
Ah it wasn’t clear that he had posted the picture of the house. (The article I read simply said they asked about a picture and he denied knowledge of it) if he posted it that changes things.
I suppose if you posted a picture of my house and immediately thereafter a picture of yourself with a gun I’d call the police too.
>A bail document seen by The Telegraph refers to an allegation of possessing a firearm with intent to cause fear of violence and a further allegation of stalking related to a photograph of a house that appeared on his social media... re-arrested in October for allegedly breaching his bail conditions. However, that charge was later dropped...The firearms and stalking allegations were also dropped but Mr Richelieu-Booth was charged with a public order offence relating to a different social media post...charged with an offence of displaying “any writing/sign/visible representation with intent to cause harassment/alarm or distress”. However, that charge was also later dropped, he said.
Quite the gaggle of charges flying about!
Something very strange is going on in this case. Reading between the lines, there’s someone specific (forgive the cliche but, perchance, an ex wife) who either is being intentionally and subtly threatened, or feels that way.
The article is just missing some really obvious key points - what was written in the LinkedIn post? Whose house was in the image?
The headline is written for maximum clicks in the US advertising market. If an ex husband is posting pictures of his ex wife’s house and cryptic threatening messages on LinkedIn (not saying he was, but if he was) that’s a very different story from “man is arrested for photo with gun”.
On the other hand, the police in my beloved country (including the WYP) never cease in their hard work to make mistakes in some new unfathomable way. So it’s entirely possible that this story is just exactly what it seems on first inspection.
As far as I’ve been able to gather, the image of the house was posted BY SOMEONE ELSE. The image of the firearm was posted from a country where firearms are legal. There was no threatening language in his post of the firearm. All charges were ultimately dropped (though he was arrested and spent time in jail over the post)
The thing you fail to understand is how afraid of guns British people can be.
There was an article a few years ago about a British man, ex army. The story goes someone threw a bag of shotguns over his fence. He found them. Brought them inside for safekeeping overnight, brought them to the police station first thing in the morning. Arrested and charged for possession.
As far as I can tell he posted a picture containing a gun. This scared someone who reported it. The police arrested him. No further evidence of a crime was found and he was not charged.
Someone really doesn't like him
or, and hear me out here, he might have done something illegal?
Come on, it's the UK - that would've guaranteed the police ignored him completely.
Feel free to leave the West Yorkshire police department a message: https://www.westyorkshire.police.uk/form/leave-an-officer-a-...
https://archive.ph/bH56T
It looks pretty bad but I have a hunch that we don’t know the whole truth.
yerrrp... from the article:
"A bail document seen by The Telegraph refers to an allegation of possessing a firearm with intent to cause fear of violence and a further allegation of stalking related to a photograph of a house that appeared on his social media."
just variant #9812981837 of the "which opinions, MFer??" goose meme merry-go-round
Ah it wasn’t clear that he had posted the picture of the house. (The article I read simply said they asked about a picture and he denied knowledge of it) if he posted it that changes things.
I suppose if you posted a picture of my house and immediately thereafter a picture of yourself with a gun I’d call the police too.