The woman accused of being first to spread the fake rumours about the Southport killer which sparked nationwide riots has been arrested.

Racist riots spread across the country after misinformation spread on social media claiming the fatal stabbing was carried out by Ali Al-Shakati, believed to be a fictitious name, a Muslim aslyum seeker who was on an MI6 watchlist.

A 55-year-old woman from Chester has now been arrested on suspicion of publishing written material to stir up racial hatred, and false communication. She remains in police custody.

While she has not been named in the police statement about the arrest, it is believed to be Bonnie Spofforth, a mother-of-three and the managing director of a clothing company.

    • davidagain@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      There’s a logical reasoning thing called modus ponens (it has a latin name because it’s not exactly new). It goes
      A. If A then B.
      Hence B.

      That’s exactly how she called for all hell to break loose. You can’t claim that you didn’t mean B when you say “A. If A then B.” It’s just that A was false and “If A then B” was also false. Nevertheless, a lie-ridden far right call to violence over the murder of innocent children is what it was, and it was heeded by the far right nut jobs who rioted over the issue, targetting the immigration lawyers that had nothing to do with the deaths of the children until she posted the lie. She incited violence. Jail. Good riddance.

      Keep your far right racist lying incitements to violence to yourselves, or you’ll end up in prison, fascists! You’re not welcome in the UK and you never have been. Thousands of ordinary people counter protested against hundreds of racist agitators. Good.

        • davidagain@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          No she wasn’t. She already unequivocally stated A.

          My friend has a UK driver’s licence.

          If she has a UK driver’s licence, she must be at least 17.

          Now, can you honestly claim I’m sceptical about whether she has a driver’s licence or whether she’s over 16?

          Please Google modus ponens before coming back again. She even used it in the classical form.

          • aidan@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            “If that’s true” pretty clearly implies skepticism. She wasn’t stating a theorem. She was conversing.

            • davidagain@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              You’re not prepared to change your mind, you’d rather contradict literally thousands of years of logical thinking. 2+2=3. Got it. I really really wasted my time talking to you.

              • aidan@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                I read what I read. I’m not saying it’s definitely what she meant, but if it’s how I interpreted it, it may be what she meant. Language after all is largely fluid, and not a mathematical equation. But sure, just insult me instead.

                • davidagain@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  But sure, just insult me instead

                  OK, you’re a right winger who spends his time online defending racist liars who post inflammatory lies stirring up hatred and violence in my country and you won’t listen to reason and literally deny logic.

                  • aidan@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    you won’t listen to reason and literally deny logic.

                    Your reasoning is that that is the phrasing in formal logic. My point is how people converse doesn’t necessarily follow formal logic. So that may not be what she meant. I can’t say she definitely meant what I said- but that is the impression I got. And as I said if it’s how I as a fluent English speaker interpreted it, then it may also be how she meant it.