It comes after millionaire mum Bonnie Spofforth said she was 'mortified' to be accused of being the first to spread the false rumours.

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.

  • Mechanize@feddit.itEnglish
    211·
    4 months ago

    While she has not been named in the police statement about the arrest, it is believed to be Bonnie Spofforth

    This, I don’t like. If you - the newspaper, the means of information - are not sure about a name you should really refrain from using it.

    It would be not the first time people get their lives ruined by some careless journalist because of a namesake or just an error.

    It’s not that different from “spreading rumors”.

    That aside, in this case, it is probably a rumor from an inside source. Still. Not a fan.

      • Glytch@lemmy.worldEnglish
        45·
        4 months ago

        They know it’s her, they’re just shielding themselves from libel claims. The same way they’ll say “allegedly” until a conviction.

        • zaph@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          7·
          4 months ago

          If they were trying to shield themselves they could have not dropped a name. This is different than saying allegedly about someone who was arrested and the name released.

      • gmtom@lemmy.worldEnglish
        32·
        4 months ago

        That’s not true at all.

        She literally made shit up out of nowhere with no evidence.

        The website is posting actual credible information based on available evidence I.e. journalism.

      • inbeesee@lemmy.worldEnglish
        4·
        4 months ago

        But now internet people can harass her and the newspaper can make a little more money! /s

    • Wimopy@feddit.ukEnglish
      20·
      4 months ago

      I’ve also said this before and I’ll say it again: names of suspects and even convicted criminals should not be shared unless necessary*. That just makes no sense for rehabilitation as it opens people up for judgement in a court of opinion. Justice is the job of the justice systems and should not generally involve the wider public.

      Could there be issues with the judgement or other events where the only way to achieve justice is via the press? Sure, probably, but I don’t think the default should be that if I google the name of someone I can find if they or someone with a similar name (and god forbid, appearance) were involved in a crime.

      *: unless necessary here can cover cases like trying to find an individual on the run, or when their previous crime is meant to exclude them from specific lines of work, although even that should be on a need-to-know basis imo, not public info.

      • AreaSIX @lemm.eeEnglish
        10·
        4 months ago

        Meanwhile here in Sweden, everyone’s criminal record is public, and even available to search online. Unless the crime is something minor punished with a fine. It’s really ridiculous, everything is publicly available online, like addresses, phone numbers, the cars or pets people own. Unless you have a protected identity, it’s all available to everyone online. I tried to apply for a protected identity on account of being a public servant that is involved in making decisions many people very much dislike. But I couldn’t provide a concrete threat so it was denied. It’s like the system is still geared towards pre-internet times. The system itself in fact doxxes every resident in the country.

      • Wispy2891@lemmy.worldEnglish
        9·
        4 months ago

        You’re right but otherwise there are cases like child rapists that get a slap on the wrist and then go to represent a country at the Olympics

      • viking@infosec.pubEnglish
        8·
        4 months ago

        Yep. In Germany for example we don’t name perpetrators at all, neither alleged nor convicted. Newspapers are not allowed to refer to them with anything but the first name plus first letter of the last name, or initials. The only exception is when someone dangerous is on the run and they need help from the public to ID him, in that case the name is released after an ethical review board from the police force decides so (it’s mostly done on the spot without delay, but there is a procedure at the very least).

        A general exception is made for persons of interest, be it celebrities, politicians or something. For general members of the public, nothing truly identifiable is released. Minors (generally below the age of 18, or people tried as minors, i.e. committed a crime while below 18 but only tried later) will not be named whatsoever; only their age and gender are released.

        Race is never mentioned, unless it is a race-related hate crime.

        • Wispy2891@lemmy.worldEnglish
          8·
          4 months ago

          Race is never mentioned, unless it is a race-related hate crime.

          We need something like this in my country. There’s a newspaper here (il giornale) that always has headlines like

          • African robs store
          • African rapes girl
          • Illegal alien shoplifts
          • Mad African shouts in a mall
          • Foreigner madness: demands food then gets mad when denied

          And so on. The last (foreigner madness) is almost a catchphrase for them, if you search for “la follia dello straniero” it comes out only results from that outlet

          A crime is a crime and the criminal nationality is irrelevant, unless you need to push some agenda