Explosion on district line
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 16/09/2017 17:37, Recliner wrote:
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 16/09/2017 16:36, Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 16 Sep 2017 09:20:32 -0500, Christopher A. Lee
wrote:
It does appear to be terrorism.
Yes.
And they've now made an arrest, in Dover.
Don't these bombers realise that with all the surveillance videos,
they're going to get caught?
It's not guaranteed.
Most criminals are caught due to having some form of previous
interaction with the Police and establishing the end of a trail, eg a
bank robbers trail may have started when he nicked some sweets from a
corner shop as a 13 year old and became one to watch and whose habits
and haunts become known.
With a terrorist the trail may have been started by intelligence
services observing their coming and goings with other known people
doing suspicious activity or being seen at certain buildings.
In both case if the perpetuator of a bank robbery or a terrorist act
is doing it for absolutely the first time and is a lone wolf it
becomes much harder, surveillance videos will not help if the person
in the image cannot be recognized or are disguised unless they happen
to turn up again elsewhere unguarded.
There are experts at analyzing videos but as an example of how
difficult it is to find someone with no previous look at the Jogger
who pushed the woman into the path of a Bus recently, not even
disguised, reasonable video from the street and the bus, loads of
people about.
They still have not identified anyone enough to bring charges
Indeed, and they've wrongly arrested two innocent joggers so far. You'd
think the jogger should be relatively easy to find, as his home location
can be pinned down to quite a narrow area,
Not necessarily in central London, could have jogged from his place of
work and back (he recrossed the bridge shortly after the incident) and
actually lives somewhere in the London commuter area, aka England.
Yes, good point.
and he must have been caught by
many other cameras on his route.
But who is going to put in the effort to look at them all, once he left
the bridge he could have gone in any direction.
Yes, but they can work outwards from the end of the bridge to trace his
route. That area must have plenty of cameras. And the case is high profile
enough that it may be worth the effort.
Lots of cameras at the north end of the bridge, possibly not so many at
the south end.
However, if, within a few days of the incident, they didn't realise that
they needed to do it, the footage from most of the cameras may not have
been retained.
It took quite a while to be made public. Don't know how long footage is
kept on modern CCTV but doubt it is more than week at the outside.
Yes, that may be the weak link.
|