Five dead in Canada terrorist attack

[Mintjewlips]

Serious question, maybe a Canadian can enlighten me, if you're a white french Canadian, living in Canada, but you sympathise with french Canada separating from Canada, how the fuck are you a white nationalist?

Glenn Greenwald just mind fucked me when he called the Quebec mosque shooter a "white nationalist".

[Dan Druff]

The problem was that the Canadian media described having two "suspects" in custody, but then did not name them for awhile.

When a shooting like this occurs and they arrest a "suspect", that usually means the person is guilty or very likely to be guilty, and thus their name can be released.

However, other times they grab a few people who look/act suspicious, without any strong evidence against them. In such a case, they are "persons of interest" or "taken in for questioning".

I am totally fine with not releasing names of person-of-interest types, as sometimes it turns out those people are innocent.

However, when you have an actual SUSPECT in a shooting like this, then yes, you should feel pretty safe to release his name, especially after a few hours of preliminary investigation.

And then, as already pointed out, they botched the release of the name of the correct suspect anyway, despite the wait.

So I repeat...


LOL CANADA

[BetCheckBet]

The problem was that the Canadian media described having two "suspects" in custody, but then did not name them for awhile.

When a shooting like this occurs and they arrest a "suspect", that usually means the person is guilty or very likely to be guilty, and thus their name can be released.

However, other times they grab a few people who look/act suspicious, without any strong evidence against them. In such a case, they are "persons of interest" or "taken in for questioning".

I am totally fine with not releasing names of person-of-interest types, as sometimes it turns out those people are innocent.

However, when you have an actual SUSPECT in a shooting like this, then yes, you should feel pretty safe to release his name, especially after a few hours of preliminary investigation.

And then, as already pointed out, they botched the release of the name of the correct suspect anyway, despite the wait.

So I repeat...


LOL CANADA

No they didn't botch the release. They had two suspects as initially two shooters were reported . One ended up being downgraded to a witness and was released. But news outlets assumed both were the shooters.

[Dan Druff]

The problem was that the Canadian media described having two "suspects" in custody, but then did not name them for awhile.

When a shooting like this occurs and they arrest a "suspect", that usually means the person is guilty or very likely to be guilty, and thus their name can be released.

However, other times they grab a few people who look/act suspicious, without any strong evidence against them. In such a case, they are "persons of interest" or "taken in for questioning".

I am totally fine with not releasing names of person-of-interest types, as sometimes it turns out those people are innocent.

However, when you have an actual SUSPECT in a shooting like this, then yes, you should feel pretty safe to release his name, especially after a few hours of preliminary investigation.

And then, as already pointed out, they botched the release of the name of the correct suspect anyway, despite the wait.

So I repeat...


LOL CANADA

No they didn't botch the release. They had two suspects as initially two shooters were reported . One ended up being downgraded to a witness and was released. But news outlets assumed both were the shooters.

Then something was wrong with the investigation.

There's a huge gap between suspect and witness.

After a short time, they should be able to tell the difference between likely suspect and fringe suspect.

In high profile situations like these, it is always smart to avoid claiming "suspects in custody" unless you really have strong evidence that you have people actually involved.

Otherwise, you just release a statement of "two individuals have been detained for questioning, but their involvement has yet to be determined." That also satisfies most people who are wondering why the suspects aren't being named.

[limitles]

Serious question, maybe a Canadian can enlighten me, if you're a white french Canadian, living in Canada, but you sympathise with french Canada separating from Canada, how the fuck are you a white nationalist?

Glenn Greenwald just mind fucked me when he called the Quebec mosque shooter a "white nationalist".

A seperatist's goal is for Quebec to become a nation. Had to look that one up

[BetCheckBet]

No they didn't botch the release. They had two suspects as initially two shooters were reported . One ended up being downgraded to a witness and was released. But news outlets assumed both were the shooters.

Then something was wrong with the investigation.

There's a huge gap between suspect and witness.

After a short time, they should be able to tell the difference between likely suspect and fringe suspect.

In high profile situations like these, it is always smart to avoid claiming "suspects in custody" unless you really have strong evidence that you have people actually involved.

Otherwise, you just release a statement of "two individuals have been detained for questioning, but their involvement has yet to be determined." That also satisfies most people who are wondering why the suspects aren't being named.

Nothing was worng. Multiple shooters were reported. Both guys were seen fleeing and therefore taken inti custody as suspects based on behaviour. Unfortunately because the public deamands immediate justice people condemned the innocent Muslim suspect and look up his info for 2-3 hours online thinking he was a terrorist.

The innocent suspect already stated he didn't blame police and understood why they took him in. Problem is media and blood thirsty public who seek out such justice.

Also I don't know about laws in USA but pretty sure in Canada you can't just detain someone without them being a suspect of a crime.