Wednesday, 18 February 2015

"The Angels will return; and when you see the one who's meant to help you - you will weep with joy..."

"The Angels Will Return" : The Alice Gross Case, Ritual Murder and the Strategy of Tension from Spike EP on Vimeo.

"The Angels will return; and when you see the one who's meant to help you - you will weep with joy..."

It's a distinctly postmodern phenomenon that in the media charade presented via the mass media whenever now there is a search for a missing child (roughly once every 12 months), the police pretending to investigate it now will always issue statements to the media in press conferences using the personal pronouns "I", and "me", rather than "we" in reference to their so-called efforts in this investigation.

Is this because "we" sounds once again too reminiscent of the collective hive mind of the Brotherhoods...?

We are the Police. Resistance is futile.

That they are not trying, and conspicuously misdirecting outside scrutiny so as to confuse activity with productivity or progress is obvious - during the Yorkshire Ripper series, the floor of Leeds CID had to be reinforced to support the weight of all the paper the investigation had accumulated; here, Police brag in dead-pan fashion about how many tens of thousands of CCTV surveillance tapes they have sat down and reviewed, and the countless manhours wasted on such a pointless exercise. This is how they lie, right -

They said "We have reviewed over 40,000 hrs of CCTV footage from over 150 cameras, that's more hours than were reviewed for the riots of 2010 - but it's a massive, massive task".

It's also completely unnecessary - they know ever she appears in the footage, on what cameras and at what time, and where she stops appearing on them.

So you don't need to look at 40,000 hrs of footage you need to look at probably less than 4.

The average person living in London will appear on CCTV between 70 to 100 times a day.

And whenever anything like this happens, eight they relevant cameras aren't working, or have been switched off.

They know exactly what happened to her - this is all just fluff to divert suspicion away from the knowledge that they actually have the tape and it contradicts their story of a Nasty Immigrant Builder (His NIBS..?) from the East.

This sinister brand of Orientalism is all-pervasive - for the citizens of the former Soviet Union, they may (and do) certainly care a lot to distinguish between a Lithuanian, a Bulgarian, Romanian, Moldovan or Transnistrian, but to the average man in the street in today's Britain, when they hear "Latvian Convicted Murderer", on some level, they hear "Russia".

As for the late, unfortunate patsy, Arnis Zalkalns, many, many things about his pre-packaged back story simply do not add up - again, it may make perfect sense to the British public that "of course" some backward banana republic like Latvia would release a convicted murderer from jail after serving only 7 years of a 12 year sentence, and then give him a passport and not keep track of where he is or what he is up to, but to anyone who grew up inside the former Soviet Union, or any other authoritarian state bureaucracy, the idea of just loosing interest in supposedly violent criminals upon their release is just laughable and insulting all at once - one area of Soviet Society that was NEVER at risk of creeping institutional incompetence was offender management and corrections.

Having made the junket/wild goose chase over to the Baltic State, the Latvian Police ostensibly appear to be conducting themselves with far greater professional integrity than their British counterparts - the line being, he hasn't committed any crimes here, he's not on our radar, we're not concerned about him, and I can't tell you anything further than that about any criminal intelligence we may have on him, since you are not authorised to have it - its confidential.

Implicit also in that answer is the suggestion that had he re-entered Latvia, his passport would have been flagged upon arrival, so why are you here...? And since he has been charged with no crime in Britain and no European Arrest Warrant has been issued, why should we tell you anything.

The Mother of his dead wife provides just the sort of soundbites one would expect from the Mother of a murdered daughter who feels he is to blame - and, understanding the Stasi-esque and ever-present BBC guidelines, we see a recurring trend emerging in their carefully worded statements.

Everyone knows that to receive a murder conviction does not make you a murderer - it does not work like that.

Reality will not cleave to Man-Law - in law, you can be a convicted murderer, but being a murderer in law does not infer that you are a murderer in fact.

The words (and tenses) that the BBC, and to a lesser extent the police use in reference to Arnis' conviction for the murder of his wife raise more questions than they purport to answer from only a superficial reading - they steer noticably clear from such declarative statements as "He is a convicted murderer"; rather, they use the form "he HAS a murder conviction", "he WAS convicted of murder", "he RECEIVED a murder conviction"....

No comments:

Post a comment