A man raped a teenager near Tranmere Rovers at 5:30am Monday 28th September. Police would like to speak to this man ....



From the description I assume this was at the bottom of Temple Road.

SOURCE

That is the most vile offence that can be committed. The offender will receive around 5 years and the victim has a life sentence.

The fact that the rapist is negro should help in finding him as only 5% of Wirral's population is non white British.

I don't think his race has any bearing and we don't know he is from the Wirral.

Seems you have already convicted him Lud.

Looks like 2 different people. Seen a young black guy witha hat like that but not the face of the other

I think his race does have a bearing on the case as it rules out 95% of Wirral's population, as to him not being a Wirral resident, you might be right, but there's a good chance he is isn't there?

Presuming he does live on the Wirral, one person out of 5% did it, as opposed to the 95% that didn't. Kind of narrows it down a bit.

racists racists everywhere.

so the poor victim is racist for telling police it was a black person---

I don't see any racist comments--just facts.

His race is irrelevant.

Don't twist things fish.

Ste, I think you are being deliberately disingenuous about this. My point is that it must be easier to find someone in 5% of the population than in 95% of the population. Wirral has approximately 320,000 residents and assuming that half of them are female it follows that the police are searching for one in 8,000 with 152,000 automatically ruled out of the search by virtue of their colour. Not racism Ste, just mathematics.

Of course his race is relevant.It is a way of identifying him, as would it be if the attacker had red hair or big ears. There is nothing racist, per se, about it.

I think my first cocern was the use of the word Negro, I'm not saying it was racist but we could all see he is coloured and don't think we needed it pointing out.

Probably more politically correct to use the word "black". And of course it's relevant in trying to find the attacker.

As its a black and white picture it is probably better not to make any colour assumptions, there are plenty of white British people around with similar features.



I didn't see the victim make that statement in any of the press releases I saw.

"As its a black and white picture it is probably better not to make any colour assumptions, there are plenty of white British people around with similar features."

Your quite right DD. Egg on my face. I was reacting to the initial post and assumption from the photo that it was a black man.


"I didn't see the victim make that statement in any of the press releases I saw."

No neither did I ...but I am pretty sure she would have given a description and it wouldn't have gone "sorry officer I am not allowed to give a description of his colour because its racist for me to do so"

I am pretty she would have said its a white male or a black male if she knew.

I agree with your point, witch-hunting everybody as racists and homophobes etc ends up with a situation where you have to be so concerned in what you say that it interferes with your thought process.

Defining "hate crime" is one of the lowest moments of our legal system, if someone attacks someone else because they are black or just because they are carrying a packet of smarties it is irrelevant, the offence is the attack. If they abuse someone verbally then it is abuse, no need to subsection it as a "hate crime" or drunken mouthing off.

Racism is differentiating by race and that is exactly what what the creation of "hate crime" does, how perverse.

Equally perverse is that ethnicity, skin colour and race are three completely different things but we appear to have systems that automatically equates between them.