UPDATED: Detectives are investigating a stabbing outside Colchester YMCA

Suspected stabbing outside Colchester supermarket

Suspected stabbing outside Colchester supermarket

First published in News
Last updated

DETECTIVES are investigating a stabbing outside a Colchester supermarket.

Officers and paramedics were called to Aldi, on Magdalen Street, shortly after 2.30pm.

It is believed the man sustained the injuries outside the Colchester YMCA, before rushing to the nearby supermarket for help. 

A spokesman for Essex Police said: "Police are investigating an assault in Colchester.

"Officers were contacted shortly after 2.30pm following reports of a stabbing in Magdalen Street.

"Officers arrived and found a man aged in his 20s suffering from abdominal injuries in Aldi.

"Paramedics treated him at the scene."

He added: "Officers believe this was a drug-related stabbing." 

The victim has been taken to Colchester General Hospital for treatment as officers investigate the circumstances surrounding the alleged attack.

A car was stopped in East Street as part of the search but nobody has been arrested.

One eyewitness said: "I was shopping today at Aldi when a man came to the shop calling 'help, Ive just been stabbed".

 

 

Comments (38)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

3:53pm Fri 11 Jul 14

SOMETHING2SAY says...

For f***** sake....its happening EVERYWHERE !!
For f***** sake....its happening EVERYWHERE !! SOMETHING2SAY
  • Score: 49

3:55pm Fri 11 Jul 14

Angry of Lexden says...

I make no excuse for being boring about Russell voting against a change in the law to reduce knife crime. Does no one else have the energy to challenge him?
I make no excuse for being boring about Russell voting against a change in the law to reduce knife crime. Does no one else have the energy to challenge him? Angry of Lexden
  • Score: 46

4:03pm Fri 11 Jul 14

graham1983 says...

Its the norm now? Getting a bit boring! Yawn!!
Its the norm now? Getting a bit boring! Yawn!! graham1983
  • Score: -66

4:15pm Fri 11 Jul 14

Angry of Lexden says...

graham1983 wrote:
Its the norm now? Getting a bit boring! Yawn!!
You got children Graham?
[quote][p][bold]graham1983[/bold] wrote: Its the norm now? Getting a bit boring! Yawn!![/p][/quote]You got children Graham? Angry of Lexden
  • Score: 77

4:25pm Fri 11 Jul 14

1980-colchester says...

Certainly not boring. More like frightening for innocent people
Certainly not boring. More like frightening for innocent people 1980-colchester
  • Score: 61

4:33pm Fri 11 Jul 14

Angry of Lexden says...

Graham, where are you? I repeat, do you have children?
Graham, where are you? I repeat, do you have children? Angry of Lexden
  • Score: 34

4:37pm Fri 11 Jul 14

Mohammad Akbar says...

What's going on in Colchester today?
Not much same old stuff.
What another stabbing then?
Of course.
What's going on in Colchester today? Not much same old stuff. What another stabbing then? Of course. Mohammad Akbar
  • Score: -18

4:37pm Fri 11 Jul 14

caravandel says...

Whats the hell is going on in this town these days . starting to think about the safety of my family in this town
Whats the hell is going on in this town these days . starting to think about the safety of my family in this town caravandel
  • Score: 40

4:42pm Fri 11 Jul 14

Angry of Lexden says...

caravandel wrote:
Whats the hell is going on in this town these days . starting to think about the safety of my family in this town
Caravandel, I have a suggestion. Why don't we all email the mp who is supposed to represent our interests and ask him why he voted against a change in knife crime law to reduce stabbings?
[quote][p][bold]caravandel[/bold] wrote: Whats the hell is going on in this town these days . starting to think about the safety of my family in this town[/p][/quote]Caravandel, I have a suggestion. Why don't we all email the mp who is supposed to represent our interests and ask him why he voted against a change in knife crime law to reduce stabbings? Angry of Lexden
  • Score: 52

4:45pm Fri 11 Jul 14

sam vines says...

Would our so call elected representative please step forward and explain why current knife deterrents are helping reduce knife crime in this town. Or are you just going to hide in London and make comments in parliament about criminals paying their victims to avoid jail.
Would our so call elected representative please step forward and explain why current knife deterrents are helping reduce knife crime in this town. Or are you just going to hide in London and make comments in parliament about criminals paying their victims to avoid jail. sam vines
  • Score: 29

5:09pm Fri 11 Jul 14

Angry of Lexden says...

sam vines wrote:
Would our so call elected representative please step forward and explain why current knife deterrents are helping reduce knife crime in this town. Or are you just going to hide in London and make comments in parliament about criminals paying their victims to avoid jail.
Good one Sam! Dies he gave an email address as mp?
[quote][p][bold]sam vines[/bold] wrote: Would our so call elected representative please step forward and explain why current knife deterrents are helping reduce knife crime in this town. Or are you just going to hide in London and make comments in parliament about criminals paying their victims to avoid jail.[/p][/quote]Good one Sam! Dies he gave an email address as mp? Angry of Lexden
  • Score: -2

5:15pm Fri 11 Jul 14

ArtesianWells says...

I'd be very interested to read any studies that might show how mandatory minimum sentences on knife crime have worked around the world. If anyone could let me know where I could find anything like that, please let us know.
I'd be very interested to read any studies that might show how mandatory minimum sentences on knife crime have worked around the world. If anyone could let me know where I could find anything like that, please let us know. ArtesianWells
  • Score: 5

5:48pm Fri 11 Jul 14

Jess Jephcott says...

What difference would a change in the law make Mr Angry? The laws are already in place. This is a trend. Men carry knives because they know they can easily throw them away if a cop approaches them. They carry knives because others carry knives. It is a natural response to a threat. How many knives were found in nearby hedges after Jay Whiston was stabbed? Even I understand that, just as I carry the means to deal with an agressive dog when I am out with my dog. We live in a violent society but thankfully we have Mr Young out there with his purple flag to reassure us. This is Colchester today. Not nice but it is a result in the moral decline in society generally. See you all in church on Sunday!
What difference would a change in the law make Mr Angry? The laws are already in place. This is a trend. Men carry knives because they know they can easily throw them away if a cop approaches them. They carry knives because others carry knives. It is a natural response to a threat. How many knives were found in nearby hedges after Jay Whiston was stabbed? Even I understand that, just as I carry the means to deal with an agressive dog when I am out with my dog. We live in a violent society but thankfully we have Mr Young out there with his purple flag to reassure us. This is Colchester today. Not nice but it is a result in the moral decline in society generally. See you all in church on Sunday! Jess Jephcott
  • Score: 8

5:48pm Fri 11 Jul 14

Citizen 139 says...

Angry of Lexden wrote:
sam vines wrote:
Would our so call elected representative please step forward and explain why current knife deterrents are helping reduce knife crime in this town. Or are you just going to hide in London and make comments in parliament about criminals paying their victims to avoid jail.
Good one Sam! Dies he gave an email address as mp?
info@bobrussell.org.
uk
[quote][p][bold]Angry of Lexden[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sam vines[/bold] wrote: Would our so call elected representative please step forward and explain why current knife deterrents are helping reduce knife crime in this town. Or are you just going to hide in London and make comments in parliament about criminals paying their victims to avoid jail.[/p][/quote]Good one Sam! Dies he gave an email address as mp?[/p][/quote]info@bobrussell.org. uk Citizen 139
  • Score: 4

5:49pm Fri 11 Jul 14

Angry of Lexden says...

ArtesianWells wrote:
I'd be very interested to read any studies that might show how mandatory minimum sentences on knife crime have worked around the world. If anyone could let me know where I could find anything like that, please let us know.
AW I'm sure there must be data out there. But it's a bit like drink drive, or wearing seat belts. We could fanny about like a load of lib dem's, or put through a sound adjustment to the existing law. Getting back to search belts and drink drive, I recall lots of claptrap about "its up to the individual to wear a belt or not". Drink drive law provoked a cascade of excuses - "the officer was not wearing his hat when he stopped me". And another good one: " yes I just had a drink because of the shock of the accident" we all know that in the end the new laws on drink drive and seat belts saved lives. Mandatory sentencing for being caught a second time carrying a knife, is a low risk adjustment to improve the deterrent strength of the law, carrying a strong probability of success. I know I'm really boring about this but, if Redman had been caught twice carrying a knife, the experience of being locked up, might just have meant he didn't take a knife to the party and wouldn't have killed Jay whiston. Think about the balance - fanny about or make a sensible move now to save lives and avoid the devastating impact on families.
[quote][p][bold]ArtesianWells[/bold] wrote: I'd be very interested to read any studies that might show how mandatory minimum sentences on knife crime have worked around the world. If anyone could let me know where I could find anything like that, please let us know.[/p][/quote]AW I'm sure there must be data out there. But it's a bit like drink drive, or wearing seat belts. We could fanny about like a load of lib dem's, or put through a sound adjustment to the existing law. Getting back to search belts and drink drive, I recall lots of claptrap about "its up to the individual to wear a belt or not". Drink drive law provoked a cascade of excuses - "the officer was not wearing his hat when he stopped me". And another good one: " yes I just had a drink because of the shock of the accident" we all know that in the end the new laws on drink drive and seat belts saved lives. Mandatory sentencing for being caught a second time carrying a knife, is a low risk adjustment to improve the deterrent strength of the law, carrying a strong probability of success. I know I'm really boring about this but, if Redman had been caught twice carrying a knife, the experience of being locked up, might just have meant he didn't take a knife to the party and wouldn't have killed Jay whiston. Think about the balance - fanny about or make a sensible move now to save lives and avoid the devastating impact on families. Angry of Lexden
  • Score: 20

5:59pm Fri 11 Jul 14

Angry of Lexden says...

Jess Jephcott wrote:
What difference would a change in the law make Mr Angry? The laws are already in place. This is a trend. Men carry knives because they know they can easily throw them away if a cop approaches them. They carry knives because others carry knives. It is a natural response to a threat. How many knives were found in nearby hedges after Jay Whiston was stabbed? Even I understand that, just as I carry the means to deal with an agressive dog when I am out with my dog. We live in a violent society but thankfully we have Mr Young out there with his purple flag to reassure us. This is Colchester today. Not nice but it is a result in the moral decline in society generally. See you all in church on Sunday!
Jess, the existing law is not fit for purpose. A mandatory sentence for being caught a second time carrying a knife would have an impact. It won't stop injury and death by stabbing, but it will make guys hesitate to carry. It might have meant Redman would not of been carrying a knife the night he killed Jay Whiston. With his previous Redman could well have received a mandatory sentence, which might have changed his attitude to knives.
[quote][p][bold]Jess Jephcott[/bold] wrote: What difference would a change in the law make Mr Angry? The laws are already in place. This is a trend. Men carry knives because they know they can easily throw them away if a cop approaches them. They carry knives because others carry knives. It is a natural response to a threat. How many knives were found in nearby hedges after Jay Whiston was stabbed? Even I understand that, just as I carry the means to deal with an agressive dog when I am out with my dog. We live in a violent society but thankfully we have Mr Young out there with his purple flag to reassure us. This is Colchester today. Not nice but it is a result in the moral decline in society generally. See you all in church on Sunday![/p][/quote]Jess, the existing law is not fit for purpose. A mandatory sentence for being caught a second time carrying a knife would have an impact. It won't stop injury and death by stabbing, but it will make guys hesitate to carry. It might have meant Redman would not of been carrying a knife the night he killed Jay Whiston. With his previous Redman could well have received a mandatory sentence, which might have changed his attitude to knives. Angry of Lexden
  • Score: 13

6:28pm Fri 11 Jul 14

Angry of Lexden says...

Citizen 139 wrote:
Angry of Lexden wrote:
sam vines wrote:
Would our so call elected representative please step forward and explain why current knife deterrents are helping reduce knife crime in this town. Or are you just going to hide in London and make comments in parliament about criminals paying their victims to avoid jail.
Good one Sam! Dies he gave an email address as mp?
info@bobrussell.org.

uk
Many thanks Citizen 139. I'll get some thoughts together.
[quote][p][bold]Citizen 139[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Angry of Lexden[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sam vines[/bold] wrote: Would our so call elected representative please step forward and explain why current knife deterrents are helping reduce knife crime in this town. Or are you just going to hide in London and make comments in parliament about criminals paying their victims to avoid jail.[/p][/quote]Good one Sam! Dies he gave an email address as mp?[/p][/quote]info@bobrussell.org. uk[/p][/quote]Many thanks Citizen 139. I'll get some thoughts together. Angry of Lexden
  • Score: 6

7:11pm Fri 11 Jul 14

Mohammad Akbar says...

Nobody is safe in Colchester.
Nobody is safe in Colchester. Mohammad Akbar
  • Score: 5

7:18pm Fri 11 Jul 14

Route88 says...

Angry of Lexden wrote:
Jess Jephcott wrote:
What difference would a change in the law make Mr Angry? The laws are already in place. This is a trend. Men carry knives because they know they can easily throw them away if a cop approaches them. They carry knives because others carry knives. It is a natural response to a threat. How many knives were found in nearby hedges after Jay Whiston was stabbed? Even I understand that, just as I carry the means to deal with an agressive dog when I am out with my dog. We live in a violent society but thankfully we have Mr Young out there with his purple flag to reassure us. This is Colchester today. Not nice but it is a result in the moral decline in society generally. See you all in church on Sunday!
Jess, the existing law is not fit for purpose. A mandatory sentence for being caught a second time carrying a knife would have an impact. It won't stop injury and death by stabbing, but it will make guys hesitate to carry. It might have meant Redman would not of been carrying a knife the night he killed Jay Whiston. With his previous Redman could well have received a mandatory sentence, which might have changed his attitude to knives.
The present penalty for carrying certain types of knives in public without GOOD excuse is a maximum prison sentence of four years and/or (I believe) a fine of up to £5000. This 'threat' alone ought to be enough to deter anyone but is doesn't so I doubt whether the possibility of a mandatory minimum sentence of six month for second time offenders would either. The likes of Redman have no respect for the law. What is needed is a .toughening up' of our whole sentencing regime and a return to deterrent sentences for crimes of violence.
[quote][p][bold]Angry of Lexden[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jess Jephcott[/bold] wrote: What difference would a change in the law make Mr Angry? The laws are already in place. This is a trend. Men carry knives because they know they can easily throw them away if a cop approaches them. They carry knives because others carry knives. It is a natural response to a threat. How many knives were found in nearby hedges after Jay Whiston was stabbed? Even I understand that, just as I carry the means to deal with an agressive dog when I am out with my dog. We live in a violent society but thankfully we have Mr Young out there with his purple flag to reassure us. This is Colchester today. Not nice but it is a result in the moral decline in society generally. See you all in church on Sunday![/p][/quote]Jess, the existing law is not fit for purpose. A mandatory sentence for being caught a second time carrying a knife would have an impact. It won't stop injury and death by stabbing, but it will make guys hesitate to carry. It might have meant Redman would not of been carrying a knife the night he killed Jay Whiston. With his previous Redman could well have received a mandatory sentence, which might have changed his attitude to knives.[/p][/quote]The present penalty for carrying certain types of knives in public without GOOD excuse is a maximum prison sentence of four years and/or (I believe) a fine of up to £5000. This 'threat' alone ought to be enough to deter anyone but is doesn't so I doubt whether the possibility of a mandatory minimum sentence of six month for second time offenders would either. The likes of Redman have no respect for the law. What is needed is a .toughening up' of our whole sentencing regime and a return to deterrent sentences for crimes of violence. Route88
  • Score: 21

7:50pm Fri 11 Jul 14

mirokou says...

Rapid expansion of unmonitored social housing and emergency placement of undesirables. i.e. bedsits , influx of cheap flats to rent etc etc has led to an explosion in the ruling underclass within this town ..Don't believe it , just walk around on any day ,its like audience participation for Jeremy KYLE..So i'll get shot down by the few on here , so be it, that's what democracy is "a freedom of expression". But lets take a long hard look and be honest…and no i'm not judging everyone on social housing and fully understand there are a lot of good people in need of help and support in a fair and balanced society and i openly support the ideal.. But the dross in this town is over whelming and generally responsible for anti social behaviour and violent crime. Lived here for over 40 years now and have witnessed the steady decline.. And unfortunately worked with a lot of it.
Rapid expansion of unmonitored social housing and emergency placement of undesirables. i.e. bedsits , influx of cheap flats to rent etc etc has led to an explosion in the ruling underclass within this town ..Don't believe it , just walk around on any day ,its like audience participation for Jeremy KYLE..So i'll get shot down by the few on here , so be it, that's what democracy is "a freedom of expression". But lets take a long hard look and be honest…and no i'm not judging everyone on social housing and fully understand there are a lot of good people in need of help and support in a fair and balanced society and i openly support the ideal.. But the dross in this town is over whelming and generally responsible for anti social behaviour and violent crime. Lived here for over 40 years now and have witnessed the steady decline.. And unfortunately worked with a lot of it. mirokou
  • Score: 63

8:17pm Fri 11 Jul 14

Angry of Lexden says...

Route88 wrote:
Angry of Lexden wrote:
Jess Jephcott wrote:
What difference would a change in the law make Mr Angry? The laws are already in place. This is a trend. Men carry knives because they know they can easily throw them away if a cop approaches them. They carry knives because others carry knives. It is a natural response to a threat. How many knives were found in nearby hedges after Jay Whiston was stabbed? Even I understand that, just as I carry the means to deal with an agressive dog when I am out with my dog. We live in a violent society but thankfully we have Mr Young out there with his purple flag to reassure us. This is Colchester today. Not nice but it is a result in the moral decline in society generally. See you all in church on Sunday!
Jess, the existing law is not fit for purpose. A mandatory sentence for being caught a second time carrying a knife would have an impact. It won't stop injury and death by stabbing, but it will make guys hesitate to carry. It might have meant Redman would not of been carrying a knife the night he killed Jay Whiston. With his previous Redman could well have received a mandatory sentence, which might have changed his attitude to knives.
The present penalty for carrying certain types of knives in public without GOOD excuse is a maximum prison sentence of four years and/or (I believe) a fine of up to £5000. This 'threat' alone ought to be enough to deter anyone but is doesn't so I doubt whether the possibility of a mandatory minimum sentence of six month for second time offenders would either. The likes of Redman have no respect for the law. What is needed is a .toughening up' of our whole sentencing regime and a return to deterrent sentences for crimes of violence.
Route88, the existing law is based on a maximum tariff, which we know fails as an effective deterrent at police level and in court. Mandatory sentencing will bring more potential killers to prison. The deterrent value I'll have an impact. It might not stop the Redman types, but then again it might. The real deterrent impact will be the guys who hang around with the Redman types - they will be more likely to hesitate to carry. We have a responsibility to do what is required to prevent another Jay tragedy. Also, we have a duty to the Redman's. - early intervention could hold them from going across the point of no return.
[quote][p][bold]Route88[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Angry of Lexden[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jess Jephcott[/bold] wrote: What difference would a change in the law make Mr Angry? The laws are already in place. This is a trend. Men carry knives because they know they can easily throw them away if a cop approaches them. They carry knives because others carry knives. It is a natural response to a threat. How many knives were found in nearby hedges after Jay Whiston was stabbed? Even I understand that, just as I carry the means to deal with an agressive dog when I am out with my dog. We live in a violent society but thankfully we have Mr Young out there with his purple flag to reassure us. This is Colchester today. Not nice but it is a result in the moral decline in society generally. See you all in church on Sunday![/p][/quote]Jess, the existing law is not fit for purpose. A mandatory sentence for being caught a second time carrying a knife would have an impact. It won't stop injury and death by stabbing, but it will make guys hesitate to carry. It might have meant Redman would not of been carrying a knife the night he killed Jay Whiston. With his previous Redman could well have received a mandatory sentence, which might have changed his attitude to knives.[/p][/quote]The present penalty for carrying certain types of knives in public without GOOD excuse is a maximum prison sentence of four years and/or (I believe) a fine of up to £5000. This 'threat' alone ought to be enough to deter anyone but is doesn't so I doubt whether the possibility of a mandatory minimum sentence of six month for second time offenders would either. The likes of Redman have no respect for the law. What is needed is a .toughening up' of our whole sentencing regime and a return to deterrent sentences for crimes of violence.[/p][/quote]Route88, the existing law is based on a maximum tariff, which we know fails as an effective deterrent at police level and in court. Mandatory sentencing will bring more potential killers to prison. The deterrent value I'll have an impact. It might not stop the Redman types, but then again it might. The real deterrent impact will be the guys who hang around with the Redman types - they will be more likely to hesitate to carry. We have a responsibility to do what is required to prevent another Jay tragedy. Also, we have a duty to the Redman's. - early intervention could hold them from going across the point of no return. Angry of Lexden
  • Score: 8

8:30pm Fri 11 Jul 14

Angry of Lexden says...

mirokou wrote:
Rapid expansion of unmonitored social housing and emergency placement of undesirables. i.e. bedsits , influx of cheap flats to rent etc etc has led to an explosion in the ruling underclass within this town ..Don't believe it , just walk around on any day ,its like audience participation for Jeremy KYLE..So i'll get shot down by the few on here , so be it, that's what democracy is "a freedom of expression". But lets take a long hard look and be honest…and no i'm not judging everyone on social housing and fully understand there are a lot of good people in need of help and support in a fair and balanced society and i openly support the ideal.. But the dross in this town is over whelming and generally responsible for anti social behaviour and violent crime. Lived here for over 40 years now and have witnessed the steady decline.. And unfortunately worked with a lot of it.
Mirokou, I agree with your comment. It would be interesting to check out the demographics of crime in the town over time. The factors to check might be area, levels of achievement in school, type of crime - violent/theft/drugs(
selling or using), car crime, single or two parent family. Mind you, it would be just as easy to go back over six months worth of the county standard - there are certain areas to the southeast and northeast of the town that would feature high and support your comment.
[quote][p][bold]mirokou[/bold] wrote: Rapid expansion of unmonitored social housing and emergency placement of undesirables. i.e. bedsits , influx of cheap flats to rent etc etc has led to an explosion in the ruling underclass within this town ..Don't believe it , just walk around on any day ,its like audience participation for Jeremy KYLE..So i'll get shot down by the few on here , so be it, that's what democracy is "a freedom of expression". But lets take a long hard look and be honest…and no i'm not judging everyone on social housing and fully understand there are a lot of good people in need of help and support in a fair and balanced society and i openly support the ideal.. But the dross in this town is over whelming and generally responsible for anti social behaviour and violent crime. Lived here for over 40 years now and have witnessed the steady decline.. And unfortunately worked with a lot of it.[/p][/quote]Mirokou, I agree with your comment. It would be interesting to check out the demographics of crime in the town over time. The factors to check might be area, levels of achievement in school, type of crime - violent/theft/drugs( selling or using), car crime, single or two parent family. Mind you, it would be just as easy to go back over six months worth of the county standard - there are certain areas to the southeast and northeast of the town that would feature high and support your comment. Angry of Lexden
  • Score: 12

8:56pm Fri 11 Jul 14

Route88 says...

Angry of Lexden wrote:
Route88 wrote:
Angry of Lexden wrote:
Jess Jephcott wrote:
What difference would a change in the law make Mr Angry? The laws are already in place. This is a trend. Men carry knives because they know they can easily throw them away if a cop approaches them. They carry knives because others carry knives. It is a natural response to a threat. How many knives were found in nearby hedges after Jay Whiston was stabbed? Even I understand that, just as I carry the means to deal with an agressive dog when I am out with my dog. We live in a violent society but thankfully we have Mr Young out there with his purple flag to reassure us. This is Colchester today. Not nice but it is a result in the moral decline in society generally. See you all in church on Sunday!
Jess, the existing law is not fit for purpose. A mandatory sentence for being caught a second time carrying a knife would have an impact. It won't stop injury and death by stabbing, but it will make guys hesitate to carry. It might have meant Redman would not of been carrying a knife the night he killed Jay Whiston. With his previous Redman could well have received a mandatory sentence, which might have changed his attitude to knives.
The present penalty for carrying certain types of knives in public without GOOD excuse is a maximum prison sentence of four years and/or (I believe) a fine of up to £5000. This 'threat' alone ought to be enough to deter anyone but is doesn't so I doubt whether the possibility of a mandatory minimum sentence of six month for second time offenders would either. The likes of Redman have no respect for the law. What is needed is a .toughening up' of our whole sentencing regime and a return to deterrent sentences for crimes of violence.
Route88, the existing law is based on a maximum tariff, which we know fails as an effective deterrent at police level and in court. Mandatory sentencing will bring more potential killers to prison. The deterrent value I'll have an impact. It might not stop the Redman types, but then again it might. The real deterrent impact will be the guys who hang around with the Redman types - they will be more likely to hesitate to carry. We have a responsibility to do what is required to prevent another Jay tragedy. Also, we have a duty to the Redman's. - early intervention could hold them from going across the point of no return.
I am not in principle against a mandatory minimum sentence and I have to agree that it is worth trying to prevent another tragedy but I would still argue that our whole approach to sentencing, especially in respect of crimes of violence needs a drastic overhaul. I doubt whether the majority of people who arm themselves with knifes would understand the term 'mandatory minimum sentence' anyway but if the courts were allowed to impose the maximum sentence instead of being constrained by sentencing guidelines the word would hopefully get around. Whatever our views, it is obvious that something needs to be done!
[quote][p][bold]Angry of Lexden[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Route88[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Angry of Lexden[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jess Jephcott[/bold] wrote: What difference would a change in the law make Mr Angry? The laws are already in place. This is a trend. Men carry knives because they know they can easily throw them away if a cop approaches them. They carry knives because others carry knives. It is a natural response to a threat. How many knives were found in nearby hedges after Jay Whiston was stabbed? Even I understand that, just as I carry the means to deal with an agressive dog when I am out with my dog. We live in a violent society but thankfully we have Mr Young out there with his purple flag to reassure us. This is Colchester today. Not nice but it is a result in the moral decline in society generally. See you all in church on Sunday![/p][/quote]Jess, the existing law is not fit for purpose. A mandatory sentence for being caught a second time carrying a knife would have an impact. It won't stop injury and death by stabbing, but it will make guys hesitate to carry. It might have meant Redman would not of been carrying a knife the night he killed Jay Whiston. With his previous Redman could well have received a mandatory sentence, which might have changed his attitude to knives.[/p][/quote]The present penalty for carrying certain types of knives in public without GOOD excuse is a maximum prison sentence of four years and/or (I believe) a fine of up to £5000. This 'threat' alone ought to be enough to deter anyone but is doesn't so I doubt whether the possibility of a mandatory minimum sentence of six month for second time offenders would either. The likes of Redman have no respect for the law. What is needed is a .toughening up' of our whole sentencing regime and a return to deterrent sentences for crimes of violence.[/p][/quote]Route88, the existing law is based on a maximum tariff, which we know fails as an effective deterrent at police level and in court. Mandatory sentencing will bring more potential killers to prison. The deterrent value I'll have an impact. It might not stop the Redman types, but then again it might. The real deterrent impact will be the guys who hang around with the Redman types - they will be more likely to hesitate to carry. We have a responsibility to do what is required to prevent another Jay tragedy. Also, we have a duty to the Redman's. - early intervention could hold them from going across the point of no return.[/p][/quote]I am not in principle against a mandatory minimum sentence and I have to agree that it is worth trying to prevent another tragedy but I would still argue that our whole approach to sentencing, especially in respect of crimes of violence needs a drastic overhaul. I doubt whether the majority of people who arm themselves with knifes would understand the term 'mandatory minimum sentence' anyway but if the courts were allowed to impose the maximum sentence instead of being constrained by sentencing guidelines the word would hopefully get around. Whatever our views, it is obvious that something needs to be done! Route88
  • Score: 13

11:03pm Fri 11 Jul 14

Dirk Diggler Knows says...

This appears to be a seperate incident from the main 2 knife crimes in colchester in recent months..

As stated in the headline it is a drug related incident which no doubt means the victim was in a life of crime himself putting himself in danger of such attrocious events..

When will they see sense before it is too late!!
This appears to be a seperate incident from the main 2 knife crimes in colchester in recent months.. As stated in the headline it is a drug related incident which no doubt means the victim was in a life of crime himself putting himself in danger of such attrocious events.. When will they see sense before it is too late!! Dirk Diggler Knows
  • Score: 15

11:40pm Fri 11 Jul 14

Angry of Lexden says...

Route88 wrote:
Angry of Lexden wrote:
Route88 wrote:
Angry of Lexden wrote:
Jess Jephcott wrote:
What difference would a change in the law make Mr Angry? The laws are already in place. This is a trend. Men carry knives because they know they can easily throw them away if a cop approaches them. They carry knives because others carry knives. It is a natural response to a threat. How many knives were found in nearby hedges after Jay Whiston was stabbed? Even I understand that, just as I carry the means to deal with an agressive dog when I am out with my dog. We live in a violent society but thankfully we have Mr Young out there with his purple flag to reassure us. This is Colchester today. Not nice but it is a result in the moral decline in society generally. See you all in church on Sunday!
Jess, the existing law is not fit for purpose. A mandatory sentence for being caught a second time carrying a knife would have an impact. It won't stop injury and death by stabbing, but it will make guys hesitate to carry. It might have meant Redman would not of been carrying a knife the night he killed Jay Whiston. With his previous Redman could well have received a mandatory sentence, which might have changed his attitude to knives.
The present penalty for carrying certain types of knives in public without GOOD excuse is a maximum prison sentence of four years and/or (I believe) a fine of up to £5000. This 'threat' alone ought to be enough to deter anyone but is doesn't so I doubt whether the possibility of a mandatory minimum sentence of six month for second time offenders would either. The likes of Redman have no respect for the law. What is needed is a .toughening up' of our whole sentencing regime and a return to deterrent sentences for crimes of violence.
Route88, the existing law is based on a maximum tariff, which we know fails as an effective deterrent at police level and in court. Mandatory sentencing will bring more potential killers to prison. The deterrent value I'll have an impact. It might not stop the Redman types, but then again it might. The real deterrent impact will be the guys who hang around with the Redman types - they will be more likely to hesitate to carry. We have a responsibility to do what is required to prevent another Jay tragedy. Also, we have a duty to the Redman's. - early intervention could hold them from going across the point of no return.
I am not in principle against a mandatory minimum sentence and I have to agree that it is worth trying to prevent another tragedy but I would still argue that our whole approach to sentencing, especially in respect of crimes of violence needs a drastic overhaul. I doubt whether the majority of people who arm themselves with knifes would understand the term 'mandatory minimum sentence' anyway but if the courts were allowed to impose the maximum sentence instead of being constrained by sentencing guidelines the word would hopefully get around. Whatever our views, it is obvious that something needs to be done!
Route88, do us all a favour if you feel comfortable about it, write to our mp. I'm going to think it through tomorrow, calm and ask for his help.
[quote][p][bold]Route88[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Angry of Lexden[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Route88[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Angry of Lexden[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jess Jephcott[/bold] wrote: What difference would a change in the law make Mr Angry? The laws are already in place. This is a trend. Men carry knives because they know they can easily throw them away if a cop approaches them. They carry knives because others carry knives. It is a natural response to a threat. How many knives were found in nearby hedges after Jay Whiston was stabbed? Even I understand that, just as I carry the means to deal with an agressive dog when I am out with my dog. We live in a violent society but thankfully we have Mr Young out there with his purple flag to reassure us. This is Colchester today. Not nice but it is a result in the moral decline in society generally. See you all in church on Sunday![/p][/quote]Jess, the existing law is not fit for purpose. A mandatory sentence for being caught a second time carrying a knife would have an impact. It won't stop injury and death by stabbing, but it will make guys hesitate to carry. It might have meant Redman would not of been carrying a knife the night he killed Jay Whiston. With his previous Redman could well have received a mandatory sentence, which might have changed his attitude to knives.[/p][/quote]The present penalty for carrying certain types of knives in public without GOOD excuse is a maximum prison sentence of four years and/or (I believe) a fine of up to £5000. This 'threat' alone ought to be enough to deter anyone but is doesn't so I doubt whether the possibility of a mandatory minimum sentence of six month for second time offenders would either. The likes of Redman have no respect for the law. What is needed is a .toughening up' of our whole sentencing regime and a return to deterrent sentences for crimes of violence.[/p][/quote]Route88, the existing law is based on a maximum tariff, which we know fails as an effective deterrent at police level and in court. Mandatory sentencing will bring more potential killers to prison. The deterrent value I'll have an impact. It might not stop the Redman types, but then again it might. The real deterrent impact will be the guys who hang around with the Redman types - they will be more likely to hesitate to carry. We have a responsibility to do what is required to prevent another Jay tragedy. Also, we have a duty to the Redman's. - early intervention could hold them from going across the point of no return.[/p][/quote]I am not in principle against a mandatory minimum sentence and I have to agree that it is worth trying to prevent another tragedy but I would still argue that our whole approach to sentencing, especially in respect of crimes of violence needs a drastic overhaul. I doubt whether the majority of people who arm themselves with knifes would understand the term 'mandatory minimum sentence' anyway but if the courts were allowed to impose the maximum sentence instead of being constrained by sentencing guidelines the word would hopefully get around. Whatever our views, it is obvious that something needs to be done![/p][/quote]Route88, do us all a favour if you feel comfortable about it, write to our mp. I'm going to think it through tomorrow, calm and ask for his help. Angry of Lexden
  • Score: 3

11:49pm Fri 11 Jul 14

C.I.5. says...

Dirk Diggler Knows wrote:
This appears to be a seperate incident from the main 2 knife crimes in colchester in recent months..

As stated in the headline it is a drug related incident which no doubt means the victim was in a life of crime himself putting himself in danger of such attrocious events..

When will they see sense before it is too late!!
They are all Drug related incidents.
To stab someone 102 Times takes quite a lot of inhuman energy and strength as in the case of the Jim attack:
The Nahid lady attack was around 16 Stab wounds and even that would have required an enormous amount of energy.
There are rogue strains of Canaboid being grown in the borough by idiots that are using Hydroponics & Growth Hormone in the Liquids, during the pumping cycle. This is changing the sex and the toxicity of the plant into a dangerous variant strain.
These are areas that have not been tested and the effects on the brain are unknown and not quantifiable.
When mixed with natural high street legal and unregulated synthetic drugs, the medical implications are just not fathomable.
There is no research into Hydroponic growth in cannabis and other plant drugs that have been altered or interfered with in this way.
I was struck in the face some years ago by a chap on a cocktail of drugs and it was like being hit with a ball pain hammer, in one strike my upper jaw was broken.
This town has turned into a nightmare for this type of attack and crime.
[quote][p][bold]Dirk Diggler Knows[/bold] wrote: This appears to be a seperate incident from the main 2 knife crimes in colchester in recent months.. As stated in the headline it is a drug related incident which no doubt means the victim was in a life of crime himself putting himself in danger of such attrocious events.. When will they see sense before it is too late!![/p][/quote]They are all Drug related incidents. To stab someone 102 Times takes quite a lot of inhuman energy and strength as in the case of the Jim attack: The Nahid lady attack was around 16 Stab wounds and even that would have required an enormous amount of energy. There are rogue strains of Canaboid being grown in the borough by idiots that are using Hydroponics & Growth Hormone in the Liquids, during the pumping cycle. This is changing the sex and the toxicity of the plant into a dangerous variant strain. These are areas that have not been tested and the effects on the brain are unknown and not quantifiable. When mixed with natural high street legal and unregulated synthetic drugs, the medical implications are just not fathomable. There is no research into Hydroponic growth in cannabis and other plant drugs that have been altered or interfered with in this way. I was struck in the face some years ago by a chap on a cocktail of drugs and it was like being hit with a ball pain hammer, in one strike my upper jaw was broken. This town has turned into a nightmare for this type of attack and crime. C.I.5.
  • Score: 11

12:53am Sat 12 Jul 14

Boris says...

Angry of Lexden wrote:
I make no excuse for being boring about Russell voting against a change in the law to reduce knife crime. Does no one else have the energy to challenge him?
Angry, as you have told us on another thread, you are still only thinking about it. Let us know how you get on, if you ever find the energy.
[quote][p][bold]Angry of Lexden[/bold] wrote: I make no excuse for being boring about Russell voting against a change in the law to reduce knife crime. Does no one else have the energy to challenge him?[/p][/quote]Angry, as you have told us on another thread, you are still only thinking about it. Let us know how you get on, if you ever find the energy. Boris
  • Score: 4

1:28am Sat 12 Jul 14

Angry of Lexden says...

Boris wrote:
Angry of Lexden wrote:
I make no excuse for being boring about Russell voting against a change in the law to reduce knife crime. Does no one else have the energy to challenge him?
Angry, as you have told us on another thread, you are still only thinking about it. Let us know how you get on, if you ever find the energy.
Boris, as I said, I am grateful for your offer to meet bob with Jay's mum. But it has to be with a news reporter of our choice. You will understand we are not confident the gaz and Cs are neutral in the matter. We aim for the end if next week before the school hols. And I'm guessing bob will be happy for the local live media to attend. I will check with charter hall tomorrow, but it might have to be another venue the marks Tey is usually ok.
[quote][p][bold]Boris[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Angry of Lexden[/bold] wrote: I make no excuse for being boring about Russell voting against a change in the law to reduce knife crime. Does no one else have the energy to challenge him?[/p][/quote]Angry, as you have told us on another thread, you are still only thinking about it. Let us know how you get on, if you ever find the energy.[/p][/quote]Boris, as I said, I am grateful for your offer to meet bob with Jay's mum. But it has to be with a news reporter of our choice. You will understand we are not confident the gaz and Cs are neutral in the matter. We aim for the end if next week before the school hols. And I'm guessing bob will be happy for the local live media to attend. I will check with charter hall tomorrow, but it might have to be another venue the marks Tey is usually ok. Angry of Lexden
  • Score: 1

2:47am Sat 12 Jul 14

Dirk Diggler Knows says...

C.I.5. wrote:
Dirk Diggler Knows wrote:
This appears to be a seperate incident from the main 2 knife crimes in colchester in recent months..

As stated in the headline it is a drug related incident which no doubt means the victim was in a life of crime himself putting himself in danger of such attrocious events..

When will they see sense before it is too late!!
They are all Drug related incidents.
To stab someone 102 Times takes quite a lot of inhuman energy and strength as in the case of the Jim attack:
The Nahid lady attack was around 16 Stab wounds and even that would have required an enormous amount of energy.
There are rogue strains of Canaboid being grown in the borough by idiots that are using Hydroponics & Growth Hormone in the Liquids, during the pumping cycle. This is changing the sex and the toxicity of the plant into a dangerous variant strain.
These are areas that have not been tested and the effects on the brain are unknown and not quantifiable.
When mixed with natural high street legal and unregulated synthetic drugs, the medical implications are just not fathomable.
There is no research into Hydroponic growth in cannabis and other plant drugs that have been altered or interfered with in this way.
I was struck in the face some years ago by a chap on a cocktail of drugs and it was like being hit with a ball pain hammer, in one strike my upper jaw was broken.
This town has turned into a nightmare for this type of attack and crime.
If i remember reading correctly, wasnt it 102 knife wounds, not stabbed that many times?? I could be wrong..

Im sure mental health is no doubt more the cause in an intance such as those murders happening than to the mindless thugs involved with drugs in petty knife attacks..
[quote][p][bold]C.I.5.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dirk Diggler Knows[/bold] wrote: This appears to be a seperate incident from the main 2 knife crimes in colchester in recent months.. As stated in the headline it is a drug related incident which no doubt means the victim was in a life of crime himself putting himself in danger of such attrocious events.. When will they see sense before it is too late!![/p][/quote]They are all Drug related incidents. To stab someone 102 Times takes quite a lot of inhuman energy and strength as in the case of the Jim attack: The Nahid lady attack was around 16 Stab wounds and even that would have required an enormous amount of energy. There are rogue strains of Canaboid being grown in the borough by idiots that are using Hydroponics & Growth Hormone in the Liquids, during the pumping cycle. This is changing the sex and the toxicity of the plant into a dangerous variant strain. These are areas that have not been tested and the effects on the brain are unknown and not quantifiable. When mixed with natural high street legal and unregulated synthetic drugs, the medical implications are just not fathomable. There is no research into Hydroponic growth in cannabis and other plant drugs that have been altered or interfered with in this way. I was struck in the face some years ago by a chap on a cocktail of drugs and it was like being hit with a ball pain hammer, in one strike my upper jaw was broken. This town has turned into a nightmare for this type of attack and crime.[/p][/quote]If i remember reading correctly, wasnt it 102 knife wounds, not stabbed that many times?? I could be wrong.. Im sure mental health is no doubt more the cause in an intance such as those murders happening than to the mindless thugs involved with drugs in petty knife attacks.. Dirk Diggler Knows
  • Score: 4

8:40am Sat 12 Jul 14

MaryPoppins87 says...

Angry of Lexden wrote:
I make no excuse for being boring about Russell voting against a change in the law to reduce knife crime. Does no one else have the energy to challenge him?
Angry, after reading all these comments I'm starting to unserstand more fully your issue with Bob and I pretty much agree with what you've all said, it would be great if these laws could be changed. I do, however, wonder what diference it'll make to those who carry knives. I used to work with a homeless charity and saw many people with drug problems, and they simply don't care. A few do, but most aren't scared of police, prison etc. I even knew some who would offend around October so they could be in a nice warm prison over the winter months.
They guy who was stabbed and the attacker might not have been homeless themselves, but in general those who hang around the YMCA, take drugs and carry knives tend to be those who don't care enough about the consequences.
That being said, I still really hope there is a change in the law, as it will deter some from carrying knives and therefor prevent some disasters, which as you rightly say, affect so many lives. I hope you get enough backing on this to challenge Bob and be heard.
[quote][p][bold]Angry of Lexden[/bold] wrote: I make no excuse for being boring about Russell voting against a change in the law to reduce knife crime. Does no one else have the energy to challenge him?[/p][/quote]Angry, after reading all these comments I'm starting to unserstand more fully your issue with Bob and I pretty much agree with what you've all said, it would be great if these laws could be changed. I do, however, wonder what diference it'll make to those who carry knives. I used to work with a homeless charity and saw many people with drug problems, and they simply don't care. A few do, but most aren't scared of police, prison etc. I even knew some who would offend around October so they could be in a nice warm prison over the winter months. They guy who was stabbed and the attacker might not have been homeless themselves, but in general those who hang around the YMCA, take drugs and carry knives tend to be those who don't care enough about the consequences. That being said, I still really hope there is a change in the law, as it will deter some from carrying knives and therefor prevent some disasters, which as you rightly say, affect so many lives. I hope you get enough backing on this to challenge Bob and be heard. MaryPoppins87
  • Score: 11

2:13pm Sat 12 Jul 14

Angry of Lexden says...

MaryPoppins87 wrote:
Angry of Lexden wrote:
I make no excuse for being boring about Russell voting against a change in the law to reduce knife crime. Does no one else have the energy to challenge him?
Angry, after reading all these comments I'm starting to unserstand more fully your issue with Bob and I pretty much agree with what you've all said, it would be great if these laws could be changed. I do, however, wonder what diference it'll make to those who carry knives. I used to work with a homeless charity and saw many people with drug problems, and they simply don't care. A few do, but most aren't scared of police, prison etc. I even knew some who would offend around October so they could be in a nice warm prison over the winter months.
They guy who was stabbed and the attacker might not have been homeless themselves, but in general those who hang around the YMCA, take drugs and carry knives tend to be those who don't care enough about the consequences.
That being said, I still really hope there is a change in the law, as it will deter some from carrying knives and therefor prevent some disasters, which as you rightly say, affect so many lives. I hope you get enough backing on this to challenge Bob and be heard.
Thanks Mary. I have emailed Caroline Shearer to ask if she wishes to join me, if I get an appointment.
[quote][p][bold]MaryPoppins87[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Angry of Lexden[/bold] wrote: I make no excuse for being boring about Russell voting against a change in the law to reduce knife crime. Does no one else have the energy to challenge him?[/p][/quote]Angry, after reading all these comments I'm starting to unserstand more fully your issue with Bob and I pretty much agree with what you've all said, it would be great if these laws could be changed. I do, however, wonder what diference it'll make to those who carry knives. I used to work with a homeless charity and saw many people with drug problems, and they simply don't care. A few do, but most aren't scared of police, prison etc. I even knew some who would offend around October so they could be in a nice warm prison over the winter months. They guy who was stabbed and the attacker might not have been homeless themselves, but in general those who hang around the YMCA, take drugs and carry knives tend to be those who don't care enough about the consequences. That being said, I still really hope there is a change in the law, as it will deter some from carrying knives and therefor prevent some disasters, which as you rightly say, affect so many lives. I hope you get enough backing on this to challenge Bob and be heard.[/p][/quote]Thanks Mary. I have emailed Caroline Shearer to ask if she wishes to join me, if I get an appointment. Angry of Lexden
  • Score: 3

5:50pm Sat 12 Jul 14

mirokou says...

mirokou wrote:
Rapid expansion of unmonitored social housing and emergency placement of undesirables. i.e. bedsits , influx of cheap flats to rent etc etc has led to an explosion in the ruling underclass within this town ..Don't believe it , just walk around on any day ,its like audience participation for Jeremy KYLE..So i'll get shot down by the few on here , so be it, that's what democracy is "a freedom of expression". But lets take a long hard look and be honest…and no i'm not judging everyone on social housing and fully understand there are a lot of good people in need of help and support in a fair and balanced society and i openly support the ideal.. But the dross in this town is over whelming and generally responsible for anti social behaviour and violent crime. Lived here for over 40 years now and have witnessed the steady decline.. And unfortunately worked with a lot of it.
I appear to have hit the nail on the head . So i ask the local housing officers to consider their policy of housing any all and sundry.. By the way 3 more knife incidents in town since Friday but nothing reported ..Hmmm strange?
[quote][p][bold]mirokou[/bold] wrote: Rapid expansion of unmonitored social housing and emergency placement of undesirables. i.e. bedsits , influx of cheap flats to rent etc etc has led to an explosion in the ruling underclass within this town ..Don't believe it , just walk around on any day ,its like audience participation for Jeremy KYLE..So i'll get shot down by the few on here , so be it, that's what democracy is "a freedom of expression". But lets take a long hard look and be honest…and no i'm not judging everyone on social housing and fully understand there are a lot of good people in need of help and support in a fair and balanced society and i openly support the ideal.. But the dross in this town is over whelming and generally responsible for anti social behaviour and violent crime. Lived here for over 40 years now and have witnessed the steady decline.. And unfortunately worked with a lot of it.[/p][/quote]I appear to have hit the nail on the head . So i ask the local housing officers to consider their policy of housing any all and sundry.. By the way 3 more knife incidents in town since Friday but nothing reported ..Hmmm strange? mirokou
  • Score: 10

6:49pm Sat 12 Jul 14

Linda Gosling says...

Could I ask mirokou to explain his comment about 3 more knife incidents since Friday, yesterday? and nothing said.
Could I ask mirokou to explain his comment about 3 more knife incidents since Friday, yesterday? and nothing said. Linda Gosling
  • Score: -2

6:55pm Sat 12 Jul 14

mirokou says...

Linda Gosling wrote:
Could I ask mirokou to explain his comment about 3 more knife incidents since Friday, yesterday? and nothing said.
That would be revealing my source.. Just trust me
[quote][p][bold]Linda Gosling[/bold] wrote: Could I ask mirokou to explain his comment about 3 more knife incidents since Friday, yesterday? and nothing said.[/p][/quote]That would be revealing my source.. Just trust me mirokou
  • Score: -1

7:35pm Sat 12 Jul 14

Angry of Lexden says...

Just read some of the new above. I'm hoping ask to meet an mp. You must please be able to back anything up with facts, or the credibility of any move to change the status quo will be undermined.
Just read some of the new above. I'm hoping ask to meet an mp. You must please be able to back anything up with facts, or the credibility of any move to change the status quo will be undermined. Angry of Lexden
  • Score: -1

9:50am Sun 13 Jul 14

Mohammad Akbar says...

I hear a lot of people saying bad things about Bob Russell, but he helped me and my family come to Colchester he got the counsel to give us a 4 bedroom house, and be sorted out all our benefits because my self and my wife can't work, he managed to get the children into a top school, Bob helped us get a home a car and an income he has helped us so much.
I hear a lot of people saying bad things about Bob Russell, but he helped me and my family come to Colchester he got the counsel to give us a 4 bedroom house, and be sorted out all our benefits because my self and my wife can't work, he managed to get the children into a top school, Bob helped us get a home a car and an income he has helped us so much. Mohammad Akbar
  • Score: -11

9:44pm Sun 13 Jul 14

A Very Primate Gentleman says...

One junkie stabs another, nothing to do with the 2 murders. Nothing to do with street lights. Nothing to do with Bob Russell.

Can everyone please stop getting so hysterical.
One junkie stabs another, nothing to do with the 2 murders. Nothing to do with street lights. Nothing to do with Bob Russell. Can everyone please stop getting so hysterical. A Very Primate Gentleman
  • Score: 3

11:54am Mon 14 Jul 14

mirokou says...

Mohammad Akbar wrote:
I hear a lot of people saying bad things about Bob Russell, but he helped me and my family come to Colchester he got the counsel to give us a 4 bedroom house, and be sorted out all our benefits because my self and my wife can't work, he managed to get the children into a top school, Bob helped us get a home a car and an income he has helped us so much.
Me thinks this fellow is a leg puller ;-)
[quote][p][bold]Mohammad Akbar[/bold] wrote: I hear a lot of people saying bad things about Bob Russell, but he helped me and my family come to Colchester he got the counsel to give us a 4 bedroom house, and be sorted out all our benefits because my self and my wife can't work, he managed to get the children into a top school, Bob helped us get a home a car and an income he has helped us so much.[/p][/quote]Me thinks this fellow is a leg puller ;-) mirokou
  • Score: 10

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree