Controversy Erupts Over Release of Terrorist Linked to Manchester Bomber

[Social Media]

 

The release of Abdalraouf Abdallah, a convicted terrorist with ties to the radicalization of Manchester Arena bomber Salman Abedi, has sparked widespread outrage and calls for intervention from the Justice Secretary. Abdallah, a childhood friend of Abedi, was freed from HMP Full Sutton in East Yorkshire this week after serving his full sentence, despite being deemed a continuing danger to the public.

 

 

Abdallah's release comes just two months after the Parole Board rejected an early release plea, citing assessments from his prison officer, psychologist, and probation officer, all of whom agreed he posed a "high risk of serious harm to the public." Reports stated that Abdallah remained engaged with extremist ideologies and retained an intent to commit terrorist-related offenses. Despite these concerns, his automatic release was mandated as his sentence had expired.

 

Abdallah, now 31, had been jailed for facilitating travel to Syria for individuals seeking to join the Islamic State group. In 2021, he was recalled to prison after breaching license conditions, underscoring the risks associated with his release. His potential to influence and radicalize others remained a central issue, with reports highlighting that he could exploit any accommodation or contacts post-release to further extremism.

 

The release has prompted a fierce backlash, with Shadow Secretary of State for Justice Robert Jenrick leading calls for action. In a statement on X (formerly Twitter), Jenrick said: “This is the terrorist, Abdalraouf Abdallah. He was released on Tuesday. His prison officer, psychologist, and parole officer said he was ‘high risk,’ ‘engaging with extremism,’ and intended to ‘commit terrorist-related offending.’ The Justice Secretary must intervene.”

 

According to documents from his parole hearing, Abdallah exhibited no significant change in his extremist mindset, and the proposed measures for managing his release were criticized as insufficiently robust. His continued engagement with extremism raised alarm among officials, who concluded that public safety could not be guaranteed under current release plans.

 

The case has reignited debates about the adequacy of the UK’s system for managing the release of dangerous offenders. Critics argue that the automatic release mechanism, which is triggered when sentences expire, fails to account for the ongoing risks posed by individuals like Abdallah. Calls for reform have intensified as public and political figures question whether the existing legal framework adequately prioritizes public safety.

 

The Justice Secretary is now under pressure to take urgent action. Jenrick and others have emphasized the gravity of the threat Abdallah poses, particularly given his previous role in radicalizing Abedi, whose attack on the Manchester Arena in 2017 claimed 22 lives and left scores injured.

 

The case serves as a stark reminder of the challenges in balancing legal obligations with the imperative to protect the public from individuals who, even after serving their sentences, remain committed to dangerous ideologies. Whether Abdallah’s release will prompt changes to the system remains to be seen, but the anger surrounding the decision underscores the need for a comprehensive review of policies governing the release of high-risk offenders.

 

Based on a report by Daily Mail 2024-11-29

 

 

 

[Watawattana]

1 hour ago, Social Media said:

The release of Abdalraouf Abdallah, a convicted terrorist with ties to the radicalization of Manchester Arena bomber Salman Abedi, has sparked widespread outrage and calls for intervention from the Justice Secretary. Abdallah, a childhood friend of Abedi, was freed from HMP Full Sutton in East Yorkshire this week after serving his full sentence, despite being deemed a continuing danger to the public.

Much as it pains me, he has served his full sentence.  If he has committed another crime then try him and send him back if guilty.  This time for long enough so that it's the Parole Service who decide his release or not; they seem far better to judge the risk to society than the rest of the criminal justice system.

[JonnyF]

If he's is deemed a continued danger to the public as the article states, he should not be released.

 

But they probably need the cells for those dastardly social media posters. 

[Chomper Higgot]

5 hours ago, Social Media said:

The case serves as a stark reminder of the challenges in balancing legal obligations with the imperative to protect the public from individuals who, even after serving their sentences, remain committed to dangerous ideologies.

The article does not explain what those ‘legal obligations’ are.

 

[Chomper Higgot]

20 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

If he's is deemed a continued danger to the public as the article states, he should not be released.

 

But they probably need the cells for those dastardly social media posters. 

Inciting race hatred annd encouraging others to join race riots represents a danger to public order.

 

But you already know that.

 

 

Edited 3 hours ago by Chomper Higgot

[RayC]

12 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

If he's is deemed a continued danger to the public as the article states, he should not be released.

 

Then that will require a change to the law as the article clearly states. Until such time as that occurs there is no alternative but to release him.

 

12 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

But they probably need the cells for those dastardly social media posters. 

 

Sigh ..... Some might call this gaslighting.

[JonnyF]

3 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

Then that will require a change to the law as the article clearly states. Until such time as that occurs there is no alternative but to release him.

 

Indeed. Let's hope the police are watching him like a hawk so that as soon as he resumes his terror campaign they can get him back in. Maybe they could take a few officers away from the "non crime hate incident" intimidation visits?

 

 

3 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

 

Sigh ..... Some might call this gaslighting.

 

I posted several links for you yesterday Ray. Are you pretending to have forgotten them? 😃

[JonnyF]

8 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Inciting race hatred annd encouraging others to join race riots represents a danger to public order.

 

But you already know that.

 

 

 

I think you are on the wrong thread Chomps. This is about the Manchester bomber. 

[Bkk Brian]

Disaster waiting to happen.........this is stomach churning that he's been released

 

But his probation officer, prison officer and psychologist still did not support his release, with assessments determining he posed a "high risk of serious harm to the public".

Psychologists concluded Abdallah continued to "show levels of engagement with extremism and intent to commit terrorist-related offending", the papers said.

A plan for his release that was presented to the panel was also deemed "not robust enough" to manage him once he left prison.

It added there was insufficient evidence to suggest there had been any change in his extremist mindset.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c1wjvqx41p2o

[RayC]

2 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

Indeed. Let's hope the police are watching him like a hawk so that as soon as he resumes his terror campaign they can get him back in.

 

Agreed

 

2 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

Maybe they could take a few officers away from the "non crime hate incident" intimidation visits?

 

I would imagine that surveillance of suspects requires a specialised set of skills which not all officers possess. Therefore, transferring officers to the surveillance units might not be as easy as you suggest.

 

2 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

I posted several links for you yesterday Ray. Are you pretending to have forgotten them? 😃

 

Naughty, naughty Jonny☹️.

 

As you well know I have replied numerous times to you about your gaslighting in the appropriate thread.

 

[RayC]

4 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Disaster waiting to happen.........this is stomach churning that he's been released

 

But his probation officer, prison officer and psychologist still did not support his release, with assessments determining he posed a "high risk of serious harm to the public".

Psychologists concluded Abdallah continued to "show levels of engagement with extremism and intent to commit terrorist-related offending", the papers said.

A plan for his release that was presented to the panel was also deemed "not robust enough" to manage him once he left prison.

It added there was insufficient evidence to suggest there had been any change in his extremist mindset.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c1wjvqx41p2o

 

I agree with your sentiments but until the law is changed what choice was there other than to release him?

[JonnyF]

Just now, RayC said:

As you well know I have replied numerous times to you about your gaslighting in the appropriate thread.

 

You're being sillly now Ray. I posted links to backup each of my claims. You are clearly very upset that I have called out your gaslighting and so now you are accusing me of the same thing. That's a tactic 7 year olds employ. 😆

 

"You smell".

"No YOU smell".

 

Not a level I wish to steep to. Have a great day. 

[proton]

28 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Inciting race hatred annd encouraging others to join race riots represents a danger to public order.

 

But you already know that.

 

 

 

Islam is not a race, objecting to illegal immigrants is not 'hate'. They were not race riots they were protests over the slaughter of 3 children, by yet another Islamic murderer.

[Chomper Higgot]

29 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

I think you are on the wrong thread Chomps. This is about the Manchester bomber. 

So why did you troll your social media martyrs into the discussion?

 

 

[Bkk Brian]

17 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

I agree with your sentiments but until the law is changed what choice was there other than to release him?

I have no idea, I am not in a position to do anything of course but the frustration by all concerned is real and as the OP says. "The Justice Secretary must intervene" The very least will be a very closely managed surveillance operation which will probably cost a huge amount of money.

[RayC]

15 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

You're being sillly now Ray. I posted links to backup each of my claims. You are clearly very upset that I have called out your gaslighting and so now you are accusing me of the same thing. That's a tactic 7 year olds employ. 😆

 

"You smell".

"No YOU smell".

 

Not a level I wish to steep to. Have a great day. 

 

I'm pleased that you have decided to call an end to your claim that I am gaslighting. Thank you.

 

Just a shame that you felt the need to post the false allegation in the first place.

 

You have a great day as well.

[Chomper Higgot]

26 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Disaster waiting to happen.........this is stomach churning that he's been released

 

But his probation officer, prison officer and psychologist still did not support his release, with assessments determining he posed a "high risk of serious harm to the public".

Psychologists concluded Abdallah continued to "show levels of engagement with extremism and intent to commit terrorist-related offending", the papers said.

A plan for his release that was presented to the panel was also deemed "not robust enough" to manage him once he left prison.

It added there was insufficient evidence to suggest there had been any change in his extremist mindset.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c1wjvqx41p2o

Thank you for the BBC link which provides the salient information:

 

“Despite losing his latest parole board appeal two months ago, Abdallah was eligible for automatic release from prison because his sentence - set in court by a judge - had expired.”

 

 

 

[Bkk Brian]

6 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Thank you for the BBC link which provides the salient information:

 

“Despite losing his latest parole board appeal two months ago, Abdallah was eligible for automatic release from prison because his sentence - set in court by a judge - had expired.”

 

 

 

Proof again that you do not read the OP, its also contained in there:

 

6 hours ago, Social Media said:

Despite these concerns, his automatic release was mandated as his sentence had expired.

 

[Yagoda]

Give the dude a pager as a gift.

[RayC]

1 minute ago, Bkk Brian said:

I have no idea, I am not in a position to do anything of course but the frustration by all concerned is real and as the OP says. "The Justice Secretary must intervene" The very least will be a very closely managed surveillance operation which will probably cost a huge amount of money.

 

Again, I agree with your sentiments but, in the short term at least, I'm not sure what the Justice Secretary can do other than order (increased) surveillance? Any change to the laws would require parliamentary approval. 

 

Given what the article says, it seems very unlikely that this individual will mend his ways. It may seem a bizarre thing to suggest but, perhaps, the best we can hope for in this case is that he is caught planning another terrorist incident at an early stage before any damage is - or will be - done. In that way, he can then be put behind bars again.

[stevenl]

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

If he's is deemed a continued danger to the public as the article states, he should not be released.

 

But they probably need the cells for those dastardly social media posters. 

So lock him up because you don't agree with his free speech?

[James105]

Just now, stevenl said:

So lock him up because you don't agree with his free speech?

 

Not sure what you think free speech is, but this isn't it:

 

"His prison officer, psychologist, and parole officer said he was ‘high risk,’ ‘engaging with extremism,’ and intended to ‘commit terrorist-related offending."

[Bkk Brian]

1 minute ago, RayC said:

 

Again, I agree with your sentiments but, in the short term at least, I'm not sure what the Justice Secretary can do other than order (increased) surveillance? Any change to the laws would require parliamentary approval. 

 

Given what the article says, it seems very unlikely that this individual will mend his ways. It may seem a bizarre thing to suggest but, perhaps, the best we can hope for in this case is that he is caught planning another terrorist incident at an early stage before any damage is - or will be - done. In that way, he can then be put behind bars again.

I can hope for a lot more as well, justice meted out by the victims families..

[JonnyF]

1 minute ago, stevenl said:

So lock him up because you don't agree with his free speech?

 

No, lock him up for his facilitation of terrorism.

 

[stevenl]

17 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

I have no idea, I am not in a position to do anything of course but the frustration by all concerned is real and as the OP says. "The Justice Secretary must intervene" The very least will be a very closely managed surveillance operation which will probably cost a huge amount of money.

A surveillance operation will not only cost a lot, it might very well be deemed illegal.

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, JonnyF said:

 

No, lock him up for his facilitation of terrorism.

 

He’s been locked up, he served his sentence.

 

 

[stevenl]

2 minutes ago, James105 said:

 

Not sure what you think free speech is, but this isn't it:

 

"His prison officer, psychologist, and parole officer said he was ‘high risk,’ ‘engaging with extremism,’ and intended to ‘commit terrorist-related offending."

He has done his time. Whatever he is saying is free speech, unless it incites crimes.

But this has your thinking in a catch 22.

[mokwit]

Why was he even here?

 

 

https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/r-v-abdallah-sentencing.pdf

 

1. Mohammed Abdallah, you are 26 years of age, you were born on 31st July 1991.
Your family came to this country when you were three years of age. Your father
came to escape an oppressive regime in Libya. You grew up and went to school
in Manchester. You did not do well at school but completed your education at
college, leaving at the age of 18. I have seen the reports of Doctor Beck and
Professor Young who agree that your overall IQ score is 68. That figure reflects
the difficulties you have in verbal expression and comprehension. In all other
respects, the assessment was higher. You do not suffer from an intellectual
impairment. An application for an intermediary to assist you in giving
evidence was allowed to help you deal with the detailed schedule of events.
Having seen you give evidence over a number of days I have no doubt that you
fully understood what you were doing and the consequences of your actions.
That view is supported by your personal history.
Page 2 of 7
2. You travelled to Libya in 2011 and fought there. You were trained to use a
semi-automatic weapon and, on your own account, used it in battle to "kill or
be killed". You also assisted others in firing heavy weapons. Your brother,
Abdalraouf Abdallah, also fought in Libya and was badly injured, he is
permanently paralysed and confined to a wheelchair.
3. In late June 2014 you travelled to Turkey to cross into Syria intending to fight
in the armed struggle to overthrow the regime. The discussions between the
group showed an interest in and support for both Jabhat Al Nusra and Islamic
State.

[Bkk Brian]

9 minutes ago, stevenl said:

A surveillance operation will not only cost a lot, it might very well be deemed illegal.

Its not illegal, MI5 has 10's of thousands on the watch list................lol

[Bkk Brian]

6 minutes ago, stevenl said:

So lock him up because you don't agree with his free speech?

Planning terror attacks is not free speech, get a grip man