Picture courtesy of BBC

 

Police confirmed the tragic death of a woman who suffered a neck stab at a Birmingham bus stop on Friday. The victim, 34-year-old Katie Fox, was attacked in an unprovoked incident in Smallbrook Queensway, near the Bullring shopping centre. Djeison Rafael, 21, has had his charge upgraded from attempted murder to murder following her death.

 

The incident occurred just before 21:00 GMT, close to Birmingham New Street station. Rafael, from Rosedale Avenue, Smethwick, was arrested and has been charged with two counts of causing actual bodily harm, possession of a Stanley blade, and assaulting a detention escort officer. During his appearance at Birmingham Magistrates' Court, Rafael interrupted the proceedings multiple times and was instructed to remain silent by District Judge John Bristow. His case will proceed to Birmingham Crown Court on 12 November.

 

The police have increased their presence in the city centre to reassure the public, and they are supporting Fox's family during this difficult time. Detectives are appealing for any witnesses, particularly those who might have seen Rafael, who was reportedly dressed in an all-grey tracksuit, black hat, trainers, and carrying a rucksack.

 

Authorities are treating the incident as an unprovoked attack. Det Insp James Nix mentioned that efforts are underway to determine the motive behind this brutal act. West Midlands police and crime commissioner Simon Foster expressed his shock and reiterated his commitment to combating knife crime, highlighting significant reductions achieved over the past year but insisting that there is still room for vigilance.

 

Looking forward, the case against Rafael will be closely monitored as it progresses to the Crown Court, where he will face serious charges related to the attack. Community safety measures and initiatives to reduce knife crime are expected to remain a top priority for local authorities, reported the BBC.

 

 

 

Key Takeaways

 

• Katie Fox, 34, died after an unprovoked stabbing in Birmingham.
• Djeison Rafael's charge has been updated to murder after her death.
• Police stress continued efforts against knife crime in the region.

 

  Adapted by ASEAN Now from BBC 2025-11-11

 

 

4 hours ago, webfact said:

Djeison Rafael

 

I did a quick web search and could not find a photo of the guy.

 

I wonder why?  NOT.

39 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

I did a quick web search and could not find a photo of the guy.

 

I wonder why?  NOT.

 

No pictures for obvious reasons, but it would appear he is of similar heritage to the train stabber.  

 

https://news.sky.com/story/djeison-rafael-man-charged-with-attempted-murder-after-woman-stabbed-in-the-neck-in-centre-of-birmingham-13467064

 

The attack was totally unprovoked. 

 

PS Diversity is our greatest strength 3 times. 

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

 

No pictures for obvious reasons, but it would appear he is of similar heritage to the train stabber.  

 

https://news.sky.com/story/djeison-rafael-man-charged-with-attempted-murder-after-woman-stabbed-in-the-neck-in-centre-of-birmingham-13467064

 

The attack was totally unprovoked. 

 

PS Diversity is our greatest strength 3 times. 

You are a racist.

The UK has grown more diverse, and this has brought enormous benefit in terms of culture, economy, innovation and social vitality.

When you blame “immigrants” or “Muslims” as a group for crime, you betray the principle that individuals are responsible for their actions - not whole ethnicities or religions.

Encouraging integration, opportunity, fairness and justice is what makes a society safe, not scapegoating.

As an immigrant yourself, your hypocrisy is outstanding.

Crime is overwhelmingly committed by British-born citizens.

Poverty, inequality, exclusion matter far more in many cases than immigration status. People who feel excluded or disadvantaged may turn to crime; addressing that is far more productive than blame.

18 minutes ago, JimCM said:

You are a racist.

The UK has grown more diverse, and this has brought enormous benefit in terms of culture, economy, innovation and social vitality.

When you blame “immigrants” or “Muslims” as a group for crime, you betray the principle that individuals are responsible for their actions - not whole ethnicities or religions.

Encouraging integration, opportunity, fairness and justice is what makes a society safe, not scapegoating.

As an immigrant yourself, your hypocrisy is outstanding.

Crime is overwhelmingly committed by British-born citizens.

Poverty, inequality, exclusion matter far more in many cases than immigration status. People who feel excluded or disadvantaged may turn to crime; addressing that is far more productive than blame.

The white leftist.  Male or female.  
 

The best friend a non white criminal could ever have.

 

Why do you consider it racism when race should be part of description of a fleeing criminal?

 

 

20 minutes ago, Rocky Sullivan said:

The white leftist.  Male or female.  
The best friend a non white criminal could ever have.

Why do you consider it racism when race should be part of description of a fleeing criminal?

And sex ......... police are in search of a person 

......... dressed in an all-grey tracksuit, black hat, trainers, and carrying a rucksack.

 

You shouldn't be calling an unidentified person a man without first finding out their preferred pronouns.

Unnecessary comment removed 

 

@Rocky Sullivan

14 minutes ago, Rocky Sullivan said:

The white leftist.  Male or female.  
 

The best friend a non white criminal could ever have.

 

Why do you consider it racism when race should be part of description of a fleeing criminal?

 

 

He is not fleeing.

His race was given, black British man.

 

25 minutes ago, Rocky Sullivan said:

The white leftist.  Male or female.  

 

White (colonial?) guilt is going to bring about the end of centuries of western culture.  In our lifetime, I'm afraid.

53 minutes ago, JimCM said:

You are a racist.

The UK has grown more diverse, and this has brought enormous benefit in terms of culture, economy, innovation and social vitality.

When you blame “immigrants” or “Muslims” as a group for crime, you betray the principle that individuals are responsible for their actions - not whole ethnicities or religions.

Encouraging integration, opportunity, fairness and justice is what makes a society safe, not scapegoating.

As an immigrant yourself, your hypocrisy is outstanding.

Crime is overwhelmingly committed by British-born citizens.

Poverty, inequality, exclusion matter far more in many cases than immigration status. People who feel excluded or disadvantaged may turn to crime; addressing that is far more productive than blame.

 

Nonsense.

 

Stating facts is not racist. Noticing patterns is not racist. Knife crime is a huge problem in the black community, especially in London but increasingly in other ethnically diverse places like Birmingham.

 

Burying your head in the sand and pretending otherwise is a great way of NOT fixing the problem. In fact, it leads to more problems as we saw when police were too terrified to address the issues of the Pakistani rape gangs for fear of being called racist by people like you. 

 

So in summary, your boring chants of racist are not only unintelligent but actually seek to silence people and hence perpetuate the issues of knife crime and Pedophilia. Well done.   

 

PS I am an expat not an immigrant. Learn the difference. 

 

32 minutes ago, Rocky Sullivan said:

The white leftist.  Male or female.  
 

The best friend a non white criminal could ever have.

 

Why do you consider it racism when race should be part of description of a fleeing criminal?

 

 

…because JonnyF's implication appeared to had very little to do with describing the attacker and everything to do with insinuating that the attacker’s race was somehow a central cause of the incident.

 

It is an area worth examining - but only if the statistics are evaluated intelligently and in full context.

Race on its own tells us almost nothing.

 

We would need to assess it alongside location, socio-economic status, education levels, community support structures, and the broader environment.

 

Any youth growing up in inner-city, under-privileged areas of UK towns and cities is statistically more likely to be involved in confrontational crime than those living in wealthier, less densely populated areas. That pattern is mirrored in many parts of the world.

 

It could easily be argued that a White youth from a deprived estate in certain UK cities may be more likely to be involved in knife crime or street attacks than a Black youth raised in a more affluent, better-supported environment.

 

Location matters, education matters, family support matters, financial stability matters - there are countless variables beyond race. It is also important to recognise that many of the areas considered deprived are, by their very nature, more culturally diverse.

 

It is a delicate topic and not a binary - where race can be isolated and blamed. It is similar to the sweeping generalisation that “Brits” get into trouble in Pattaya street fights. The nationality isn’t the core issue - it is often the socio-economic background of the individuals involved. The same principle applies to violent incidents in the UK, with the caveat that some cases are driven by religiously motivated extremism, which is an entirely different category.

 

 

 

 

 

11 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

It is an area worth examining - but only if the statistics are evaluated intelligently and in full context.

Race on its own tells us almost nothing.

 

I'm more interested in why the MSM seems to want to hide the facts of the case(s). And not just this one.  If the stabber had been a pasty white guy, his photo would be all over the MSM.

 

Being a Yank myself, I don't follow UK crime stats, but I do occasionally look at US (FBI) stats.  So when someone whines about "minorities" being picked on during crime mitigation exercises, it seems to me that's because "minorities" are the perpetrators of a disproportionate number of crimes. 

 

And if you ignore that, or you give them a pass because of reasons, you're harming the vast majority of all races that don't commit crimes and just want to be safe.  Because the other FBI stat is that "minorities" are the victims in a disproportionate number of violent crimes.

 

 (And I figure it's probably similar in the UK.)

2 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

Nonsense.

 

Stating facts is not racist. Noticing patterns is not racist. Knife crime is a huge problem in the black community, especially in London but increasingly in other ethnically diverse places like Birmingham.

 

Burying your head in the sand and pretending otherwise is a great way of NOT fixing the problem. In fact, it leads to more problems as we saw when police were too terrified to address the issues of the Pakistani rape gangs for fear of being called racist by people like you. 

 

So in summary, your boring chants of racist are not only unintelligent but actually seek to silence people and hence perpetuate the issues of knife crime and Pedophilia. Well done.   

 

As you point out, there are observable patterns - yet the more “woke” factions in the UK have often shut down deeper investigation out of fear of being accused of racism.

 

The irony, of course, is that race is not the core driver of these problems. Socio-economics are. Community cohesion is. Education is. Access to opportunity is. And crucially, effective policing - particularly community policing - plays a major role.

 

In deprived areas with high population density, there are simply more young people, more instability, and therefore more chances for some of them to get involved in trouble.

 

The issue of the so-called “rape gangs” is a separate but related example. In those cases there were cultural factors, yes, but the underlying failure was the same - authorities failed to intervene decisively because they were paralysed by fear of being labelled racist. That isn’t progress - it is cowardice, and people suffered because of it.

 

It is not racist to stop and search someone if there is a genuine suspicion that they are carrying a knife. It is not racist to investigate criminal behaviour committed by any minority group. Policing should be colour-blind and entirely focused on the facts of the situation, not on appeasing public-relations concerns - but they can't operate with fear of being wrong or accused.

 

Patterns can and should be examined - but sensibly and responsibly. The problem arises when those patterns are applied lazily, turning into blanket racial profiling. That is where the line is crossed. Competent policing requires nuance, courage, and evidence-led action - not fear-driven avoidance and certainly not sweeping generalisations based on race.

 

 

In this example we have a couple of posters implying this attack occurred because the attacker was black - thats not why this happend - its just a detail - why this happened likely runs much deeper into education, economics, lack of opportunity.. but even that is all a guess - but those factors are 'why' a youth might be carrying a knife in the first place.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1 minute ago, impulse said:

 

I'm more interested in why the MSM seems to want to hide the facts of the case(s). And not just this one.  If the stabber had been a pasty white guy, his photo would be all over the MSM.

 

I don't follow UK crime stats, but I do occasionally look at US (FBI) stats.  So when someone whines about "minorities" being picked on during crime mitigation exercises, it seems to me that's because "minorities" are the perpetrators of a disproportionate number of crimes. 

 

And if you ignore that, or you give them a pass because of reasons, you're harming the vast majority of all races that don't commit crimes and just want to be safe.  Because the other FBI stat is that "minorities" are the victims in a disproportionate number of violent crimes.

 

 (And I figure it's probably similar in the UK.)

 

Agreed - and this is the heart of the problem: when information is withheld, a void opens up, and that void inevitably fills with speculation. In the current social climate of the UK, this approach by the media feels clumsy at best and reckless at worst.

 

If information exists, it should be released. Controlled transparency is far better than a vacuum that invites rumour, exaggeration, or conspiracy.

 

The difficulty, of course, is that there is a modern race to be “first” rather than to be accurate. News cycles move at lightning speed, and the pressure to publish ahead of everyone else leads to half-formed stories, missing context, and mistakes. Responsible reporting requires verified facts - but verified facts take time, and in that time gap social media manufactures its own narrative, often louder and faster than the truth.

 

In the case we’re discussing: the police do know the attacker’s name. That means they have verifiable information. It would not require much for them to release a photograph and a brief factual statement such as:

“A Black youth, born in xxx, raised in xxx. Photo attached”.

 

That alone would immediately shut down a large portion of the speculation. But even then, you are right - the next wave of noise would shift to his parentage, whether he is second-generation, third-generation, whether he “counts” as British, and so on. It becomes an endless cycle where people dig for meaning beyond the individual facts.

 

This is exactly why controlled, consistent communication matters. The authorities cannot stop people speculating, but they can at least eliminate the void that allows speculation to flourish. Transparency does not guarantee reason - but secrecy almost always guarantees chaos.

 

 

 

 

50 minutes ago, JimCM said:

He is not fleeing.

His race was given, black British man.

 

You still failed to answer my question.

 

Why racist?

7 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

That alone would immediately shut down a large portion of the speculation. But even then, you are right - the next wave of noise would shift to his parentage, whether he is second-generation, third-generation, whether he “counts” as British, and so on.

 

Have you ever considered that there could be an issue with second and third generation immigrants?

 

The statistics (when reluctantly released) certainly suggest that this could be the case. Perhaps they have not integrated properly and formed negative subcultures where knife crime is glorified, perhaps they feel resentful towards the country that offered a home to their parents or grandparents, perhaps race baiters in the media like Meghan Markle/Dr Shola convince them that the country is inherently racist and whip up anger? Perhaps they have glorified the country of their grandparents birth despite having never lived there? Perhaps they are the only poor people living in inner cities?

 

Who knows? But maybe if we admitted there is an issue we could start working towards some solutions instead of shouting racist at anyone who notices a pattern or sees the statistics from places like London? Maybe we could actually look into it? Crazy idea I know, that would require admitting there could be a problem and opening ourselves up to the R word.  

 

7 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

 

It becomes an endless cycle where people dig for meaning beyond the individual facts.

 

Perhaps there IS meaning beyond the individual facts. When a particular Demographic is committing a disproportional amount of one particular type of crime, one could say it is deeply irresponsible to just ignore that for the sake of political correctness like we did in Rotherham. It might be worth digging for meaning in order to understand the problem and prevent this cycle repeating rather than digging our heads into the sand, writing individual facts like "Choirboy from Cardiff kills 3 girls" and patting ourselves on the back for being so wonderfully kind.

'Djeison'

38 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

That alone would immediately shut down a large portion of the speculation. But even then, you are right - the next wave of noise would shift to his parentage, whether he is second-generation, third-generation, whether he “counts” as British, and so on. It becomes an endless cycle where people dig for meaning beyond the individual facts.

 

I'd be more interested in whether he's got a history of violence and was released into society anyway.  But I won't count on the MSM to dig into that.  It'll have to be the right wing bloggers...

 

 

17 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

47 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

That alone would immediately shut down a large portion of the speculation. But even then, you are right - the next wave of noise would shift to his parentage, whether he is second-generation, third-generation, whether he “counts” as British, and so on.

 

Have you ever considered that there could be an issue with second and third generation immigrants?

 

Yes - and IMO, there is just as much of an issue with 'any' youth of any ethnicity growing up in areas that are conducive to such behavior, and lack of opportunity and socio-economics is a far greater underlying cause than ethnicity / race.

 

 

17 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

The statistics (when reluctantly released) certainly suggest that this could be the case.

 

What statistic ? you don't have any. If you want to provide stats, please do so - but to suggest "the 'stats' certainly suggest" - without providing any stats is disingenuous and presents a fundamentally flawed platform on which to base your bias.

 

17 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Perhaps they have not integrated properly and formed negative subcultures where knife crime is glorified, perhaps they feel resentful towards the country that offered a home to their parents or grandparents, perhaps race baiters in the media like Meghan Markle/Dr Shola convince them that the country is inherently racist and whip up anger? Perhaps they have glorified the country of their grandparents birth despite having never lived there? Perhaps they are the only poor people living in inner cities?

 

There's an awful lot of 'whatifery' and 'perhaps' there to fill your conformation bais.

 

I would like to see genuine, comprehensive statistics, because without them the conversation becomes distorted by assumption rather than evidence. Even with accurate data, I would still argue that these crimes are more strongly shaped by environment, opportunity, and socio-economic conditions than by race.

 

Many of the areas where these offences occur at higher rates are also areas of greater deprivation – which often coincides with more diverse, multicultural populations and a larger number of migrants. That overlap makes it far too easy for people to incorrectly attribute cause to ethnicity rather than recognising the underlying structural issues.

 

This subject requires nuance. We cannot reduce it solely to race without ignoring the far more significant influences of poverty, community stability, social responsibility, access to opportunity, policing effectiveness, youth support structures, and parenting.

 

Issues of crime rarely originate from a single demographic variable – they come from a complex ecosystem of disadvantage, neglect, vulnerability, and pressure within a community. Any serious attempt to understand or address the problem must begin there.

 

17 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Who knows? But maybe if we admitted there is an issue we could start working towards some solutions instead of shouting racist at anyone who notices a pattern or sees the statistics from places like London? Maybe we could actually look into it? Crazy idea I know, that would require admitting there could be a problem and opening ourselves up to the R word.  

 

There is an issue – and there always has been – with violent, confrontational, and organised crime in less affluent areas across the UK. This is nothing new. We even have entire TV franchises glamorising it, turning generational poverty and brutality into entertainment.

 

To claim that confrontational or violent crime in the UK is somehow rooted solely in race requires a remarkably blinkered outlook. Crime doesn’t spring from a single characteristic – it grows out of a whole ecosystem of pressures and vulnerabilities.

 

I’m not denying that race can intersect with these issues, but to elevate it to the status of a root cause is simply wrong. The far more powerful drivers are deprivation, lack of opportunity, fractured communities, poor local investment, ineffective policing, intergenerational trauma, weak social cohesion, and unstable home environments. These are the ingredients that consistently create conditions for violent or organised crime. Race is a facet, yes – but it is not the engine. The true engine is socio-economic reality.

 

17 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

47 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

It becomes an endless cycle where people dig for meaning beyond the individual facts.

 

Perhaps there IS meaning beyond the individual facts.

 

For those who lack the nuance and ability to see 'other factors' - its very easy and also lazy to simply blame these issues on 'race' - its racist in fact.

 

17 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

When a particular Demographic is committing a disproportional amount of one particular type of crime, one could say it is deeply irresponsible to just ignore that for the sake of political correctness like we did in Rotherham. It might be worth digging for meaning in order to understand the problem and prevent this cycle repeating rather than digging our heads into the sand, writing individual facts like "Choirboy from Cardiff kills 3 girls" and patting ourselves on the back for being so wonderfully kind.

 

The core problem with your assertion is the assumption baked into the premise: “a particular demographic is committing a disproportionate amount of one particular type of crime.” You’re stating it as if it’s a verified statistical fact – but where is the evidence?

We’re talking about a claim that requires nationally representative, consistent, transparent data on perpetrators, their ethnicity, and their immigration status. That data simply does not exist in the clean, definitive form you are implying. Without it, you aren’t presenting analysis – you’re presenting belief. And belief dressed up as fact is exactly how confirmation bias entrenches itself.

 

Once you frame the issue in those terms, every anecdote begins to feel like evidence. You’ve mentioned Rotherham – but Rotherham is the exception, and that’s precisely why it became a national scandal. Yes, the failure of authorities to act due to cowardice, political optics, and institutional fear was appalling. But isolating that one case and trying to extrapolate it into a general trend across the country is intellectually dishonest.

 

A single high-profile incident tells you about a specific context – it does not tell you about national proportionality.

 

When you zoom out and examine broader data – where information does exist – the picture does not support the idea that “immigrant men” are disproportionately committing sexual offences compared to white British men. In fact, in most datasets, white British males still constitute the majority of perpetrators. That’s not opinion; that’s the limited available evidence. If race were the root causal factor, the numbers would reflect that clearly and consistently. They don’t.

 

And if we’re going to discuss proportionality, then it has to be proportional to the population. You cannot compare raw numbers from a smaller demographic group to a majority demographic group without adjusting for population size, socio-economic conditions, and reporting biases. That’s basic statistical literacy. Without that, you simply point at individual cases that fit your narrative and ignore the thousands that don’t.

 

Your argument rests on selectively highlighted examples – often emotionally charged, media-amplified ones – rather than comprehensive data. That is classic confirmation bias. Once you accept the premise, every story you read strengthens it, even if the data does not.

 

Meanwhile, you criticise “political correctness” for blinding people… yet you’re doing something similar to what you accuse others of:

On this forum alone we often read of other posters accusing Thai's of being protective and suggesting “a foreigner must have done it” to preserve their national image...  or "Thai's don't do that"... etc... 

 

You saying “an immigrant demographic must be responsible” to preserve a narrative of cultural or racial threat is thee psychological mechanism, just in a slightly different direction.

 

Let’s be brutally honest: If we were to truly unpack the root causes of violence – the real roots, not the convenient ones – we would have to go down a long, uncomfortable rabbit hole:

- underreporting

- socio-economic factors

- power dynamics

- male violence across all ethnicities

- childhood trauma

- mental health

- community breakdown

- policing failures

- victim reluctance

- cultural barriers in reporting within multiple communities

 

But that’s the hard work. It’s messy, it doesn’t fit in a headline, and it doesn’t give you a simple “group X is the problem” narrative. So the temptation is to cherry-pick high-profile cases and treat them as proof.

 

And yes, many incidents go unreported. But that applies across all demographics – white, immigrant, British-born, migrant, wealthy, poor. Underreporting does not conveniently point toward one group; it simply obscures the truth across the entire spectrum.

 

If you genuinely want to “dig for meaning” and prevent cycles repeating, then the first step is intellectual honesty, not narrative-driven assumptions. We need data, nuance, and context – not the seductive simplicity of blaming a demographic without evidence.

 

A black youth was involved in this stabbing...   Are you certain the next one will be by a black youth, or could the next highly public incidence of violent crime in the UK just as equally be by a white youth ???  

 

Because when you are suggesting 'race' as the primary factor - you can also start prediction the pattern.

 

Lets revisit this when we see news of the 'next violent attack' in the UK.

 

---------

 

On the evening of Thursday 6 November 2025, at around 9:30pm, the Cleveland Police were called to reports of a disturbance in Orme Court. 

Two men, both aged 44, were found with stab wounds. One is in a “critical but stable” condition; the other has non-life-threatening injuries. 

The attack is believed to have been targeted rather than random; it reportedly involved weapons and occurred as part of an attack on a vehicle.

 

There as been no release of the 'race' of those involved - What race would you suggest they might be ?

 

 

 

2 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

because JonnyF's implication appeared to had very little to do with describing the attacker and everything to do with insinuating that the attacker’s race was somehow a central cause of the incident.

Nah, I'm sure if there were more white Muslims they'd be just as stabby as non white Muslims.

 

It's not race that's the problem, it's their religion.

23 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

What statistic ? you don't have any. If you want to provide stats, please do so - but to suggest "the 'stats' certainly suggest" - without providing any stats is disingenuous and presents a fundamentally flawed platform on which to base your bias.

 

Here you go.

 

https://www.london.gov.uk/press-releases/assembly/commission-on-knife-crime-in-black-community

 

 

Now, do you want to start looking for reasons in the hope we can find solutions? Or are you going to continue pretending there are no patterns here and it is all down to bias?

2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

Nonsense.

 

Stating facts is not racist. Noticing patterns is not racist. Knife crime is a huge problem in the black community, especially in London but increasingly in other ethnically diverse places like Birmingham.

 

Burying your head in the sand and pretending otherwise is a great way of NOT fixing the problem. In fact, it leads to more problems as we saw when police were too terrified to address the issues of the Pakistani rape gangs for fear of being called racist by people like you. 

 

So in summary, your boring chants of racist are not only unintelligent but actually seek to silence people and hence perpetuate the issues of knife crime and Pedophilia. Well done.   

 

PS I am an expat not an immigrant. Learn the difference. 

 

What facts? 

Here's a fact, when there's a black or British Muslim committing a crime you see pout as this racial stuff, which does NOT help to stop crime. Seriously, you sound like my ex colleague who boasted about being a member of Combat 18 and had a Thai girlfriend. Would you like it if you were tarred by the same brush by Thai people because of Badly behaved Brits here?

 

So according to you knife crimes is a black problem, please show this fact.

The biggest knife problem I know of was in Glasgow in the early 90s, with 4 people stabbed daily, and definitely not a black problem. You're turning a non racial problem into a hate filled racial thing with MULTIPLE posts on such threads.

 

Correlation is not causation.

Yes, some groups appear overrepresented in certain crime statistics. But that reflects complex socio-economic factors, not inherent criminality.

For instance, areas of high deprivation often have more violent crime. Ethnic composition correlates with deprivation in some urban areas, which can lead to misleading assumptions.

 

Is a guy moving to England from Pakistan for work and expat or immigrant?

 

I wish ALL illegal immigrants were put on a boat and pointed in the direction of another country but legal immigrants like you or I, or the British accused in the OP have every right to remain. You are an immigrant, get over it.

39 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

Here you go.

 

https://www.london.gov.uk/press-releases/assembly/commission-on-knife-crime-in-black-community

 

 

Now, do you want to start looking for reasons in the hope we can find solutions? Or are you going to continue pretending there are no patterns here and it is all down to bias?

Are you really saying that they are more frequent knife crimes BECAUSE they are black?

What an utterly racist post. How about restricting black immigrants and only accept white ones?

1 hour ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

Yes - and IMO, there is just as much of an issue with 'any' youth of any ethnicity growing up in areas that are conducive to such behavior, and lack of opportunity and socio-economics is a far greater underlying cause than ethnicity / race.

 

 

 

What statistic ? you don't have any. If you want to provide stats, please do so - but to suggest "the 'stats' certainly suggest" - without providing any stats is disingenuous and presents a fundamentally flawed platform on which to base your bias.

 

 

There's an awful lot of 'whatifery' and 'perhaps' there to fill your conformation bais.

 

I would like to see genuine, comprehensive statistics, because without them the conversation becomes distorted by assumption rather than evidence. Even with accurate data, I would still argue that these crimes are more strongly shaped by environment, opportunity, and socio-economic conditions than by race.

 

Many of the areas where these offences occur at higher rates are also areas of greater deprivation – which often coincides with more diverse, multicultural populations and a larger number of migrants. That overlap makes it far too easy for people to incorrectly attribute cause to ethnicity rather than recognising the underlying structural issues.

 

This subject requires nuance. We cannot reduce it solely to race without ignoring the far more significant influences of poverty, community stability, social responsibility, access to opportunity, policing effectiveness, youth support structures, and parenting.

 

Issues of crime rarely originate from a single demographic variable – they come from a complex ecosystem of disadvantage, neglect, vulnerability, and pressure within a community. Any serious attempt to understand or address the problem must begin there.

 

 

There is an issue – and there always has been – with violent, confrontational, and organised crime in less affluent areas across the UK. This is nothing new. We even have entire TV franchises glamorising it, turning generational poverty and brutality into entertainment.

 

To claim that confrontational or violent crime in the UK is somehow rooted solely in race requires a remarkably blinkered outlook. Crime doesn’t spring from a single characteristic – it grows out of a whole ecosystem of pressures and vulnerabilities.

 

I’m not denying that race can intersect with these issues, but to elevate it to the status of a root cause is simply wrong. The far more powerful drivers are deprivation, lack of opportunity, fractured communities, poor local investment, ineffective policing, intergenerational trauma, weak social cohesion, and unstable home environments. These are the ingredients that consistently create conditions for violent or organised crime. Race is a facet, yes – but it is not the engine. The true engine is socio-economic reality.

 

 

For those who lack the nuance and ability to see 'other factors' - its very easy and also lazy to simply blame these issues on 'race' - its racist in fact.

 

 

The core problem with your assertion is the assumption baked into the premise: “a particular demographic is committing a disproportionate amount of one particular type of crime.” You’re stating it as if it’s a verified statistical fact – but where is the evidence?

We’re talking about a claim that requires nationally representative, consistent, transparent data on perpetrators, their ethnicity, and their immigration status. That data simply does not exist in the clean, definitive form you are implying. Without it, you aren’t presenting analysis – you’re presenting belief. And belief dressed up as fact is exactly how confirmation bias entrenches itself.

 

Once you frame the issue in those terms, every anecdote begins to feel like evidence. You’ve mentioned Rotherham – but Rotherham is the exception, and that’s precisely why it became a national scandal. Yes, the failure of authorities to act due to cowardice, political optics, and institutional fear was appalling. But isolating that one case and trying to extrapolate it into a general trend across the country is intellectually dishonest.

 

A single high-profile incident tells you about a specific context – it does not tell you about national proportionality.

 

When you zoom out and examine broader data – where information does exist – the picture does not support the idea that “immigrant men” are disproportionately committing sexual offences compared to white British men. In fact, in most datasets, white British males still constitute the majority of perpetrators. That’s not opinion; that’s the limited available evidence. If race were the root causal factor, the numbers would reflect that clearly and consistently. They don’t.

 

And if we’re going to discuss proportionality, then it has to be proportional to the population. You cannot compare raw numbers from a smaller demographic group to a majority demographic group without adjusting for population size, socio-economic conditions, and reporting biases. That’s basic statistical literacy. Without that, you simply point at individual cases that fit your narrative and ignore the thousands that don’t.

 

Your argument rests on selectively highlighted examples – often emotionally charged, media-amplified ones – rather than comprehensive data. That is classic confirmation bias. Once you accept the premise, every story you read strengthens it, even if the data does not.

 

Meanwhile, you criticise “political correctness” for blinding people… yet you’re doing something similar to what you accuse others of:

On this forum alone we often read of other posters accusing Thai's of being protective and suggesting “a foreigner must have done it” to preserve their national image...  or "Thai's don't do that"... etc... 

 

You saying “an immigrant demographic must be responsible” to preserve a narrative of cultural or racial threat is thee psychological mechanism, just in a slightly different direction.

 

Let’s be brutally honest: If we were to truly unpack the root causes of violence – the real roots, not the convenient ones – we would have to go down a long, uncomfortable rabbit hole:

- underreporting

- socio-economic factors

- power dynamics

- male violence across all ethnicities

- childhood trauma

- mental health

- community breakdown

- policing failures

- victim reluctance

- cultural barriers in reporting within multiple communities

 

But that’s the hard work. It’s messy, it doesn’t fit in a headline, and it doesn’t give you a simple “group X is the problem” narrative. So the temptation is to cherry-pick high-profile cases and treat them as proof.

 

And yes, many incidents go unreported. But that applies across all demographics – white, immigrant, British-born, migrant, wealthy, poor. Underreporting does not conveniently point toward one group; it simply obscures the truth across the entire spectrum.

 

If you genuinely want to “dig for meaning” and prevent cycles repeating, then the first step is intellectual honesty, not narrative-driven assumptions. We need data, nuance, and context – not the seductive simplicity of blaming a demographic without evidence.

 

A black youth was involved in this stabbing...   Are you certain the next one will be by a black youth, or could the next highly public incidence of violent crime in the UK just as equally be by a white youth ???  

 

Because when you are suggesting 'race' as the primary factor - you can also start prediction the pattern.

 

Lets revisit this when we see news of the 'next violent attack' in the UK.

 

---------

 

On the evening of Thursday 6 November 2025, at around 9:30pm, the Cleveland Police were called to reports of a disturbance in Orme Court. 

Two men, both aged 44, were found with stab wounds. One is in a “critical but stable” condition; the other has non-life-threatening injuries. 

The attack is believed to have been targeted rather than random; it reportedly involved weapons and occurred as part of an attack on a vehicle.

 

There as been no release of the 'race' of those involved - What race would you suggest they might be ?

 

 

 

Excellent, eloquent post. Racism must be pointed out.

2 hours ago, Rocky Sullivan said:

You still failed to answer my question.

 

Why racist?

What question?

2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

Have you ever considered that there could be an issue with second and third generation immigrants?

 

The statistics (when reluctantly released) certainly suggest that this could be the case. Perhaps they have not integrated properly and formed negative subcultures where knife crime is glorified, perhaps they feel resentful towards the country that offered a home to their parents or grandparents, perhaps race baiters in the media like Meghan Markle/Dr Shola convince them that the country is inherently racist and whip up anger? Perhaps they have glorified the country of their grandparents birth despite having never lived there? Perhaps they are the only poor people living in inner cities?

 

Who knows? But maybe if we admitted there is an issue we could start working towards some solutions instead of shouting racist at anyone who notices a pattern or sees the statistics from places like London? Maybe we could actually look into it? Crazy idea I know, that would require admitting there could be a problem and opening ourselves up to the R word.  

 

 

Perhaps there IS meaning beyond the individual facts. When a particular Demographic is committing a disproportional amount of one particular type of crime, one could say it is deeply irresponsible to just ignore that for the sake of political correctness like we did in Rotherham. It might be worth digging for meaning in order to understand the problem and prevent this cycle repeating rather than digging our heads into the sand, writing individual facts like "Choirboy from Cardiff kills 3 girls" and patting ourselves on the back for being so wonderfully kind.

Disgusting, you, as usual, are trying to turn this into an anti Islam thing when the OP is about a black British.

50 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

1 hour ago, richard_smith237 said:

What statistic ? you don't have any. If you want to provide stats, please do so - but to suggest "the 'stats' certainly suggest" - without providing any stats is disingenuous and presents a fundamentally flawed platform on which to base your bias.

 

Here you go.

 

https://www.london.gov.uk/press-releases/assembly/commission-on-knife-crime-in-black-community

 

 

Now, do you want to start looking for reasons in the hope we can find solutions? Or are you going to continue pretending there are no patterns here and it is all down to bias?

Thats a headline - not a statistic, its misleading, ignores nuance and plays into racial sterotypes rather than attempts to undress the underlying issues: 

 

Why the headline claim (“blacks make up most of the knife crime / disproportionate share”) can be misleading:

It treats a statistical skew (higher percentage) as evidence of a community-wide phenomenon rather than a phenomenon localised to certain risk groups (young males, deprived areas, gangs) - which leads to over-generalisation.

 

It omits key contextual factors (age, gender, area deprivation, gang involvement) that are critical to understand causation and risk. Without those, attributing over-representation to ethnicity alone is simplistic and risks reinforcing bias/stereotype.

 

It creates a bias that focuses on “black community must be fixed” rather than addressing the structural issues (poverty, educational opportunities, neighbourhoods, policing).

It gives raw percentages without full denominators or trend analysis, meaning a reader (such as yourself) might think “blacks commit the majority of knife crime” when in fact the data may refer only to a subset (knife murders, perpetrators caught) and may not reflect all knife offences.

 

There is risk of ignoring how policing and criminal justice practices (e.g., stop & search, neighbourhood targeting) might themselves influence the statistics and over‐representation, making the data not purely reflective of underlying behaviour.

 

What stronger / more helpful analysis would include:

To avoid the pitfalls above, a better approach might include:

Rate calculations: offenders/victims per 1,000 people by ethnic group, controlling for age and gender.

Broken down by subgroup: e.g., young males (16-24) in specific boroughs, gang-involved individuals, etc, to isolate the high-risk groups.

Trend over time: is over‐representation widening or narrowing?

Contextual controls: factor in deprivation, school exclusions, employment status, neighbourhood crime rates, policing intensity.

Offence type breakdown: non-fatal vs fatal, robbery vs gang violence vs domestic, to see which parts of “knife crime” are driving the disparity.

Policing / detection bias: consider if certain communities are more heavily policed, which may influence who is identified as perpetrator. For instance, over-use of stop & search in black communities could inflate detection rates vs other groups. (Some evidence exists: e.g., black males in London are far more likely to be stopped and searched).

Structural causation: emphasise that ethnicity itself is not a causal factor, but rather the interplay of multiple risk factors often correlated with ethnicity (poverty, urban disadvantage, young male age profile, gang exposure).

 

 

Thus, In short:

The article does highlight a concerning disproportion in certain knife-crime statistics for black Londoners, which is valid as a starting point.

However, it risks mis‐framing the issue by emphasising ethnicity in a way that may overshadow the more relevant drivers (age, gender, geography, socio-economic status, gang dynamics).

 

Saying that “blacks make up most knife crime” is misleading because it glosses over the nuance that most knife crime is committed by specific high-risk groups (often young males in deprived areas) and that ethnicity is a proxy rather than core cause.

 

The article lacks deeper analysis of rates, risk factors, context, and structural causes, which are essential to interpret the figures responsibly and avoid unfair stigma of an entire community.

 

Many people miss the nuance for the ease of a convenient 'sound-bite' - you have done just that, as has the media article you presented.

 

 

3 hours ago, JimCM said:

He is not fleeing.

His race was given, black British man.

 

Mentally-ill I assume?  Seems that a high % of black people have lost (or never had) their marbles....

15 minutes ago, JimCM said:

Are you really saying that they are more frequent knife crimes BECAUSE they are black?

What an utterly racist post. How about restricting black immigrants and only accept white ones?

 

No. I am saying black people are disproportionately represented in knife crime statistics. See my link above for more details. 

 

Now, get back to protecting the child rape gangs if that's your thing. 🤮

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

Now, do you want to start looking for reasons in the hope we can find solutions? Or are you going to continue pretending there are no patterns here and it is all down to bias?

 

Yes - which is why I've mentioned the underlying reasons are not 'race' but environmental factors mentioned - socio-economic factors, age, gender, geography, status, gang dynamics, opportunity and education....