(It’s been a little while so forgive me if my style is a little lacking)
The headline reads: Zainab Ansari: Police arrest ‘serial killer’ over rape and murder of 7-year-old that sparked protests across Pakistan.
I should very much like to add a few comments to the article (if I can be bothered I shall make some comments on the state of Pakistan now and in the past, but in all likelihood I shall be doing something else).
There is no doubt in my mind that the person who has committed this (and between six and nine more similar atrocities), should be damaged and destroyed. Don’t for a second think that taking note of discrepancies and seeing possibilities means that excuses are being made nor am I in any way advocating such behaviour.
That being said, we should all be careful not to throw stones in glass houses; being absolutely sure (within the limits of knowledge), of guilt is the only right we have to pick up jagged pieces of rock and hurl them at unprotected flesh.
To more interesting points...
Another short aside: there is always the possibility my understanding to the article is at fault because of the poor writing of the article in mention and everything I write is in error due to my misreading of the article (perhaps that should have been included before the ‘to more interesting points...’).
The article reads ‘Police launched a manhunt for the person responsible for the murder of Zainab Ansari in Kasur, Eastern Punjab after the death sparked widespread protests.’ (my italics). So the police only took action after a lot of people became angry someone had killed a seven-year-old girl...? Are these police not ‘the people’? Were they not overly concerned by the rape and murder of the little girl, until a lot of people told them to be...? Were they suddenly instilled with a fear for their office sitting, newspaper reading, long lunch break, jobs, and so decided we should probably get something done so we can go back to office sitting, newspaper reading and having long lunch breaks?
Later in the article... considerably later considering the importance of the adage ‘After the 7-year-old’s body was found (discarded in a rubbish tip), earlier this month, police revealed at least 10 similar cases had been recorded over the past 12 months.’ Further on it goes on to mention all of these rapes and murders took place within a 3km radius and all the bodies were found in either rubbish tips or abandoned houses. What’s the old saying: two may be a coincidence but three is the beginnings of a pattern...? I mean, come on... if ‘three’ is the beginning of a pattern what about five, or eight... but TWELVE...!
Now, not to go all conspiracy theory on you or anything... but, nearer to the beginning of the article it says the man they caught has confessed to seven to the crimes (why not admit to them all, he’s facing the death penalty anyway...?), and then far further into the article, in a very small note, it mentions ‘Mr Imran did not immediately have legal representation, officials said.’ Of course in our liberal world everyone should be provided with legal representation (although had he been caught in the act I could personally live without such beatific morality), but that he confessed before he was allowed to see a lawyer...?
There’s a picture of the girl’s father holding up a picture of the sweet looking little girl, who in the picture appears as an old man with a great deal of grey in his beard. One has to wonder at the age of his own wife, who must be at least healthy child bearing age... The father, and the national political spokesman (and we all know, in this day and age, of total trust in the neutrality and care of our elected officials, we all possess), are calling for a quick trial (to satisfy the national unrest...), of this ‘beast’, and for him to be publically executed, because that would ‘serve as a deterrent for preventing similar cases’. Are such cases common? Are they committed by people who are thinking rationally, and respond to such threats? Or would such a public display disperse some of the national fervour in a country that seems to be looking for reasons for civil unrest?
I make no claims to know any of the facts in the case. I can see a few irregularities, but they could be the fault of the author of the article (who is writing for the Independent, one of the papers I once held up in argument as being about as neutral and interesting as a paper could be – once being far more than a decade ago). The article was published in the Independent, by Harry Cockburn, on Tuesday 23 January 2018 20:05 GMT, and while I have covered some of the article there’s plenty I have let out, and reading the piece yourself might shed even more light into my reading (which of course could be as corrupted as I suspect the article itself is – see my article on the Death of the Author). So I suggest you read it for yourself and come up with your own conclusions.