Andrew Tate's arrest prompted by livestreamer who said Tate was leaving Romania, law firm says
Andrew Tate's arrest prompted by livestreamer who said Tate was leaving Romania, law firm says
Influencer Adin Ross said he had one last chance to record content with Andrew Tate. A law firm says the comment tipped off U.K. authorities.
Influencer Adin Ross said he had one last chance to record content with Andrew Tate. A law firm says the comment tipped off U.K. authorities.
I am shocked that Andrew Tater-Tot would attempt to elude justice. Shocked, I tell you.
How fitting that a racist moron who he considers a friend inadvertently gave him away. Awesome with a side of good riddance.
You're viewing a single thread.
It doesn't matter if you like or hate or don't know who he is. Being arrested for someone else saying you might maybe do something, is not a reality the people should accept.
Presumptive policing is very dangerous. Articles that use it as copaganda to show them gettin' the bad guy before the bad happened is just desensitizing people to how and why it was allowed to happen in the first place.
"Flight Risks" tend to follow more sensitive rules. He fled to Romaina and bragged about how bribable their cops were. Maybe don't go to a country with a corrupt justice system and commit crimes if you want a fair trial?
This is the single best take I’ve read since he went there.
Under multiple investigations Has money to be a serious flight risk from investigations Police get tip tate is planning on fleeing romania. AKA a flight risk Get arrested to prevent flight risk
you need to stop licking tates taint
I don't care who the jackass is. I do care about idiots like you giving up your freedoms because you're too stupid to understand how the justice system is supposed to work which allows it to now work in this dystopian cluster way.
The same way that the west shits on China for. Preemptive policing.
You know how the law actually works? Assume you're being stalked. You're a woman, and some Tater Tot is creeping you out and following you in public. As long as he doesn't trespass or actually touch/assault, he's done nothing wrong. Women have attempted to sue to get restraining orders and protective orders against such creepy people and it is denied. Because that's how the law works. You cannot be presumed to be guilty of an upcoming potential offense and be punished for it. They must actually commit that offense.
People afraid of their lives, being threatened with murder, have had the police tell them there's nothing they can do until they actually attempt to kill them. That's how the law works.
To bend the law in cases for public opinon just diminishes the law entirely. Being against tyranny does not make you a supporter of a criminal.
WOW so if someone is being stalked, the stalker has done nothing wrong?! Are just trolling at this point? Stalking in and of itself is a crime, in the UK.
You seem to be arguing tate has done nothing wrong. Ignoring the ongoing investigation. There has been plenty of times, its not uncommon at all, for people to be detained due to flight risk.
In the US and Canada it is NOT a crime to be creepy. There are many cases that point this out.
You can't just apply laws to people you like it dislike depending on the outcome. That is not a democratic nation of laws. Thats an authoritarian regime. If you cannot see that, you have fallen too deep in your own propaganda.
You aren’t engaging with any point and just spouting “huurrr propaganda”
- Tate is under multiple investigations.
- Individuals under investigation are held due to being a flight risk
Are you suggesting that anyone under investigation with the means to leave, should just be allowed to flee the investigation?
In the US and Canada
Cool. Irrelevant. tate is in romania, and additionally being investigated in the UK.
The stalking example is barely relevant but anyway.
Awesome, you've missed the point entirely. Now lookup the definition of stalking. It is NOT what a rational human would call stalking. There are very strict and rigid requirements. Which is exactly what I'm saying. You just keep proving my point.
? What point am I missing? You brought up stalking, I demonstrated that is a crime regardless of your opinion. Now it seems you want to redefine stalking without providing a definition. Your stalking example is irrelevant anyway, so lets now ignore that.
My point. Tate is a flight risk.
Your point => ???
Before?
What he was brought in for, this particular incident, is a before.
You want to dissociate the event from all context, but that's not how reality works. The guy is a rapist and a flight risk who has been publicly bragging about paying bribes to avoid the law. Of course he's going to be picked up on a tip, that's not an overreach at all.
Can you share any proof for this. I haven't caught up with the tate news since 2022 and I thought he was getting arrested for sex trafficking.
Now you're ignoring reality.
Police in two different countries have complaints against him for sex trafficking. He's boasted about getting away with stuff publically.