Taxi Driver Online

That's interesting, Sussex, and I certainly hadn't thought of that possible angle

I had assumed that it was the Bulgarian couple - obviously police knew there had been an altercation, but presumably they'd initially considered anything physical from the pair to be self-defence, or whatever, but now they've maybe been forced to reconsider. Or maybe it's something completely different.

Or, as you say, nothing to do with them at all.

But I don't think statements like that from Police Scotland are that unsual, and often refer simply to a man and/or woman etc, and don't name them - maybe until they appear in court, or whatever, but I don't know the details.

Anyway, the Courier have even done their own puff piece telling everyone how good they've been at reporting it all

But there's been lots of stuff in the Courier with more general stuff sugar-coating of Lochee and downplaying it all in terms of Dundee and Lochee's image

Which I could spend days blabbering about, but I doubt the audience here would be particularly interested.

Anyway, the Courier's editor has done a video about the reporting restrictions attaching to the whole episode, which is worth a watch. And is maybe relevant to today's report about the latest charges, particularly if Sussex's theory is correct.

But this just show that the likes of Dan Wootoon's stuff (and his half million YouTube subscribers etc) is more than a tad reckless - still showing the original video and the girls' faces etc

Of course, I'm maybe a bit close to the edge about stuff like that on here, but I'd guess it's all about proportionality and the like, and the audience on here is tiny.

Equally, they probably won't go after Tommy Robinson and Dan Wooton types because they'd just play the victim to enhance their status and clout, and there are probably jurisdictional issues as well because they're mainly outside Scotland, and mainly online etc.

On the other hand, the Courier is local and their reporters have, to an extent, to depend on the goodwill of police and other authorities etc.

Anyway, this is the vid:

https://content.jwplatform.com/previews/PJw1lu7G

Latest is that anon UK twitter account Basil the Great is claiming (via the US crowdfunder) that it's the Bulgarian couple who've been arrested. But his evidence is a Daily Record report saying simply that a male and female have been arrested, so hardly definitive proof. And there's the usual exaggeration of the injuries etc.

But Elon Musk has simply replied 'Good'.

(Basil has a huge following on the hard right, and also seems to have the support of Rupert Lowe (in general terms, at least) and is obviously well connected, and seems to have the inside track on Lowe...

On the other hand, some are claiming the Ninewells Hospital letter is faked. I took it at face value, but in actual fact it does look a bit odd.

And, of course, others stating that the letter basically shows nothing clinically significant - I'd guess she was simply taken to hospital 'as a precaution', as the phrase goes.

And one speculating the couple charged could in fact be the parents - child neglect, or similar

Funny, though, out of the thousands and thousands of words I've read about this - including numerous claims the mother is a crackhead etc - I've never seen any mention at all of any dad, so to that extent the couple arrested wouldn't be the mother and father.

But obviously I don't know. But what I do know is that it's all still being seriously overblown, and Elon Musk and the millions and millions below him in the pecking order are just sucking it all up.

https://x.com/Basil_TGMD/status/1963623415702499352

Indeed, if you zoom in on the high-res image of the letter, it does look a bit odd. For example, along the top crease, shouldn't the crease distort the lettering of 'Moir'' and 'date of birth' a bit?

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Gz2ypRlWYAA ... name=large

...and if anyone's actually reading this thread, I didn't really type in the words 'Lady of The Night' in an earlier post

It must be a banned word on here, so it's automatically censored and changed by the forum software

But if anyone didn't see the actual word in the linked graphics, in American rapper speak it's a bit like a garden tool used to, er, hoe the weeds

I thought this piece by the Courier's editor was going to say why the man and woman charged haven't been named. Unfortunately it doesn't

Interesting piece, nonetheless.

(And, of course, different to the rules in England, but the general principles are much the same.)


DAVID CLEGG: Dundee ‘knife’ incident coverage poses major questions for lawmakers

https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/opinion ... vid-clegg/

'Those in the best position to check out information are silenced when it matters most.'

Regular readers will have seen this warning on some of The Courier’s social media posts: “As someone has been arrested or charged in connection with this incident, it is now active under the Contempt of Court Act 1981.”

It is a standard line to protect the fairness of a trial, but the date in the title tells its own story.

The main law that regulates crime reporting in Scotland was passed 44 years ago – before the internet, before social media, before a rumour could circle the world in minutes.

Three people have now been charged in connection with the infamous Dundee “knife” incident.

One of them is a 12-year-old girl, whose age gives her automatic anonymity.

Two adults have also been charged but, somewhat unusually, not arrested.

Under the letter of the contempt law in Scotland, that means their case is not yet active.

In practice, that status can change quickly and on advice from lawyers we are proceeding as if all three were subject to full restrictions.

That means we are prohibited from publishing anything that creates a substantial risk of prejudice to the trial. Even repeating a claim to challenge it could be a contempt.

Questions from readers

In recent days, some readers have asked why The Courier’s coverage has contained less detail than social media.

This legal context is one of the reasons.

In theory, the contempt rules apply to everyone. In practice, they are enforced almost entirely against professional journalists.

As we have seen in the last week, the end result is the worst of both worlds – an information space polluted by disputed claims, while those in the best position to check them are silenced when it matters most.

This is why some people online have been shouting that The Courier “covered things up” over this case.

The reality is the opposite – we have done exactly what you would want from a responsible newsroom.

From the moment the incident came to light, our reporters were on the ground in Lochee.

They spoke to shopkeepers, parents, and community leaders, and checked every claim against evidence we could verify.

If police confirmed a fact, we reported it. If it couldn’t be corroborated, it stayed out.

When police sources told us they had found no evidence to support the most serious online allegations, we made that position public. Nothing more, nothing less.

Every line of our coverage was examined meticulously in the newsroom.

Editors and reporters sat around asking whether each sentence was fair, accurate and legally safe.

When there was doubt, we phoned our lawyers and asked for guidance on contempt risks and the consequences of getting it wrong.

‘Vast grey area’

Doing this job properly takes time and money. It is a slower process than the internet would like, but the only way to produce journalism you can believe in.

Here is what that means to me: We will not publish anything that could prejudice the outcome of a trial.

We will not repeat unverified social media rumours for clicks. We will not identify a child or publish anything likely to lead to their identification.

And we will only report what we can be sure of.

There are details of our recent reporting that I can no longer describe for legal reasons.

That is not evasion, but the law working as it was designed to in 1981. It is also a prime example of the problem.

The framework that was meant to protect justice now struggles to cope with the speed and reach of modern communication.

It binds regulated newsrooms tightly while leaving a vast grey area for everyone else.

To be clear, I completely support the principle. Contempt rules exist to secure fair trials.

No one should face justice shaped by rumour rather than evidence.

But Scotland is trying to apply a pre-internet law to an internet-first world.

‘Difficult calls under pressure’

What would better look like?

At minimum, a modernised contempt regime that recognises the speed and scale of cyberspace, applies rules equally to every public platform, and gives courts better tools to address genuinely prejudicial content.

Crucially, it should empower responsible rebuttal by credible outlets when unverified claims are already circulating.

Shielding juries from prejudice and allowing provable facts to be put on the record should not be mutually exclusive goals.

Until the law catches up, cases like this will keep exposing the gap between the slow, careful work of journalism and the too fast free-for-all of the online rumour mill.

Regardless of that, The Courier team will keep doing our job the right way.

I won’t claim perfection.

We make difficult calls under pressure.

When covering news like complex police investigations, the story can move on very quickly and our coverage will evolve to reflect that.

But I am extremely proud of the way we’ve covered this story: rigorous, fair and based on what we can substantiate.

That is not arrogance.

It is a commitment to accuracy and to the basic promise we make our readers – when we publish something, you can trust it.

Isn't there a huge contraction there?

It says at the top that arrest OR charge means it's an active case, but below it says the couple have been charged but not arrested, so that means the case is not active

Anyway, I'm not sure if that's relevant to whether the man and woman arrested aren't being named in the mainstream press.

But, of course, because of the kind of stuff the Courier editor outlines above, even Elon Musk knows who the pair who've been charged are, because he responded to a twitter post naming them.

Assuming, of course, that the post had actually named the pair who actually had been charged, as opposed to who the post assumed had been charged

Anyway, huge photo of the Courier's office used to illustrate the piece. So the upper floors there are where they'll be taking photos of all the crime going on at or near the taxi rank etc

The photo must have been taken from about the front of the rank

https://wpcluster.dctdigital.com/thecou ... 8x1152.jpg

Incidentally, I didn't get any response from the Courier to my email about the crowdfunder.

However, there's been a couple of questioning pieces in other Scottish media outlets about it, although nothing really about the disinformation angle I suggested

However, there was this in Private Eye, which effectively says it's based on bollocks. But, of course, in view of more recent events maybe Private Eye would need to reassess what they've said below

But I still say the crowdfunder is based on utter embellishment, though, as evidenced by the Ninewells Hospital letter, which reads more like the girl was taken there as a precaution rather than with SEVERE concussion, a tennis ball-sized lump on her head, and extensive bruising.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Gz69eZHW0AA ... name=small

...and the crowdfunder is still only on £92k. I say 'only', because I'd assume it would have blasted through £100k by now, particularly with the recent charges against the 'man and woman', which the crowdfunder is portraying as confirming that the Bulgarian and his wife are guilty as sin

https://www.givesendgo.com/lolaandruby

Imagine thinking there's any kind of parallel between those two incidents



Could just about imagine a similar scenario with the 12-year-old 30 years ago when I lived in Dundee, and particularly when I started on the taxis at that time. And you could drive about the streets for miles without seeing anything other than a white face.

So what that has to do with that awful murder on a train in the Charlotte, North Carolina a few days ago is anyone's guess, except some tenuous link to the race issue.

Full video of the murder here if anyone hasn't seen it and feels the need - warning VERY GRAPHIC CONTENT

https://x.com/i/status/1965490014873178271

On the other hand, this is all very true:

So the Bulgarians were eventually charged with assault, and it's now being tried. Just in case anyone anywhere reading on here is still remotely interested.

But who to believe? It was never denied there was an altercation, but what kicked it all off?

Whichever side to believe, the bigger issue to me is why the girl was carrying those weapons about on a sunny Saturday evening near Farmfoods and the nearby shopping street.

That's not really properly explained.

But, of course, the Tommy Robinson types and millions of others will portray it as being protection against marauding rape gangs of foreigners. I suspect the truth is more mudane than that. But those types won't be impressed by the sheriff's remarks here

I mean, even the version of events portrayed by the two girls here is hardly consistent with the Tommy Robinson-style take...


Girl, 12, describes pulling axe and knife during ‘chaotic’ Dundee confrontation

https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/co ... fe-dundee/

Ilia Belov is on trial at Dundee Sheriff Court, accused of assaulting the youngster.

A young girl described to a court how she produced an axe and a knife from her waistband to stop her sister being attacked in a Dundee car park.

The 13-year-old claimed she was assaulted by a man who had made sexual remarks towards her in the Lochee area on August 23 2025.

After completing her evidence, the girl was lectured by a sheriff about the potentially fatal consequences of carrying weapons.

Illia Belov, 22, is on trial accused of attacking the girl and making sexual comments towards her and three other children on St Ann Lane.

Dundee Sheriff Court heard how the girl’s “extremely distressed” sister flagged down police and was taken to hospital after being attacked by a woman who was with the accused.

Alleged assault described

The group of five girls had been swimming and bus hopping when they arrived in the Lochee area and came across Belov and another man near Farmfoods.

Belov allegedly said: “Come here sexy, I’ll show you how to have a good time,” which one of the girls claimed was said to her multiple times.

“I turned around and basically shouted at them,” the girl – who is too young be named – said.

“I was shouting at him, asking him what he was saying.”

The other man walked away but Belov continued in the altercation with the children, the court was told.

The girl, who gave evidence via video link, said she was pushed against a railing on a ramp by Belov after the woman arrived on the scene and assaulted her sister.

“She’s run up to me and pushed me out the way, grabbed (her sister) and threw her on the ground.

“I went to go back and push her out the way then the laddie went and smashed my head off the pole.

“When the guy pushed me down, I basically got back up and went towards the lassie.”

When asked by prosecutor Michael Robertson how she felt about what was happening, she said: “Just dead angry.

“I basically told them to stop hitting (her sister).”

Girl explains why she pulled out weapons

The young witness then told Mr Robertson she “grabbed the blades”.

Responding to how many she had possession of, she replied: “I had two. A knife and an axe.”

“When did you pull these weapons out?” Mr Robertson asked.

The girl said it was while her sister was being assaulted.

She denied producing the weapons before this stage and alleged Belov was filming them.

Belov’s solicitor Larry Flynn accused the child and her friends of first calling his client and the other man “immigrants” as well as swearing at them.

She said: “We never called him any of that.”

Mr Flynn asked: “When you met up with your friends, did you have the axe and knife at that time?”

The child denied she had, claiming they came into her possession “five to 10 minutes” before the incident.

She added: “I jumped the fence, went to the roundabout and threw the axe and a knife in there and sat at the park behind the multi.”

Sheriff’s reaction to girl’s evidence

In re-examination, Mr Robertson asked: “The male, he made remarks to you, was that the first thing that was said?”

She replied: “Yeah.”

Mr Robertson added: “You didn’t pull out the axe and a knife from your waistband until you got up after you were pushed. It wasn’t before?”

She said: “No.”

Sheriff Tim Niven-Smith addressed the girl about her decision to take hold of the blades.

He told her: “You have quite candidly explained you had an axe and a knife. Two weapons.

“I just want to explain because I am the master of the law there’s no such thing as a defensive weapon, there are only offensive weapons and it’s my experience garnered over three decades that it’s those young people who carry weapons such as a knife and an axe who have recourse to use them in a heated situation often to lethal effect.

“If you get into a barney, you might stab someone and kill them and spend a large proportion in prison having taken someone’s life.

“Often people who have produced a weapon they are overcome by another person and the lethal weapon is used against them.

“I would hope you would reflect it’s not a good idea to carry weapons in the city of Dundee.”

Sister’s evidence

In her evidence, the girl’s sister repeated the sexual remark allegedly used by the man, telling the court she and her group called him a “f*****g creep”.

She described having blurred vision after being assaulted and had to be assessed at hospital.

Also giving evidence via video link, she said her sister was “angry” and “flipped” after witnessing her being attacked.

The court heard how she was “scared” as the incident unfolded.

After seeing her sister produce the weapons, the girl said she told her sister – worried she might “stab herself” – to drop them but she refused.

The child claimed she was unaware her sister was in possession of the knife and axe.

Mr Flynn accused the child and her group of being “cheeky” to the two men.

The girl said: “We didn’t call them immigrants. ‘F******g creeps’ – that’s all we said.

“When we got to the ramp, (her sister) went on a rampage. She was so angry.”

Police witness describes ‘chaotic’ scene

PC Ross Mann was driving a marked police van when one of the girls who he described as “extremely distressed” ran onto Coupar Angus Road to alert them to the incident.

He said: “There was a young female who was crossing the dual carriageway to flag me down to get my attention.

“She said she had been hit. She pointed towards two people standing nearby.

“She repeatedly said a female had assaulted her.

“It was a dynamic situation, crowds were gathering, various accusations were being made.”

He described the scene as “chaotic” and said he had no issues over Belov’s understanding of the charges, highlighting the intense media coverage of the incident.

Belov, aided by a Bulgarian interpreter during the trial, denies the two charges he faces on summary complaint.

The trial will resume in June.