Daughter of EU official raped and murdered by Migrant

[EarlOfHazard]

blindswelledrat said:

EarlOfHazard said:

What I don't get is, Merkel opened the borders to migrants from outside of the EU, as Germany (apparently) needed to prop up its ageing and decreasing population.
If migrants were needed, why didn't she try to entice youths from Spain, or Portugal, or Italy, or Greece, or any of the other countries WITHIN the EU that has rampant youth unemployment?

She didn't open their borders to the Syrians to prop up their population, she did it for humanitarian reasons and to set an example to the rest of Europe about helping the unfortunates.
Backfired spectacularly but the sentiment was altruistic

Two birds one stone, as Germany does have an ageing and shrinking population. With low birth rates, but this has changed recently, mainly due to migration
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/18/immigra...

And with regards to the refugees, will they go home after the conflict in their country has ended?

Like you said it's backfired, and this will cause a massive st storm. The German people will only tolerate so much before something happens. Merkel will not survive another term.

[hifihigh]

I don't think I've ever met any Afghanis, admittedly I could have done and thought they were Polish but that would only be when I've been in Polish Pieters Eurofoods shop. Maybe all the forrins should be made to wear a marker on their sleeve so as you can tell who's a forrin and who's not?

[Amateurish]

alfie2244 said:

Perhaps you have a point after all, well in part anyway so half an apology due perhaps.

"Following his arrest the suspect, aged 17, pleaded guilty to the attack and will be sentenced next year."

"However, prosecutors say he can still change his plea and it's unknown if he has admitted raping Maria."

Cheers

http://www.dw.com/en/german-police-arrest-17-year-...

"The alleged perpetrator has so far remained silent. Whether there was any kind of relationship between him and the victim remains at the center of the investigation."

http://www.thelocal.de/20161204/afghan-teen-arrest...

"The Afghan, who has said nothing to investigators about the alleged crimes,"

He may or may not have confessed.

[Rovinghawk]

Amateurish said:

Innocent until proven guilty!

I'd normally be the first to agree with you, but as he's admitted it I feel his right to a presumption of innocence has been waived, especially as there's apparently some strong evidence to confirm it.

[alfie2244]

Amateurish said:

alfie2244 said:

Perhaps you have a point after all, well in part anyway so half an apology due perhaps.

"Following his arrest the suspect, aged 17, pleaded guilty to the attack and will be sentenced next year."

"However, prosecutors say he can still change his plea and it's unknown if he has admitted raping Maria."

Cheers

http://www.dw.com/en/german-police-arrest-17-year-...

"The alleged perpetrator has so far remained silent. Whether there was any kind of relationship between him and the victim remains at the center of the investigation."

http://www.thelocal.de/20161204/afghan-teen-arrest...

"The Afghan, who has said nothing to investigators about the alleged crimes,"

He may or may not have confessed.

As I said point taken however I'm not sure how we are supposed to know whether the sources you link are to be trusted any more than others that have been posted.

[Amateurish]

alfie2244 said:

As I said point taken however I'm not sure how we are supposed to know whether the sources you link are to be trusted any more than others that have been posted.

We can't. That's why I said he may or may not have confessed. We just don't know. The important point is we can't just accept the claim that he has confessed and therefore assume guilt like most posters seem to have done.

[anonymous-user]

Digga said:

Greg66 said:

Digga said:

2.5 times more likely is a lot.

Not really. As BSR says, making a very small chance 2.5 times more probable means it stays a very small chance.

Eg: take the National Lottery chances of winning as 15 million to 1 per tickey. If I buy three tickets, my chances come down to 5 million to 1. Not great.

Whereas my chances of throwing a 6 with a dice are 1 in 6, and if I increase those chances by 2.5 times, I'm close to a coin flip.

You are looking at gains, try thinking in terms of losses; how happy would you be is, say, your employer told you there was asbostos in your building, but they weren't going to do anything about it because your chance of developing respiratory disease and/or cancer wwas only twice as high. Or failing your own ability to assess the risk, how might HSE or a lawyer see that?

Think about it for a second before dismissing it as a non-issue this time.

Well let's just park for a second the rather patronising approach of "I've thought about this and you haven't".

We were discussing the narrow issue of increase in probability of an event by 2.5 times, and whether that is a lot.

BSR and I both pointed out that "a lot" isn't a helpful assessment, because increasing a very small probability still leaves you with a very small probability.

You're now switching the argument to a different point: the seriousness, or severity of the event that may occur.

Your example: First, the severity of the event. Being told that the chances of contracting mesothelioma had doubled, vs being told that the chances of stubbing my toe doubled, would no doubt attract my attention.

But secondly, the ultimate probability of the event occurring remains paramount. If I am then told that my chances of contracting mesothelioma had increased from 200 million to one to 100 million to one, whereas my chances of stubbing my toe had increased from one in three to two in three, I would be pretty phlegmatic about mesothelioma but might well wear some sturdier shoes. My chances of (eg) being hit by lightning, dying in a plane crash, and so on would me much higher than contracting mesothelioma, and I don't care about those. If I get unlucky, so be it.

Ultimately, the fundamental point remains this: what is the quantum of the original probability that is being multiplied?


ETA: Trying to tie this back to the point at hand, let's assume that the chances of a woman in Germany being raped by a German national are 1 in a million, and there are 40 million males in Germany (so say 40 rapists in Germany). Add a group of 100,000 migrants. The chances of being raped by a migrant are - let's say - 1 in 2,500, because they are a considerably more dangerous group. You've added 40 rapists to the pool - you now have 80 rapists in a population of 40,100,000. The chances of being raped are now very close to 500,000 to 1 - they've doubled. But they are still 500,000 to 1.

All of these numbers are hypothetical, but they illustrate that doubling a very small chance still leaves a very small chance.

There are all sorts of considerations then to take into account in deciding how much money and human resources to throw at (for want of a better word) some sort of "screening" process that aims to keep those odds as close to 1 million to 1 as possible, which has to be balanced against the (again, for want of a better word) "humanity" driven considerations of admitting and settling migrants as quickly as possible.

Edited by anonymous-user on Tuesday 6th December 11:37

[scherzkeks]

CoolHands said:

Rape by an immigrant is probably more likely to be reported than rape by someone known to the victim. So that would skew the data, as would a million other unknowns.

Of course, ignoring the data strung together to create the inaccurate estimate of "2.5 x more likely", most of these crimes go unreported anyways. My wife is a social worker here in Ger. and sexual assault and abuse are the most common problems she deals with. The majority of it goes unreported, even if the victim seeks counseling. Shes got dozens of abuse cases that she can't even report to the police without the victim's consent, and many do not consent.

In other words, these crimes occur so often even with out the addition of the refugees, that it is impossible to get a real picture.

[anonymous-user]

hyphen said:

EarlOfHazard said:

What I don't get is, Merkel opened the borders to migrants from outside of the EU, as Germany (apparently) needed to prop up its ageing and decreasing population.
If migrants were needed, why didn't she try to entice youths from Spain, or Portugal, or Italy, or Greece, or any of the other countries WITHIN the EU that has rampant youth unemployment?

I think that was just used as an argument to subdue the masses.

The German Left & Left-Centre still have deep issues & guilt over their past, they equated those migrants running from Syria to the refugee escaping from Hitler and all logical reasoning went out of the window.

Agree.....

I was in Berlin in early June prior to the Brexit referendum here. We witnessed first hand a large and noisy political protest outside the Reichstag building, Which now has controlled access to the front steps of the buliding, a change since the last time I was there at the end of 2003.

Later that day a Saturday afternoon , there was continued protests ongoing in the Potsdamer Platz area bang in the city centre, sirens, barriers, a very heavy ( armed ) police presence, cars blocking streets, demonstrators passing out leaflets to passers by, whilst addressing the crowd by megaphone, etc.

Germany has serious issues with it's own disaffected populace.The government are scared stiff of appearing to overreact due to Germany's past political affiliations and the result it caused.
Hence Merkel's lovefest with uncontrolled immigration, and her apparent reticence to stem the flood of migrants into Germany by God knows who, from God knows where, whose past character seems to be of no consequence to anyone .... yet,