I'd like to suggest adding a passage about Roy Larner, who bravely fought against the murderers, finally driving them out of a pub into the arms of police, probably saving several people from being killed. (The Guardian, Fox News ..) --Anti. (talk) 13:59, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
His "being sent for deradicalisation"
Regarding this recent addion:"Larner was later required by the government to take deradicalization classes to stop him from becoming Islamophobic."[1]
The addition gets things wrong, fails to provide context and is poorly sourced. The source used says:"Larner has since been added to the United Kingdom’s “Prevent” program, a watchlist for those deemed to have anti-Islamic tendencies.. Prevent is actually primarily a programme devised post 9-11 to stop Islamic terrorism and radicalisation of Muslims. Any RS should know that basic fact. The UK has no programme explicitly to stop Islamophobia AFAIK. If Prevent also deals with far-right or anti-Muslim terrorism, then that it a relatively recent development. Secondly, the source does not say that the UK govt has done anything, the source refers to "UK authorities", whether that is police, courts or whoever is not said by the source, nor is it clear who it could be or when/why it happened. Certainly there is no suggestion that it was because of the 2017 incident. The ultimate source of the Washington Examiner appears in part to be The Sun.
There is a total lack of context, it seems that Larner committed a number of offences, including possession of a large quantity of illegal amphetamines and an overt racial attack, even Washington Examiner says: "Larner had his first run-in with anti-extremist authorities in January 2018 after he was filmed yelling racist slurs and spitting on a black man who was attempting to take his picture. During the explicit rant, he told the man, “People like you stink.”. Why attacking a man in the street would lead to a "run-in with anti-extremist authorities" isn't clear, a local court would deal with it. For this incident he was given a suspended sentence, precisely because of his prior heroism "He was sentenced to eight weeks in jail and a 50 euro fine for his racist rant, but the judge delayed his sentence for one year, given that his crime had taken place just months after his heroic actions." He broke the terms of his suspended sentence and thus served the 8 weeks. He also broke the terms of a restraining order against his own mum "granted to his 80-year-old mum Phyllis. The order was granted after Larner was convicted for damaging a TV set at his mum’s home in Peckham, south London.. He has also attacked his local MP, and acknowledged doing so "However, he has been involved in several racist incidents … these include convictions for racially-aggravated common assault and religiously-aggravated harassment for an expletive rant in his local MP Neil Coyle’s office. . Quite why, when or by whom he was supposedly sent to "deradicalization" classes, I haven't been able to establish, it is possible it was a condition of one of his suspended sentences, but the only source that comes up for me on a web-search for "Roy Larner deradicalization" of similar is the Washington Examiner!
A 5-second search reveals that Larner's story is a great deal more nuanced than the Washington Examiner implies and certainly more so than our text suggested. One can simultaneously be a violent person, prone to racist outbursts and a "hero of the hour", when the occasion requires. What is core is that this page is about the attack, not about Larner, but if it covers him it should provide reasonable context, which the text singularly failed to do.Pincrete (talk) 06:11, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
The ultimate source for the claim that he was "required by the government to take deradicalization classes to stop him from becoming Islamophobic" appears to be Larner himself. In an interview for the Sun, reported by Daily Mail and others he said he had 'put on a list' by Prevent after being contacted by a far-right group. A Home Office spokesman said "Prevent safeguards people who may be vulnerable to being drawn into terrorism. It is entirely up to an individual whether they accept the support offered through Prevent … The support people receive through Prevent is rightly confidential and it would not be appropriate to comment on whether or not an individual has been offered support." So basically a nothing-burger.
Other sources about him here and here.Pincrete (talk) 04:50, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
Naming
Why is Roy Larner not even named in this article? He was extremely prominent in the press after the events. Surely that merits inclusion, rather than "a man" as the article currently says? — Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnLoeber (talk • contribs) 19:48, 11 July 2025 (UTC)
