Pháp luật · Manchester terror caseTwo men remanded over alleged plot against Manchester’s Jewish communityĐã viết lúc 03:01 UTC 5 tháng 10, 2026XemBản chép lời0:09A judge remanded two men in custody over an alleged plot against Manchester's Jewish0:14community.0:14The alleged targets include Heaton Park Synagogue and Manchester Jewish Museum0:19institutions used for worship, community life, and preserving Jewish history.0:22Neither defendant has been found guilty and no attack is reported in this case.0:27What is established about the case and what still has to be proved?0:30Salam Ahmadian 36 of Liverpool and Rahman Salehi 34 of Salford0:36are the two defendants.0:37Both are Iranian nationals.0:39Ahmadian was born on March 5th, 1990.0:42Salahi's recorded birth date is october 28th, 1991.0:46These are the corrected spellings of their names.0:49Salehi's published age differs by one year, thirty-four in the police identity0:53record and court accounts, but thirty-five in the prosecution's charging0:56announcement.0:57His recorded birth date makes him 34 at the October 3 hearing and 35 on october1:0128th.1:02That arithmetic does not explain why another account used 35, and the discrepancy1:06remains unresolved.1:07District Judge Nina Tempia remanded both men in custody at Westminster Magistrates1:12Court on October 3rd, 2026.1:14They did not enter pleas at that appearance.1:16The absence of a plea is not an admission, and the custody decision is not a finding1:20of guilt.1:20The charge is engaging in conduct in preparation for terrorist acts identified as an1:24offense under Section 5 of the Terrorism Act 2006.1:28The allegation encompasses preparing to commit an act of terrorism or assisting1:33another person to do so.1:34The alleged conduct occurred on or before September 20th, 2026.1:39A beginning date is not established.1:41The full charge sheet and any more precise statutory subsection are unavailable.1:45The statutory citation is not independently confirmed by the incomplete police and1:49prosecution charging passages.1:51The charges were announced on October 2 following a counterterrorism policing1:55investigation.1:56Heaton Park Synagogue and Manchester Jewish Museum are identified as intended2:00targets in the allegations.2:02The case includes alleged hostile reconnaissance of Manchester's Jewish community2:06surveillance of the synagogue and research into attacking it.2:09The precise reconnaissance activities, their dates, and each defendant's alleged2:13actions at each location are not established.2:15The alleged bomb preparations concern communications about acquiring components, not2:19an established completed device.2:21The men allegedly used encrypted applications to communicate with other people about2:24obtaining components for a homemade chlorine bomb.2:27The application names, message, contents, identities of all participants and2:30particular components are not established.2:32Neither is it established that the defendants obtained all necessary materials,2:37possessed a completed bomb, or that police recovered a bomb or components.2:41Those gaps must not be turned into either a claim that a device existed or a claim2:46that nothing was recovered.2:47An alleged overseas contact does not establish Iranian government direction.2:51The case also includes alleged contact with a third party believed to be in Iran.2:56That person's identity and location are unestablished.2:59Even the location remains tentative.3:02No available evidence establishes instructions, funding, or operational control by3:06Iran's government.3:07or any Iranian state agency.3:09Iranian nationality and an alleged overseas contact do not by themselves demonstrate3:14state direction.3:15The allegations concern these two defendants, not Iranian nationals or migrants3:19collectively.3:20The arrests took place in Manchester on September twentieth, twenty twenty six.3:24The precise location and time of day are not established.3:27The northern quarter is not a confirmed arrest location, and a Newton Street3:31photograph caption does not establish where the arrests happened.3:34The investigation involved counter terrorism policing, but the operational3:38responsibilities of individual forces and regional units remain unspecified.3:42It is not established which led the operation, made the arrests, or conducted3:46searches.3:47Not every operational detail has been independently corroborated.3:50September twenty was the eve of Yom Kippur, the Jewish Day of Atonement.3:54It was nine Tishrei, five seven eight seven, followed by Yom Kippur on September3:59twenty first, ten Tishrei.4:01The observance began at sunset on September twenty and ended at nightfall on4:05September twenty one.4:06The fast runs from several minutes before sunset until after nightfall.4:10Manchester-specific observance times are not established here.4:14Without an arrest time, it cannot be determined whether the arrests preceded or4:18followed sunset.4:19The calendar verifies the description of the arrest date.4:22It does not establish an intended attack hour or prove a plan to attack during4:26worship.4:27Both men arrived in the United Kingdom by small boat several years ago.4:31Their immigration status at the time of arrest is not established.4:34That arrival history does not explain or prove the alleged terrorist conduct.4:38The established legal position is therefore two defendants in custody facing a4:42terrorism preparation charge without pleas entered at their first appearance.4:46The reconnaissance, communications, and intended acquisition of bomb components4:51remain allegations.4:52The prosecution must prove the alleged conduct and each defendant's connection to4:56it.4:57A charge does not supply that proof.4:59What evidence will be presented?5:00How each defendant will respond, and whether the allegations can be proved remain5:04unresolved.5:05Their next appearance is listed at the Old Bailey on October 23, 2026.Đọc bài viếtDòng thời gian câu chuyệnHeyDexVideo ngắn ↗
