https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-dorset-65807339

<quote>

A riptide may have led to the deaths of a girl and and teenage boy off Bournemouth beach, an inquest heard.

An inquest opening at Dorset Coroner's Court heard there was a "suggestion" a riptide had led to the pair drowning.

Dorset Police said it was keeping an "open mind" about the circumstances that led to the deaths.

</quote>

It is staggering that the police still seem unable to do better than keep an open mind on the circumstances of the deaths.

Everyone else has worked out that it was either (1) a tragic accident, the kids did nothing wrong but got into difficulties, perhaps due to a riptide, (2) they were messing about with tragic consequences, with others perhaps encouraging reckless behaviour, or (3) they were hit or put into difficulties by vessels or others on the water.

The police by now should have enough evidence to say which of those is plausible and no, what other possibilities there are.

The problem is the police seem determined to confuse everyone by on one hand saying there was no recklessness, no collision with any vessel, no other vessels on the water, while charging a man with suspected manslaughter and impounding a vessel which is now said to have been on the water at the time, and refusing to say why they have impounded it.

There must have been plenty of witnesses, in particular the eight who had to be rescued but didn't die. Sure some of it will be contradictory, some of it outright lies, some said the kids jumped off the pier, but the police have said that's not true, some media had speculated that a jet-ski was involved, the police have discounted that as not true.

It just doesn't make sense that the police could charge someone with suspected manslaughter while also seemingly saying there were no circumstances in which the deaths could be suspected to be manslaughter.

If it turns out it was just a tragic accident, was the result of a riptide, one might reasonably ask what all that other shit was about.

Someone needs to tell Dorset police to get their act together, sort themselves out.

They say it's a complex investigation. Perhaps they could explain why that is, what makes it complicated ?

On Mon, 5 Jun 2023 13:07:27 +0100
The Happy Hippy <the.happy.hippy.nntp@ntlworld.invalid> wrote:

> If it turns out it was just a tragic accident, was the result of a
> riptide, one might reasonably ask what all that other shit was about.

My belief, based on what we know so far, is that it was simply a tragic accident, the kids simply got into difficulty and most likely through a rip tide.

The arrest of a man on suspicion of manslaughter seems to have been a knee-jerk overreaction to false suggestions the kids had jumped from the pier and imagining someone had encouraged them to do so, or imagining they were hit or put into difficulties by someone in control of a vessel which wasn't the case.

The impounding of the Dorset Belle is because it appears it was operating without a licence to operate. Despite there being a lack of clarity as to whether it was on the water at the time the police say there were no vessels on the water, that seems to me to be an entirely separate matter unrelated to the deaths.

If we take it as such, discount the arrest on suspicion of manslaughter as unwarranted, a distraction - What are we left with ?

Why are Dorset police unable to do that ?