They went to the trouble of explaining the age of the boy and where he was from and by your logic those bits of information aren’t the focus of the article either.
You’re just guessing, you don’t know. We can all make guesses.
Why is it relevant to the article about why he came here? The point of the article is that people were fined for reporting him, highlighting the ridiculous policy.
Why? The article is about the couple being fined for finding the stowaway after they left the port, the gender, age and reason the stowaway came to the UK is irrelevant to that.
The article is about the couple being fined for finding the stowaway after they left the port, the gender, age and reason the stowaway came to the UK is irrelevant to that.
Why do you believe the gender and age were included in the article?
Bizarre that the article doesn’t address the reasons why the boy wanted to come to the UK. As per usual.
Because that’s not the focus of the article, it’s specifically about the policy of fining people who report stowaways.
They went to the trouble of explaining the age of the boy and where he was from and by your logic those bits of information aren’t the focus of the article either.
You’re just guessing, you don’t know. We can all make guesses.
Why is it relevant to the article about why he came here? The point of the article is that people were fined for reporting him, highlighting the ridiculous policy.
Why is it relevant to the article about where he came from?
It’s not, they could have left it out and it wouldn’t have changed anything.
LOL, it would have changed the article.
Why? The article is about the couple being fined for finding the stowaway after they left the port, the gender, age and reason the stowaway came to the UK is irrelevant to that.
Why do you believe the gender and age were included in the article?