Man, 18, charged with murder over death of 63-year-old man in Ipswich
The force said results from a Home Office post-mortem examination indicated the cause of Mr McNicholl's death as head injuries and a stab wound to the right shoulder.
A murder inquiry into Mr McNicholl's death was led by Suffolk Constabulary's Major Investigation Team.
An 18-year-old man has been charged with the murder of a man who was found deceased at his home on New Year's Day in Ipswich.
Read more here >> https://t.co/8uDp3RMntg
— Suffolk Police (@SuffolkPolice) July 22, 2025
On January 22, a 17-year-old boy was arrested on suspicion of murder before being bailed with conditions.
Police said the man, now 18, was re-arrested on Monday on suspicion of murder and taken to Martlesham Police Investigation Centre (PIC) for questioning.
Jake McMillan, most recently of Banbury Road, Hackney in London, but formerly of Ipswich, has subsequently been charged with murder and also being concerned in the supply of cannabis.
McMillan has been remanded in custody and is due to appear at Ipswich Magistrates' Court on Tuesday.
Police said three other people were arrested on April 1 as part of the investigation.
A 17-year-old boy, 18-year-old man and 41-year-old man were arrested on suspicion of assisting an offender and being concerned in the supply of Class A and B drugs.
They were taken to Martlesham PIC for questioning and were bailed to return to police on October 1.
A woman in her 50s, who was previously arrested on suspicion of murder before being released on bail, will face no further action.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
3 hours ago
- Spectator
The state will do anything but fix the migrant crisis
Migrant hotel protests are erupting across the country, as 'tinderbox' Britain catches fire. What began with a series of protests in Epping, Essex, over the alleged sexual assault of a teenage girl by a recently arrived Ethiopian migrant, has now spread, as Brits air long-standing grievances about asylum seekers they have been forced to host in their own communities. A powerful tendency now exists in the British state towards displacement activity Demonstrations have so far been reported in Bournemouth, Southampton and Portsmouth, Norwich, Leeds and Wolverhampton, Sutton-in-Ashfield in Nottinghamshire, Altrincham and even at Canary Wharf in London. With years of unaddressed anger rapidly making themselves felt, the police, pulled in all directions, are struggling to keep up. 'Local commanders are once again being forced to choose between keeping the peace at home or plugging national gaps', admits the head of the Police Federation. Still, it seems there is one thing the government is more than happy to devote resources to: trawling the internet for anti-migrant sentiment. The Telegraph reports that an elite team of police officers convened by the Home Office is set to monitor social media to flag up early signs of unrest. Working out of the National Police Coordination Centre (NPoCC) in Westminster the new National Internet Intelligence Investigations team will 'maximise social media intelligence' gathering in order to 'help local forces manage public safety threats and risks'. If this new division was just about intelligence-gathering that would be one thing. It's true that social media is in invaluable resource for following events on the ground at such gatherings, while local Facebook groups are often where grassroots protests are organised. Yet we know that when it comes to the British state and social media, censorship and punishment for online speech is never far behind. Ever since Sir Keir Starmer repeatedly linked the Southport unrest last year with social media, the idea has firmly taken root in Whitehall that the best way to stop unrest is to aggressively police the internet. Ofcom, the broadcast regulator, already takes this view, and the link has even been drawn in Department for Education guidance on how to talk to schoolchildren about the Southport disorder. In a recent report, the police inspectorate said that that forces must be 'better prepared and resourced to monitor, analyse, use and respond to online content', which it argues was a risk to public safety. This general zeal for social-media policing is why Big Brother Watch believes the new unit is very likely to infringe on free speech. The investigations team is 'Orwellian' and 'disturbing', says interim director Rebecca Vincent, creating the possibility that it 'will attempt to interfere with online content' as other government bodies are known to have done during Covid. As if there weren't enough threats to free speech already. This week age verification provisions in the latest stage of the Online Safety Act (OSA) kicked in, meaning that some footage of protests is now inaccessible on social media for many users. Not even parliamentary privilege is safe from the censorship regime. Katie Lam's searing April speech on the rape gangs, in which she quoted court transcripts and survivors, could not be watched on X without age verification. We are beginning to look like North Korea with rainbow flags: for the public's 'safety', footage exposing grievous failures of the British state now cannot be viewed in the UK. Little wonder, given the OSA explicitly earmarks content relating to 'child sexual abuse' and 'illegal immigration and people smuggling' as the 'kinds of illegal content and activity that platforms need to protect users from'. The Conservatives, who bequeathed us this blank cheque for digital authoritarianism, certainly need to take a long, hard look at themselves. The claims that the OSA is merely about restricting access to pornography has been exposed as a mere fig leaf. And still things could still get worse. As the Free Speech Union has noted, shortly after last year's riots, the Centre for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), a pro-censorship lobby group with ties to Morgan McSweeney, 'hosted a closed-door meeting under the Chatham House rule to discuss the role of social media in civil unrest'. In attendance were officials from the Home Office, the Department of Science, Information and Technology, Ofcom and other organisations. The CCDH proposals that emerged included amending the OSA to 'grant Ofcom additional 'emergency response' powers to fight 'misinformation' that poses a 'threat' to 'national security' and 'the health or safety of the public''. This would give Secretary of State Peter Kyle the ability to directly flag unapproved content to be taken down at a time of 'crisis'. Should the unrest continue this could well be coming down the track. What all this illustrates is just how ill-equipped the people in charge are to deal with Britain's problems, as The Spectator's Madeline Grant noted earlier this week. A powerful tendency now exists in the British state towards displacement activity. Spin doctors 'manage' the news. Police surveil social media. The government shuffles asylum seekers from hotel to hotel, or to HMOs, or even to privately rented accommodation (which it uses your own taxes to outbid you for). For his part, the prime minister has been tweeting about the women's football. As the unrest grows, leading politicians continue doggedly insist that Britain remains a 'a successful multi-ethnic, multi-faith country'. In reality, there are answers to the asylum hotels crisis, it's just that the government simply lacks the will to act. Large numbers of illegal migrants need to be deported, while those that are here should be placed in a secure holding facility somewhere remote. What is surely obvious by now where they should not be: in hotels, in an Essex market town 500 yards from a school; on the Bournemouth beachfront; in the London's financial district; in a Leeds suburb right next to a shopping centre. As it is, however, it seems the regime will try anything and everything before addressing people's real concerns.
The Sun
a day ago
- The Sun
Migrant hotel protests spread across the country with more planned today as cops clamp down on weekend of stand-offs
MIGRANT hotel protests have spread across the country as furious citizens take to the streets to challenge illegal immigration. Yesterday protests were held across the country with demonstrations outside migrant hotels held in Norwich, Leeds, Southampton and Nottinghamshire. 3 3 Further demonstrations are planned today in Epping, Wolverhampton and Cheshire as anger over the Government's continued use of migrant hotels rises. The protests have so far remained peaceful but some minor confrontations with counter protestors were seen. A group of counter protesters wearing masks reportedly broke away from the main group at the Nottinghamshire demonstration and walked into the middle of the crowd. Some were said to be carrying 'Stand Up to Racism' placards and were escorted away by police. Further demonstrations are planned today in Epping, Wolverhampton and Cheshire as public anger over the Government's use of migrant hotels rises. Police have so far arrested 18 people and charged seven in connection with the continuous protests in Epping. The migrant hotel demonstrations began after an asylum seeker was charged with sexual assault. The man is alleged to have attempted to kiss a 14-year-old girl. Protests have spread across the country with demonstrations held earlier in the week outside the four-star Britannia Hotel in Canary Wharf. According to the latest Home Office data 32,000 asylum seekers are being housed in around 210 hotels across the country. A record 24,000 migrants have crossed the Channel so far in 2025. 3
Telegraph
a day ago
- Telegraph
‘Racist, far-Right' protesters: a Sikh, a Chinese man and a veteran with mixed-race kids
Of the thousands of bankers in Canary Wharf, only one crossed the footbridge to the newly designated migrant hotel opposite the district's glass towers, curious to witness the commotion. Metal fencing surrounded the entrance of the Britannia Hotel, guarded by a wall of police and a private security guard in a surgical mask. Territorial support vans crawled past. It was hard to escape the feeling that a great crime had been committed. Across the road, a smattering of protesters milled about – some live-streaming the police, who filmed them in return – while others cheered as cars honked in support. The lone banker, smartly dressed in a suit, watched from the edge. His colleagues weren't overly bothered by the disturbance. 'They live in Battersea and Fulham.' The demonstration outside the Britannia was in its second day, having originally been sparked by a false rumour that asylum seekers from the Bell Hotel in Epping had been moved here. The Home Office have nonetheless confirmed the hotel will be used to house another group of asylum seekers, after reports of tourists having room bookings suddenly cancelled without proper explanation were shared online. Few residents welcomed the prospect of people fresh off dinghies arriving in the sanitised core of London's financial district. 'This is the only place in London you'd walk around in a Rolex,' the banker said. 'A lot of Chinese, Japanese and Hong-kongers live here. It's not like Tower Hamlets.' Hotels have been used to house migrants for decades, usually in peripheral Northern towns few in Westminster knew or cared much about. In 2017, it was found that 57 per cent of asylum seekers were housed in the poorest third of Britain; the wealthiest hosted only 10 per cent. That quiet dispersal worked for a while. The benefits of porous borders were privatised – cheap labour for the gig economy, rising rents for landlords – while the costs were offloaded onto the public via tax-funded migrant support, suppressed wages, overstretched services, and housing shortages. The scheme spared ministers the grubby work of signing off on border control, creating conditions that allowed a small class of opportunists to enrich themselves from the crisis. Slum landlords could become Home Office millionaires, while the ageing magnates of hotel empires – among them, Britannia's owner Alex Langsam – were spared from market forces by taxpayer-funded subsidy. Over 170,000 people have now arrived in Britain by crossing the Channel. There are simply no 'suitable' locations left for accommodation. The use of hotels, itself a concession to the need to quickly house the excessive number of arrivals, has seen asylum seekers placed both in leafy market towns like Epping and Diss and London cultural centres like Shoreditch and the Barbican. Even Canary Wharf, a place once intended to advertise modern Britain to the world, is expected to share in the burden. Perhaps the strangeness of the decision to house asylum seekers – here of all places – was reflected in the surprising diversity of those hanging around the demonstration. A brawny Sikh man in a Louis Vuitton-branded turban held a sign reading, 'Stop calling us far-Right. Protect our women and children.' Nearby, a smartly dressed Chinese man waved a similar placard, standing alongside residents from Malaysia and Australia. They mingled among more provocative signs, including a St George's flag emblazoned with, 'The English began to hate', a line from Kipling's wartime ballad The Beginning. A visibly agitated Frenchman implored passing journalists to cover the protest fairly. The Reform chairman for Newham and Tower Hamlets Lee Nallalingham, speaking in a personal capacity, claimed the coalition extended to his own family. 'Look, when my Sri Lankan father, my Ukrainian step-mother and my Japanese wife are all sharing the same views, there's clearly something there,' he said. 'We like to pretend it's some stereotypical demographic issue. If it was, I wouldn't be here.' Concerns about safety and fairness predominated. The deal arranged by the Home Office would house up to 400 asylum seekers in the hotel for £81 per night. At full capacity, the cost is just shy of £12 million per year, in an area where the average one-bed rent is £3,000 and around 20,000 people are stuck on housing wait lists. Perhaps Tower Hamlets Council feels it can afford the expense: it recently advertised a £40,000 post to expedite asylum housing and tackle 'racism and inequality'. 'I don't agree with it,' said Terry Humm, 56, his beret marking him as a former member of the 2nd Battalion Royal Green Jackets. 'There are thousands of ex-servicemen on the streets in England – what about housing people who fought for Queen and Country?' He was quick to head off any charge of prejudice. 'I'm not racist at all, my children are mixed race,' he said. 'I just find it disgusting.' Mr Humm, who joined the army in 1989 and served in Northern Ireland, warned of renewed sectarian tension on this side of the Irish Sea. 'The ingredients are in the mixing bowl – someone's bound to make the cake'. A Met officer who'd served in the Welsh Guards passed by and paid his respects. Humm heard about the demonstration on TikTok. Others mentioned WhatsApp groups that had grown from 100 to over 3,000 members in the space of weeks. There was talk of 'civil war' and Britain being a 'ticking bomb', echoing government fears of unrest spreading across the country. 'There's going to be riots within the next six weeks, mark my words,' said one man, a builder in his 40s from Stepney. 'They've brought them here because they think Canary Wharf is secure. But what they don't realise is Tower Hamlets will not have this. It will escalate into a war,' he said, his voice rising. 'Epping set an example,' he added. 'It showed that as a community if you stand together you can make your voice be heard. The rhetoric of protesters seems to match up with the reality of increasingly inflamed tensions this summer. Earlier this month, migrants in Gravelines lobbed Molotov cocktails at French police, reportedly using fuel siphoned from the very dinghies they intended to board for Britain. A spate of sexual assaults and other violent crimes by illegal migrants stoked public frustration at an asylum system that appears impervious to reasonable adaptation. The protest remained fairly civil until the arrival of counter-demonstrators from Stand Up To Racism, an organisation open about its collaboration with the Socialist Workers Party. Divided by the road, the two groups screamed abuse at each other: 'paedophile protectors!' met with a reply of 'racists!' One female activist reminded me of someone I had met while reporting on the Bibby Stockholm barge, who furnished migrants aboard with toiletries, pens and maps. Earlier this month, one of its occupants was convicted of assaulting a teenage girl on a beach, telling her he'd 'never been this close to a white woman'. As I spoke to another far-Left activist, an egg splattered on the pavement between us, lobbed from the balcony of a luxury apartment building next to the hotel. The first 15 or so floors are reserved for affordable housing. South Asian residents in Islamic attire gathered on balconies to watch the scene. Inside their separate entrance, the only visible signs were an 'Eid haircut price list' and a notice warning residents not to hang clothes, toss cigarettes, or display flags or banners from their windows. Apartments there can cost millions. According to one resident, their Saudi neighbour is 'furious' at the decision to place the migrants next door, and the occupant of the penthouse flat is rumoured to have decided to sell up. Canary Wharf was once lauded as a turning point in Britain's post-war decline – 'a citadel of finance,' as Reuters put it, 'atop once-derelict docks.' It stands as a crowning accomplishment of the Thatcher years. But London is no longer the unquestioned centre of international finance. Canary Wharf appears now to be sliding back to its pre-regeneration state, blighted by empty commercial lots and chintzy stores that never seem to have customers. Residents of luxury residential buildings will live side by side with asylum seekers, just as the rest of the country is expected to. Amidst the pomp of Canary Wharf's creation, Margaret Thatcher warned that 'where there is no vision, the people perish.' She no doubt had the glittering financial district just across the river in mind. Today we need only look at the Britannia Hotel.
