Threatened Whitechapel chemist worker afraid to go back to work
A 30-year-old woman who received death threats at a Whitechapel chemist’s in April has been off work since because she fears further intimidation.
The Asian sales assistant, who has lived in the area with her 38-year-old husband for the last four years, is suffering from stress after twice being threatened over her style of dressing.
On March 30, a man told the owner of the chemist’s that the woman should wear long garments.
Then on April 12, another man approached her directly and told her he would kill her if she did not “cover up”.
Her husband spoke of his concerns today.
You may also want to watch:
He said: “After that she didn’t go back to work.
“In this free country, it is unbelievable.
- 1 Man killed after fall from Bow tower block
- 2 14 charged with alleged drug dealing and money laundering offences
- 3 19 arrested and cash seized in East End dawn drug raids
- 4 Revealed: The most popular baby names in your area in 2020
- 5 Panel finds gross misconduct proven against Pc arrested on suspicion of drug dealing
- 6 Why some families can't leave Bow's 'dangerous structure' tower block
- 7 Road and rail round-up: Disruptions to travel in east London this week
- 8 Prison sentence increased for 'violent and dangerous' man
- 9 Tower hamlets killing: £20,000 reward offered as two men sought for queries
- 10 Families start moving out of unsafe tower block in Bow
“Who will protect her? The police have said that they cannot protect her for 24 hours a day.”
On the first occasion, her husband says the chemist’s owner was also told that many Muslim people had boycotted the store because of how she was dressed and also that Tower Hamlets is a Muslim area and that she should follow religious rules to work there.
He also said she had been told to cover her head and body twice previously.
The woman does not want to speak publicly about what has happened because of the nature of the threats.
Both incidents were reported to Tower Hamlets police but are no longer being investigated.
According to a spokeswoman, the first did “not constitute a criminal offence” and “there was insufficient evidence to support a criminal prosecution” over the second incident.