UKC

Can anyone explain why the police/press are being so cagey about exactly what it is Mikaeel Kular's mother is actually charged with? Is this normal for Scotland or the UK as a whole? Or have the press perhaps been asked to gloss over this for some operational reason?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-25803667

jk

In reply to jkarran:

I was wondering that. The Guardian has an article about the gutters sailing close to the wind on contempt (apparently they printed some stuff in the English editions but not the Scottish), where they give some hint about having only recently learned what she's been charged with, but they don't say what.

Off-duty's your man, presumably. Or MikeR.

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

BBC is now reporting she's charged with murder.
jk

In reply to jkarran:

Here you go, as if it makes any difference http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-25816678

In reply to digby:
Thanks but why the attitude? It was and still is a valid question regarding something that struck me as unusual about the reporting.

jk

In reply to jkarran:

Something about Scots law perhaps? As is the additional charge of "attempting to defeat the ends of justice" perhaps:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2542612/Mikaeel-Kulars-mother-Rosde...

I presume that's the same as attempting to pervert the course of justice.

In reply to FesteringSore:

I think I read somewhere that it is a Scots Law thing. The charge only gets reported when the defendant attends court for the first time.

In reply to jkarran:
As a side issue, whilst the murder of a child is bound to be particularly heartbreaking what I get a bit "anti" about is this increasingly prevalent practice of the piling of masses of flowers and toys etc at or near the crime scene, in the same way that some people leave flowers at the scene of a road accident. To do so at these crime scenes is, I believe, quite mawkish especially if the victim is not known personally. OK I appreciate that some people might want to express their feelings but, in that case, surely it would be more beneficial to make a donation to an appropriate charity and state that it's in memory of whoever.

In reply to jkarran:



What I can't understand is how we put up with the immediate character assassination dragging through the mother's Facebook, her ' party animal' persona , dodgy associations etc.

I have just filled in a jury service sheet, it says I can get called up anytime in 2014, if I was called up in this case and I was asked had I read anything about thus person, I would have to say yes, and it was all negative, and it is just day one of her being charged.

It is hard to believe that there are many people who would not have heard/ read this.
How is she going to get a fair trial . ( guilty or not I don't know)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2541977/She-liked-going-clubs-getti...

In reply to Jim C:
We never really learn, do we. Our obsessive need to know the inner details of a case that (when you think about it) doesn't actually concern us directly, yet the media feels obliged to point a finger, judge, conduct its own investigations without any legal remit, shape peoples opinions, offer subtle influence to potential juries and potentially ruin the chance of a fair trial.

And when it's eventually established that the person they were so sure was guilty, whose lives they demolished and whos reputations they destroyed (thinking Chris Jeffries here) was actually innocent...well it's all a terrible mistake and won't happen again, will it.

The trawling of her facebook page was particularly low. I believe she's currently innocent.

In reply to Jim C:

I've not seen this (i.e. the character assassination that you mention) yet, but when the story of "missing 3-year-old Mikaeel" was all over the top headlines on Friday, with hundreds of volunteers assisting a search (aka "skiving off work") I did wonder why it was being given such high priority, as surely there are plenty of missing children that don't hit the headlines so much. OK he was three and it is a cold January, but you already got the sense that "they"(*) knew something sinister was afoot.
Then on Saturday I noticed that all the newspapers were running the same photograph of Rosdeep. A photo in which she looked haughty and smug and ready for a night on the tiles. Again, this was before the body was found (and I know the police took her in for questioning on Friday night but I think those papers would have gone to press possibly before knowing this). Anyway - it was the kind of photo that is specially selected to turn people against the person depicted. I am sure a more sympathetic picture could have been used had there not been some sort of agenda already going on.

That's just the media for you I suppose...


* "they" being some nonexistent shadowy forum of police and media collaborating....