AOG - ""LEAVING ASIDE THE MAIL'S USUAL SPIN" Blimey Andy if you left that aside you would be left with little to say."
I don't understand the point you are making AOG - you asked if anyone has any sympathy - and I answered.
"How dare the Daily Mail describe them as "GIRLS" although these other publications have also chose to call them such, they even dared to describe one as a nightclub hostess, dear, dear me what next."
Describing a woman as a nightclub hostess is confirming her employment, not quite the same as referring to a woman who in all aspects, cultural, social, sexual and legal is a woman with the right to vote, drink, marry, fight in a war, etc. That does not make her a 'girl' - but if the Mail chooses to describe her as such, they can 'dare' all they like.
"But if you find the fact that the Daily Mail chose to publish this story rather disturbing, please feel free to browse over these other publications."
Where did I intimate that i found the Mail's decicion to publish the story 'disturbing'? I merely took issue with their individual presentation of the facts, including the irrelevencies of photographs, and the cost of the parents' home.
You asked a question, I anwered it - I fail to see what your post means, please elucidate.