Evidence of homophobic attack...?

[joko]

http://www.telegraph....-and-set-on-fire.html


obviously this is tragic and horrific thing to happen but why are they going on about him being gay and it being a homophobic attack...and using it as the headlines!?
i know they acknowledge that they dont actually know yet, in the text of the article, but why title it that way?
this info has NOT emerged at all...its just a thought...

surely they know it will just provoke irrational hysteria from the gay community... (i myself was alerted to this story by about 4-5 of my gay pals freaking out on facebook about it...)

it appears there is no evidence whatsoever to support this claim, its just a suspicion, so why are they trying to stir up something that might be irrelevant?

to address any crime with a 'could be because of' is lazy journalism...it could be due to any number reasons - he was abusive to them, some jealous ex, because he is white, because he was just there at the time...who knows?

has anyone read any proper evidence of this?

thanks

[jno]

all they're doing is not ruling it out; but they're at the stage of not ruling anything out, so that's pretty meaningless. I think the DTel has gone over the top on this

[jackthehat]

As has the Daily Mail........same slant on the story.

[andy-hughes]

An easy sensationalist hook - sloppy journalism all round.

[Ankou]

"why are they going on about him being gay and it being a homophobic attack"

i'm not sure they are, just a sentence or two.

but yes, sloppy journalism based on one single fact.

[joko]

It is also the headline... and this isnt the only paper that has used it...

[joko]

majority of people who read it will view it as an attack on him for being gay ... most wont read between the lines...

[anotheoldgit]

The same from no other than The Guardian.

/// Police have launched a murder investigation and are looking into all aspects of his life amid reports he may have been targeted because of his sexuality. ///

/// Officers are not ruling out the possibility that the attack was motivated by homophobia. ///

[sp1814]

I noticed this story a couple of days ago, but have to say, at this time, the papers are stating that this COULD be the cause of his murder.

Perhaps it isn't lazy journalism - if you exclude the less likely causes...

For instances, I find it incredibly unlikely that a group would murder and set light to someone if they'd verbally abused them.

The jealous ex angle might work - but the time of the assault seems 'wrong'. He was killed after being out with friends in the early hours.

Also - a race attack? On a white man in Strathclyde. Not sure about that one.

The thing is - there's been a rise in the number of homophobic attacks over the past few years, and the fact that this was a lone gay male who was (let's be blunt) attacked in the most debased way possible - that one of the leading causes may be his sexuality.

We shouldn't jump to conclusions, but I'd suggest that if it turns out that he WAS targeted and murdered simply because he was gay, then this should be treated as a hate crime and if convicted, the perpetrators should recieve the very stiffest of sentences.

[jake-the-peg]

Ohh AOG - naughty naughty

Been a bit selective in your quotes from the Guardian.

Shall we pick some slightly different ones?

"amid speculation in the local community that he may have been the victim of a homophobic attack."


"The local MSP, Adam Ingram, said Walker was a well-known and well-liked young man"

Ingam added: "Obviously there has been speculation that there was a homophobic element to this but the police certainly at this stage are not suggesting that that is the case."

So the Guardian are actually attributing the source of the speculation as people they've talked to locally and are also being responsible by quoting the local MSP playing it down.




Nice try though

[pa___ul3]

the perpertrators should be given the stiffest of sentences just for the horrifically brutal nature of the attack! It's scary that there's people who'd do that to someone!
The quotes AOG's posted are more reserved and factual, it is an avenue that should be investigated and, maybe, should be publicised so as to warn others in the vicinity of the threat, but to sensationalise it for a headline is unhelpful.

[jake-the-peg]

True, however if there is a real possibility that this was the result of a Homophobic gang in the area it would be irresponsible not to make that possibility clear so that people are aware if there is a risk

[DTCwordfan]

There's enough conditional verbs in the text and the articels I have seen have only suggested it as a possibility, not the definitive case and that police investigations are continuing.

I really don't see the purpose of this thread except to shyte-stir.

[ummmm]

What DT? How is joko shyte stirring by asking a question on a question and answer site?

[DTCwordfan]

I am still clueless to the point of the question, not the posing of the question (silly comment that IMV) especially if you read through the articles.

The articles are factual and there are enough "conditionals" in there to leave the case open to "cause"- though I havent read all the press such as the Sun's view.....

And yes, the comment about warning communties to be on the look out is a good one

[sp1814]

DTcrosswordfan

To be fair to joko - when you read the article, the fact that the chap is gay is in the headline, and the first line says he 'could have been the victim of a homophobic attack'.

A casual reader may take this as being key to the murder investigation. Not everyone reads full stories in the paper, and some people don't register conditional clauses or even quotes (eg. Reverend's wife 'stole collection to feed drugs habit').

[DTCwordfan]

I'll concede on that one, sp - it's getting to be sorry state if folk only read the headlines, knowing that the Press deliberately write them for sensationalism and "advertising" - and then take them as "gospel."

[anotheoldgit]

There seems to many who are quite prepared to speculate that this could be a homophobic attack, carried out by a straight person on an homosexual.

But strangely no one has speculated that it could have been another homosexual person who attacked and killed this gay man.

Why does it have to be a homophobic attack? When there have been many gay on gay jealously killings.

[jackthehat]

All we know for certain is that 'man suffers dreadful death'.

The fact that the man is a gay man has certainly stirred some quarters and allowed for some pretty sloppy and stereotypical reporting.

I suppose we'll have to wait for the full details.........and any subsequent threads crowing that this was NOT a homophobic attack (typical of those drama-queens, eh?) but simply a 'mundane' murder of one man by another/s.

[anotheoldgit]

jake-the-peg

/// Ohh AOG - naughty naughty ///

/// Been a bit selective in your quotes from the Guardian. ///

Why have I been selective in my quotes from the Guardian?

Were these quotes any different from those of the Mail and Telegraph's?

But then it is only the 'Right Wing Press' that can be criticised isn't it?

Seems a little hypocritical to me, but then that is the 'Left's' stock in trade.

[pa___ul3]

AOG, I think the jist of this thread is that it is wrong to assume that it was a homophobic attack just because the victim was gay when it could so easily have been any number of reasons. It doesn't have to be anything to do with his sexuality.