Reggie Perrin: What would Miss Jones say?

[sandyRoe]

http://www.thesun.co....ed-Reggie-Perrin.html


.

[humbersloop]

dave, I entirely agree with your point about the rock-bottom reporting standards of some papers.

What concerns me elsewhere is that issues that were being reported and investigated as far back as the mid-nineties still appear to be being systematically supressed while stuff like this goes unchecked.

[sunny-dave]

Exactly so sloopy - I feel that the current tide of 'me-too' sensationalism is being used as a convenient smoke-screen to bury any investigation/reporting of all sorts of much more serious abuse (both sexual and financial) that there is proper evidence of ... I wonder why that could be?

[ummmm]

Yes. The person you mention is a current investigation.

[sunny-dave]

No dotty - and it's utterly unsatisfactory that (with no conviction or even concrete evidence) the name of a 'conveniently dead' public figure is being blackened in the cause of gutter journalism.

[dotty.]

I see no ships........

[sunny-dave]

Legally ummm is correct - but morally both of the discussions (and assumptions of guilt therein) are wrong.

[humbersloop]

too right dave x

so that's two of us swivel-eyed conspiracy theorists on here then...

[gness]

If a deceased family member was accused, wrongly, of sexual abuse I can only imagine what it would do to my family. I hope I never have to face that.

We haven't 'suddenly' become a society which frowns on sexual abuse. However, we have only recently become a society where the victim will be believed or at least taken seriously until proof one way or the other is shown.
Knowing you won't be believed is a great silencer, especially if the abuser is in a powerful position. Telling can take many years and shouldn't make us any less inclined to believe the accuser on the grounds of time passed alone.
There will, of course, be false claims by greedy attention seekers but not many I think. It's not an easy thing for a normal, honest person to do. The investigators will, I hope, see through those who are on the make.

[humbersloop]

I understand there may still be legal implications for reporting leftover from the Waterhouse <cough> Inquiry

it stinks

[sunny-dave]

It's the rush to "tabloid justice" which is making me very unhappy, gness.

I accept all your concerns and points wholeheartedly - but perhaps some more, quiet fact checking and legal investigation should be compulsory before someone's family has to face this sort of posthumous accusation.

[gness]

I realise that Dave, and it makes me very angry too, not only because of what this cheap, immoral journalism is doing to families but because it must damage the freedom of speech which I believe is being abused now. As you say, quiet fact checking and legal investigation should be carried out. And it shouldn't have to be compulsory.....honourable would be good. :-) Then we would have a press to be proud of.

[humbersloop]

whatever their motivation, there are some damaged people around who, I think, are being quite cynically exploited by some of the press. If a reasonably substantiated allegation of a vicious assault came to your attention, would you
a) take to the police or
b) splash it all over the news

o hang on, the dead can't be libelled, can they?

[DTCwordfan]

I mentioned in an earlier thread that dead or live, this is such a difficult one, the rights of the individual (protected by libel) versus the rights of the free press. The first issue in the Newsnight case is that, despite their investigative work, the Beeb mgt failed to back their journos - the chickens - and ended up with a damning but not satisfactory statement...... then this. To me, what is needed is that if the Press uncover something that deserves further police enquiry, the dossier should go to them first, the organ retaining the scoop rights to publishing - and not after. This would mean that the evidence would have to be pretty well damn watertight before publication and in the Rossiter story here give a better degree of flushing it out whether there was truth or were there scurrilous claims going on.

[netibiza]

Oh yes ummmm is right, it was ignored because the stars were big stars. As I have mentioned before I was abused by my boss when I was 18 and even though I reported it I was the one who lost my job!!! The hoi poloi had hardly any rights in those days!

[jno]

might be true, let's wait and see. (With the proviso that even if it can't be proved it might still be true.)