This is a Premium feature
To use this feature subscribe to Mumsnet Premium - get first access to new features see fewer ads, and support Mumsnet.Start using Mumsnet Premium
Is the reason what I think it is?(69 Posts)
For there not being the outrage there was when Rachel Nickell was murdered.
You're going to have to be a bit more specific?
Are you alluding to one of them being a black woman?
That we didn't have as much media and social media back in the 90s! It's much easier to voice our opinions and share our views now.
The circumstances are a bit different. Rachel Nickell wasn't murdered during a global pandemic, and the fact that her murder was witnessed by her toddler, compounded the horror of it.
The current case is horrific. I imagine the fact that there is so much other shit going on right now means that it isn't garnering the same headlines it might in 'peace times'.
I remember a lot of outrage! 30 years later people still know her name, so it was hardly overlooked.
Oh, wait, you're arguing there isn't as much outrage for this case? Yes, maybe. Though the previous points re other major news stories are also relevant.
I don’t think the circumstances are the same as Rachel Nickell. It’s a shocking crime tho
Rachels murderer also murdered someone else, she is almost never mentioned, but when she was murdered it was a huge story here in her hometown but back then there was only newspapers, where the story was a day or 2 old or tv news which was slightly ahead of the newspapers.
Yes its quite awful and doesn't seem to have as high a profile as you'd expect - there is likely to be some racism as generally murders or missing cases of black people don't seem to get as much attention from the media. However, I think the Rachel Nickell case, though of an archetypal pretty young blond women, also had the added heartbreak of a small child being with her when she was killed. But your point remains valid I think.
I think you might be right, OP. It's pretty disgusting really. They were both black (sisters). Their mother is high up in the Church of England, I believe. Poor woman.
Unless there is some other factor I'm unaware of, I also can't see why this isn't a bigger news story.
Rachels murderer also murdered someone else, she is almost never mentioned,
It was another mother and child he also murdered, in their own home. You're right though, I had never heard of that case until the murder trial for Rachel Nickel.
There's also the factor that the police tried to patsy a totally innocent man for RN's murder that means the case generated even more headlines.
I have spent days trying (and failing) not to think about this case. It's ... inconceivable. Just don't know what to think.
But yes, there's an obvious reason why the media response is so subdued.
Rachels murderer also murdered someone else, she is almost never mentioned
Mentioned even less is the fact the police wasted a lot of time and effort trying to frame an innocent man while the guilty went on to kill again. If anyone needs a single reason (rather than the many) to keep capital punishment in the history books, that is it.
I think the Nickell case was driven by the terrible fact her child was there. Much like the Michael Stone case a few years after.
I also think we're (sadly) desensitised to these killings nowadays. Until lockdown, barely a day went by without a fatal stabbing on the news (on Radio London at least). Remember when Stephen Lawrence and subsequently Damilola Taylor were the only names you heard in this context?
Because these are just women and everyone is busy thinking about a man who has been killed?
In any case the media are not there to inform people, bring people to justice or affect social change. They are entertainment and act accordingly. The Nickell case included a child and there was less going on then so it warranted a headline.
Are black people often treated as worth less? Yes they are, but not every decision everywhere is based on that.
"I remember a lot of outrage! 30 years later people still know her name, so it was hardly overlooked."
I think what the OP is saying is that there was more publicity when Rachel Nickell was murdered. She is trying, without saying so, to infer that people aren't as outraged about the two murdered sisters because they aren't white.
OP, I don't believe you are correct in your assumption. I think it is down to. a combination of:
1) Rachel Nickell being murdered in front of her child which was horrific and unusual.
2) We have become accustomed to hearing of murders because of the internet, whereas we heard less about them in 1992.
3) We are experiencing a health pandemic and so many people's focus is on their livelihood, their children, vulnerable parents etc. Some have so many problems already and haven't the mental energy for anything else.
4) The news programmes have so much to cover with the pandemic and Black Lives Matters protests that they literally don't have time to give it more coverage. If it wasn't for everything happening at once, it would be plastered all over the news.
Ah ok, so the op thinks the sisters murdered aren't getting enough exposure because of their race?
Then I have to agree that, sadly, murder is now just normal and not that shocking and the story is over shadowed but current events.
We could have done with more info in the first post!
You can't compare the two.
Life today is completely different to then, before the internet, Netflix etc. You're choosing to ignore that fact. You're choosing to ignore that she was killed in broad daylight in front of her child. You're choosing to ignore that the only similarity is that both murders happened on a patch of green
Lots of murders go under the radar. I’ve worked in the CJS and seen some shocking cases that never made the news, of all races. There are many factors into why some murders are more publicised than others. Tanesha Melbourne’s murder was very big news for example. We can look for race issues in everything. Some points are valid, but some are just speculation.
I agree OP. I was horrified that the police took 4 or 5 days before they announced that these poor women had been stabbed? It's an awful crime and I couldn't understand why it took so long before this was announced. Apparently the police were were so laid back about it that all the rubbish bins had been emptied and they're now having to search through a local tip looking for evidence that may have been thrown away.
What were the police thinking? How can you not notice that two dead women had been stabbed and therefore murdered?
I did think it's helpful to compare to Rachel's case for a number of reasons. However this is a shocking crime, murder by a stranger is rare particularly of 2 people in this manner so I'm surprised it hasn't had more press, it absolutely should.
"It's an awful crime and I couldn't understand why it took so long before this was announced"
Why do the police need to "announce" anything? You don't have an inherent right to instantly know all information. Maybe read up a bit on how the CJS works in this country
Join the discussion
Registering is free, quick, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Get started »
Please login first.