so he murders 2 women , and its ALL his ex's fault for cheating on him? really?

[fromparistoberlin73]

fxxk of daily telepgraph- this has made my blood boil. why fucking name her, her mother??

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/hongkong/11204666/Hong-Kong-murders-British-suspect-devastated-by-fiancees-betrayal.html

its HIS fault

ergh so angry

Of course all evil that men do is all down to women. If they are young its usually his mothers fault she must have raised him badly, if he's married the wife must have mistreated him, if he kicks his kids its all his ex-wife's fault she broke up the family.
it makes my blood boil.

Kills his kids

Yes that boiled my piss. Nearly everyone in the world has been broken up with and had their heart broken. We don't all go off killing people. Imagine if all the women on Mumsnet who have been betrayed by their husbands went off and killed sex workers.....

Bet the Daily Mail etc wouldn't think that was the husband's fault.

I can see nowhere in that article that they are blaming the ex girlfriend or the mother - they are merely giving context.

I can't see where they're using his gf cheating as a defence - a colleague has spoken about him that is all.

But the 'context' has got absolutely bugger all to do with it Enb76. It says they hadn't seen each other since the break up and he'd had other girlfriends since. Ridiculous article. Poor girl having her name in the paper because of this.

Yes, it certainly doesn't say that there is any evidence that the ex girlfriend is to blame for him going on a mad killing spree.

However, just the publication of the article, with that level of detail, certainly implies that he ended up hating women or something after he was treated badly by one.

It's a totally irrelevant article and they have no right to dig all this up about her - she is nothing to do with that murder, particularly as it says they hadn't seen in each other since they broke up and he had had other girlfriends since.

I agree, it is pretty disgraceful to name her and her mother. They broke up years ago it seems. But you know.... women are always responsible for how men behave.

First rule of journalism - quoting unnamed sources mean you have made it up.
This is all total speculation, probably on the part of the reporter.
This whole case has brought out the worst of the press, tracking down the families of the victims to ambush them with the news and get outraged soundbites from them, digging up anyone with a remote or tenuous connection to the suspect, and filling in the gaps with made up theories from made up sources.

I think that is a disgraceful article.

It's all based on 'sources'.

So some anonymous person has told a reporter about an acrimonious break up, and then someone has dug into that, and been stonewalled. But they printed it anyway even though there is no reason whatsoever to link it to the murders at this stage.

(And even if at some later point, after psych reports, it is found it was somehow a formative event, it still not remotely the fault of any person whose path crossed his in the past. It's solely him. Nothing, apart from specific danger, ever justifies homicide).

That's shocking - I hope she makes a formal complaint about it.

Yup I saw this in the DM a couple of days ago and raged.
The glee with which our media have pounced on this "angle" is truly nauseating and blaming women for murderous men is just despicable.

I'm glad you've posted this - it's been annoying me a lot.

You know what. If she'd stayed with him and ended up in an abusive relationship or even dead, then people would be saying "But why did she stay with him??"

So, if she leaves, it's her fault that he goes on to kill two other women. If she'd stayed, she'd only have had herself to blame if he'd killed her instead.

But not his fault. In either scenario.

YABU, because that's not what the article says.

Read it again coolly.

But not his fault. In either scenario.

^^ is what is in HIS head. No amount of ranting on MN will change how he thinks will it?

We're not trying to change what's in his head. We're complaining about the reporting of the case. Which is something we can change if it causes people to stop and think about what is being written and why.

The nationality of his former girlfriend's mother and the approximate location of her house is of absolutely no relevance whatsoever to the fact that he appears to have committed two horrifying murders. And yet the papers are reporting it. Why are they doing that? Is it because they think that they ARE relevant? Because the circumstances surrounding the ending of the relationship might somehow explain what happened?

Even if you read it "coolly" there's no logic to the forensic analysis of this girl and her background - unless you think that she had something to do with the murder. Which you have to conclude is exactly what the Telegraph DOES think.

Whilst I think it's disgraceful they drag the innocent ex-fiance and her mother into it, I really don't get the feel that they're blaming them for the murders...

It's quite clearly unfair on the women named in the article that their private life is being dug into and displayed in this way. It's not in the public interest, it's just to feed prurient curiosity.

I have no doubt that none of the 'facts' about these women are correct. They never are.

I imagine that chinese law will be very tough on someone who murders two women in cold blood. I suppose that the break up is only relevent if he is attempting to plead insanity. Even if its abolute bollox its fair to ask a murder suspect their reasons for possible killings. I suspect though in China it will make little difference to sentencing. People have been executed in China for far less.

There is no way that former girlfriend is responsible for the murders by her spurned lover.

Rest in peace Jesse Lorena, 32, and Sumarti Ningshi, 25.

it's fair to ask a murder suspect their reasons for possible killings - absolutely it is.

It's not fair to speculate on their reasons based on a patchy understanding of their personal history and then use that as an excuse to invade the privacy of people who have nothing whatsoever to do with it.

It's the sexist assumption that men only do bad things when women make them that even makes the printing of this woman's personal details even remotely acceptable.