To think that Nightwatch should have specific "orders"

[Maryzsnewaccount]

And that if they are going to delete threads about child rapists, they should be ordered to deleted every news story, on every topic. Or none at all.

Because the alternative makes it look as though there are some Nightwatchers (who I admire as a group, in general) who are going beyond their brief.

FFS. If you search a little deeper this case has been pounced on by 'gender critical' Twitter communities and they've all collectively decided that because some things they've posted are no longer showing in Google and because mumsnet deleted some threads, the whole mainstream media is out to conceal the "truth".

I found it and googled his name. It came up with stories in the sun, mirror, independent, local papers. It doesn't look hidden to me.

Why bloody mention it then

Because if MN are removing all mention of the subject, mentioning the subject means that this post will also be removed.

Duh!!!

This is being hidden all over the internet; links/newspaper reports/twitter threads are being hidden as we speak. And mainstream news channels are pretending it didn't happen

When I Google his name there are multiple news reports both local and national. Nothing from the BBC that I can see but it's been covered plenty.

I am genuinely sorry, but if I tell you this thread will go too.

Google is your friend. As is Twitter. And FWR.

Nowhere has name/identity of child been "outed" (despite what some people may be implying).

Political parties should be held to account. But they aren't. Because, for some inexplicable reason, this case cannot be commented upon.

As I said, bizarre.

If there are reporting restrictions in place, then MN has littlechoice but to delete, even if other organisations are flouting them.

Except of course most aren't. People are baffled because there has been diddly squat on BBC, ITV, SKY, of any of the major newspapers.

When restrictions are lifted, then reporting and discussion will begin.

Going ahead of that risks prosecution. If MN is disinclined to take that risk, then it's better to discuss elsewhere until lifting.

So if other outlets and media are covering the case, it's hardly a cover up and being censored then, is it?

I think that what OP means is that her preferred angle on the story is being hidden.

Political parties should be held to account. But they aren't. Because, for some inexplicable reason, this case cannot be commented upon

They've made a statement you know? He had never held office or stood for office, anybody can join a party. Do you think he is the first person jailed for an horrific crime that has held membership of a political party?

If it's the one I've read then why can't it be commented on?

Is it because he 'dressed up' as a female?

Female child I should add

any of the major newspapers

What do you count as major? All three of the highest circulating have a story online.

argumentativefeminist, again you are so obvious

What's being hidden is the links to political parties and political ideology. The online stories are only half the story. The rest of it is (as is obvious from the bafflement on this thread) completely invisible.

Atleast give us a clue what to Google?

Hmm very peculiar, a lot more info on Twitter that has been completely missed out of the news stories. 🤔

Is this the story you are referring to?

www.google.co.uk/amp/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6091221/amp/The-torture-den-pervert-kept-girl-captive-acted-sadomasochistic-fantasies.html

You cannot, in this country, identify any victim of any sexual offence or else you are in contempt of court. That doesn’t just mean you can’t name them, it means you can’t publish any information that might mean that they are able to be identified by other people. So jigsaw identification (Poster one: ooh look at this newspaper article. Poster 2: And look at this one too...) is covered by that law. You can’t intimate, you can’t hint, you can’t speak about someone ‘anonymously’.

And thank God, or else no victims of any sexual offences would come forward.

Nobody is suppressing the story, but people are trying to protect the victim. And so they should. Just imagine how any potential victims of this man (and there may be more than one. You don’t have to be in court to be classified as a victim under the reporting restrictions. Some victims never get their court case) may be feeling right now knowing they’re being identified all over the internet.

Bbc sky news.

They haven’t covere it at all

The abuser who raped and tortured a 10 year old girl was a scout leader , worked in children’s gymnastics

No one was trying to identify the victim

Hmm very peculiar, a lot more info on Twitter that has been completely missed out of the news stories

Really? Is there info on there that isn't covered in the Green Party statement? If so I can't find it.

I'm not allowed to Booble. Apparently.

Try FWR, if you don't have it hidden. MN likes to hide those pesky annoying feminists away.

Anyway, I'm off to bed.

I'm hopeful that when I get up in the morning, MNHQ will decide that the rape and torture of a ten year old child is worth talking about. And that any relations of the rapist, who probably (most likely) knew about the accusations should be asked serious questions about the fact that they have spent most of the last three years trying to lower safeguarding standards for girls.

Of course, I may well be banned by tomorrow. In which case, nice knowing (most of) you

Mary 👏👏👏👏👏👏👏

Just for the record Night watch don't actually delete anything. All we do is temporarily hide a thread until MNHQ are back in duty. Then they decide whether to delete it or reinstate it. The rules about what we should & shouldn't hide are quite specific

Out of interest, what are you instructed to hide? I'd assume obvious troll threads but anything else?

ANightWatcher.

I have huge admiration for all of you. I apologise unreservedly for implicating you; it's a hq'er who has been hiding/deleting threads tonight.