Page 2 | They shouldn't be sharing the name of the Plymouth shooter

OverTheRubicon · 2021-08-14T20:41:46+00:00

In most terrorist incidents - and in shooting incidents in the US - the editorial policy has recently been to minimise press coverage of the aggressor, to allow for some background of why they did this and how they accessed weapons, but focus the attention on the grief and loss of the victims and not inspire further violence or adulation of killers. Yet you can hardly move for coverage of the Plymouth shooter - he's the focus of most of the press and he's already being lauded on incel sites. He's the picture you see on every article, sometimes his mother, not other victims and grief stricken families even when they're names. Aibu that we should be vastly downplaying him as the centre of this attention?

Member869894 · 14/08/2021 23:41

Bride can you explain why you think hes a monster and find comments saying that mental illness cause his actions offensive ? I'm genuinely interested. Surely if he was mentally he wasnt responsible for his actions?

Mummyoflittledragon · 14/08/2021 23:42

@Badfootkk

I think it is important. He is not a monster.. His family tried to get him help. They were not heard. He was unwell ,unheard and cast aside. He was a person , that didn't ' fit in ' with an illness He did an awful awful action. I feel destroyed for those , but he was not well.

He was an incel and a terrorist. He hated women. We shouldn’t be suggesting otherwise or offering to bathe him in mermaid tears.

bellyy · 14/08/2021 23:44

We are in the UK.

BringBackThinEyebrows · 14/08/2021 23:50

@AfternoonToffee

reflect as to how society has caused / allowed / enabled this to happen

In what way is 'society' to blame? Of course I don't think he should have had access to a weapon, but I assumed you meant there are other solutions.

NeverDropYourMooncup · 14/08/2021 23:51

The internet being what it is, not giving his name could have resulted in incels mythologising him, probably saying he escaped and there was a cover up like sort of demented Scarlet Pimpernel.

And, naturally, the usual suspects were all over SM declaring that it had to be a Muslim, just as they always do before a photo and name are released to show it was a white English/American/whatever. Including a video showing a body which just so happened to have 'Tommy Robinson TV' tagged over the image on many shares. Another example of that is when the child was thrown off the 10th floor of the Tate Modern, SM was awash with them saying there wasn't a name or photo released because it was obviously somebody brown.

There has to be a balance between not giving a perpetrator notoriety or a starring role and making sure that there isn't an opportunity for inadequates and attention seekers to create a different version of events to suit their narratives.

AfternoonToffee · 15/08/2021 00:03

He was an incel and a terrorist. He hated women. We shouldn’t be suggesting otherwise or offering to bathe him in mermaid tears.

One can think you are absolutely correct on the first three things, but also think that he is not a monster.

It is a nature: nurture thing to me. Saying he is a monster (imo) is saying that this is just who he is and that nothing can be done (i.e born evil), rather than a multitude of internal and external factors got him to this point.

Not wanting to call him a monster, doesn't mean I want to bathe him in mermaid tears, but I can be sad, angry, frustrated that whatever has happened, or not, got him to the point that he did this. A point he should never have got to.

AfternoonToffee · 15/08/2021 00:12

[quote BringBackThinEyebrows]@AfternoonToffee

reflect as to how society has caused / allowed / enabled this to happen

In what way is 'society' to blame? Of course I don't think he should have had access to a weapon, but I assumed you meant there are other solutions.[/quote]
Society as a whole, starting from the day children are born - better support, better access to services, offering children and families opportunities, not plunging families into an ever increasing spiral of debt, tackling crimes, gang culture. The list goes on.

This costs money though, and willingness to change and government policy that is committed to it. This will never happen though and instead nothing will happen, and Boris Johnson will continue to offer hypocritical platitudes.

Throckmorton · 15/08/2021 00:14

It's possible to be mentally unwell and also be a total bastard. Saying mental illness caused this misses the fact that the vast majority of mentally ill people are not murdering bastards. This event was caused by the combination of mental illness PLUS him being a bastard. And I agree about his name and face. I don't think we should hide them, but they should not be the focus. The focus should be the innocent victims. In the same way that when some fucker annihilates his family, we should focus on the family not on the murderer.

LadyCatStark · 15/08/2021 00:27

He was a monster and I for one don’t want to see his disgusting face. Sky News was disgraceful to have shared some of the videos that he put on YouTube, that’s exactly what he would have wanted.

AllTheSingleLadiess · 15/08/2021 00:43

The terrorist had such a wide digital footprint that it was inevitable that his YouTube videos etc would become public.

We live in an era of conspiracy theories. Avoiding discussion of this monster will feed the conspiracy theorists. Is he being protected because he's been framed? Is he being protected because he's white? Etc

Of course you can be mentally ill and a monster. I'm not saying that he was a monster at birth but I feel for his family who tried to get help because I know it's an impossible task.

Snugglybuggly · 15/08/2021 00:47

@Badfootkk

I think it is important. He is not a monster.. His family tried to get him help. They were not heard. He was unwell ,unheard and cast aside. He was a person , that didn't ' fit in ' with an illness He did an awful awful action. I feel destroyed for those , but he was not well.

Sorry but he killed his own mother and a 3 year old amongst others I call that a monster

Henrytheehoover · 15/08/2021 00:52

He killed himself, the press don't need to worry about being sued for saying he killed these people.

For all the press likes to say it doesn't name perpetrators to honour the victims, you will probably find that they only avoid naming the perpetrators until they are convicted in a court of law, so they cannot be sued for stating they are guilty before they were convicted.

And yes, I am very cynical.

Clarissa111 · 15/08/2021 02:14

@Badfootkk

I think it is important. He is not a monster.. His family tried to get him help. They were not heard. He was unwell ,unheard and cast aside. He was a person , that didn't ' fit in ' with an illness He did an awful awful action. I feel destroyed for those , but he was not well.

Sorry but no. He was a vile man. Most mental health sufferers are only a danger to themselves. We cant keep making this excuse.

FrangipaniDeLaSqueegeeMop · 15/08/2021 02:19

@Badfootkk

I think it is important. He is not a monster.. His family tried to get him help. They were not heard. He was unwell ,unheard and cast aside. He was a person , that didn't ' fit in ' with an illness He did an awful awful action. I feel destroyed for those , but he was not well.

What a load of minimising nonsense.

He murdered a 3yo pushing a dolls pram in broad daylight then murdered her father. I wonder if their mother/wife sees him as a monster or a victim of society. The victim of society bollocks is exactly what incels use to justify violence

Fluffmonkey82 · 15/08/2021 02:56

@Bunnycat101

He was a monster. From the accounts I’ve read (and wished I hadn’t) the way he killed the little girl in cold blood makes him an absolute monster. I have relatives with severe mental health issues who have been sectioned frequently. They were very sick but would have never hurt a child. Yes let’s find out what contributed to this but I firmly believe he was evil - granted he may have been mentally ill as well but I wish the press would stop reporting on him and his vile face.

Yip totally agree. Anyone who can kill an innocent little girl is a monster in my book, no excuses.

Spikeyball · 15/08/2021 06:56

Saying it was because he was evil or a monster won't stop this happening again. The only way to do that is look at what led up to it and what others could have done differently.

Bunnycat101 · 15/08/2021 06:58

And I would say you can look at societal factors - of course they contribute but if you take it to its full degree no-one has any self-determination.

On the mental health side, if it became apparent that he had a psychotic episode and though he was in a zombie film or something then at that point, I could accept diminished responsibility. It just sounds like he got angry and decided to shoot everyone he saw. That to me is a monster. He shot the dad from 15ft away and while he was dying he cradled his little girl to try and protect her. The bastard then came up to them and shot them at close range. For me that tells you all you need to know about his character mental health or not.

Notsurenow43 · 15/08/2021 07:05

This scares me. Mental health services is in crisis. I have a family member who, during his last episode, tried to kill his own mother. It took four police officers to detain him - only there by sheer luck that she managed to grab a phone for help. I can see him doing this. It's terrifying.

MoggyP · 15/08/2021 07:07

He's a murderer.

Murderers are always named - part of normal British criminal justice procedures.

I'm not part of the rush to give this murder extra labels such as terrorism. And generally support the moves to ensure that criminals are called criminals, even when actions are terror related (there was a distinct shift towards this line a while back)

AtticusHoysAnus · 15/08/2021 07:09

No because it makes it very difficult for the court case with regards to jurors.

Yes people want to know all about who he is and why it happened but not at the cost of his trial.

AtticusHoysAnus · 15/08/2021 07:12

I said no for some reason?

You're thought's I think are correct but it's more because a fair trial becomes difficult the more the incident is reported.

youshallnotpass9 · 15/08/2021 07:21

@AtticusHoysAnus

No because it makes it very difficult for the court case with regards to jurors.

Yes people want to know all about who he is and why it happened but not at the cost of his trial.

he is dead there is no trial

TheAverageUser · 15/08/2021 07:23

Calling him a monster let's us distance ourselves from him. He did these things because 'he's a monster' means it can't happen to us and it's not our fault because he was born bad, is implicit.

Taking into account mental health, his life experiences etc...let's us really think about why this happened and potentially catching it next time before it happens, or not, but at least we can try to understand what happened.

Coverage wise you could be right but I'd imagine were, as usual, seeing what sells. A 'monster' who killed a bunch of people sells papers rather than seeing the victims. I'd imagine fear and anger trump sadness in terms of what emotions the media want us to have.

anon12345678901 · 15/08/2021 07:25

He was a monster. He viewed women as lesser beings. He blamed others for the fact he hadn't lost his virginity because he couldn't handle the fact it's him who was the problem. He was a misogynistic cunt.

Sobeyondthehills · 15/08/2021 07:25

The guy was a monster, he decided to do one of two things

Kill as many people as possible and then kill himself to not face justice
Commit suicide and by doing that take as many people out as possible.

Either way makes him a monster.

However since you have said we should be naming the victims
Maxine Chapman
Sophie Martyn
Lee Martyn
Stephen Washington
Kate Shepherd

these are the names we should be remembering before that bastard