Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

'Nicola Bulley's reputation 'destroyed' by police'

922 replies

MyrtIe · 16/02/2023 10:37

Article here

The points made about victim blaming and the police disclosing this information to cover themselves are spot on imo.

The usual gutter press are having a field day with this today.

What exactly was the point of it? What's it achieved, apart from compounding the heartache of her loved ones?

YABU - the police were right to divulge this sensitive information as it was relevant to the investigation

YANBU - there was absolutely no need to do so

OP posts:
Spiderboy · 21/02/2023 13:10

The details released were relevant to the case but absolutely not relevant to the public. The police released those details to conserve their own image only and it is disgusting

YetMoreNewBeginnings · 21/02/2023 13:13

Spiderboy · 21/02/2023 13:10

The details released were relevant to the case but absolutely not relevant to the public. The police released those details to conserve their own image only and it is disgusting

They released them because someone scummy was trying to sell them to the media.

Newnamenewme23 · 21/02/2023 13:14

Spiderboy · 21/02/2023 13:10

The details released were relevant to the case but absolutely not relevant to the public. The police released those details to conserve their own image only and it is disgusting

Nope. Read the family’s own words. They agreed with the police to release it so they could put it across how they wanted before some scum could sell it to the daily mail or the sun.

limitedperiodonly · 21/02/2023 15:32

The idea that a newspaper would have paid good money for a story that a 45-year-old woman was going through the menopause and liked a drink is laughable. That's me and a large part of Mumsnet.

Lancashire police put the details out because they had lost control of the direction of the story. I don't blame them for their frustration. It must be very difficult to juggle all the aspects of this kind of investigation.

But their decision was both misguided and unforgiveable. Their duty of care should have always been to Nicola Bulley and then towards her family. It should not have been about their management of their own reputation and trying to grab back the narrative.

In what way did it help the search for Nicola? I don't believe her family had any meaningful say in the official release of the information. Like any of us in this terrible situation they would have been guided by the experts - Lancashire police.

What difference did it make if the information was revealed by The Sun, The Daily Mail or Lancashire Police? Because of the police's action it was out there when it didn't have to be. It might never have been published or at the most just hinted at.

Releasing information in order to thwart publication by a newspaper or other media outlet is called a spoiler in the trade. How do people feel that the police are involved in games that newspapers and publicists play with each other?

Actually, it's worse that it was the police. If it was just in The Sun or The Daily Mail some people would have said it might not be true - certainly plenty of people on here would have said that because they have no regard for those newspapers. But if it's a police statement it's pretty much beyond dispute isn't it?

OneTC · 21/02/2023 15:53

The idea that a newspaper would have paid good money for a story that a 45-year-old woman was going through the menopause and liked a drink is laughable.

Yeah there was virtually no public interest in this whatsoever Confused

YetMoreNewBeginnings · 21/02/2023 15:54

How do people feel that the police are involved in games that newspapers and publicists play with each other?

The police releasing information on behalf of a family because they don’t want someone to benefit from their situation is absolutely fine with me.

The scumbag in this story is the family friend who felt they had the right to do that.

Felix125 · 21/02/2023 16:00

There were 3 possible outcomes here:
1 - 3rd party involvement, kidnap, murder
2 - Suicide
3 - She has got to the point where she feels her family are better off without her and wants to disappear and not be found again

Everyone, including the police, were hoping that is 3. Then they can still find her alive and get her the support she needs and bring her back home.

They released the information to help find her

If she didn't want to be found - she could have been anywhere in the country - very easy for a person to travel without having to buy tickets - hop on and off trains, hitch on the back of trucks etc etc. And she will changed her appearance so she is not easily recognised anymore and she certainly wont be using her real name.

When we were told she has alcohol issues - it could be that a shop owner in say Aberdeen has had a female come and go from his shop buying alcohol over recent days with loose change and shop owner has not really had a good look at her. But now they are aware she has alcohol issues - they will give her a good look next time or talk to her. Or support services she might be accessing under a pseudonym, drop in centres etc

She also has to eat - so she may have been accessing homeless feeding stations to get food, or finding food in restaurant bins etc etc. and she will be keeping her head down doing this to keep a low profile - the proprietors might give her a second look next time she attends. and talk to her, look at her etc phone the police if they think it might be her.

The police will have had this information from the start - but probably did not want to release it in the hope that she would have been found sooner. It got to the stage now where it needed to be released to widen the public's gaze for her.
Ask yourself - how many homeless people have you seen in your area recently huddled in a shop door way. Have you gone over and given them a good look over to make sure its not a local missing person? If you haven't done this, then most other people won't have done it either.

Pirateships · 21/02/2023 16:00

limitedperiodonly · 21/02/2023 15:32

The idea that a newspaper would have paid good money for a story that a 45-year-old woman was going through the menopause and liked a drink is laughable. That's me and a large part of Mumsnet.

Lancashire police put the details out because they had lost control of the direction of the story. I don't blame them for their frustration. It must be very difficult to juggle all the aspects of this kind of investigation.

But their decision was both misguided and unforgiveable. Their duty of care should have always been to Nicola Bulley and then towards her family. It should not have been about their management of their own reputation and trying to grab back the narrative.

In what way did it help the search for Nicola? I don't believe her family had any meaningful say in the official release of the information. Like any of us in this terrible situation they would have been guided by the experts - Lancashire police.

What difference did it make if the information was revealed by The Sun, The Daily Mail or Lancashire Police? Because of the police's action it was out there when it didn't have to be. It might never have been published or at the most just hinted at.

Releasing information in order to thwart publication by a newspaper or other media outlet is called a spoiler in the trade. How do people feel that the police are involved in games that newspapers and publicists play with each other?

Actually, it's worse that it was the police. If it was just in The Sun or The Daily Mail some people would have said it might not be true - certainly plenty of people on here would have said that because they have no regard for those newspapers. But if it's a police statement it's pretty much beyond dispute isn't it?

Your faux naievity is to be commended, but as you'll know the reality is this dominated the papers, they were printing all sorts of non stories just because they knew people were interested in this case- of course they would have been interested! Doesn't even have to be offering megabucks for someone to be willing to sell.

The police didn't lose control, the conclusion was exactly what they anticipated all along. The family requested they release it so there was control over the narrative, they didn't have many reporters contacting them to see if it was true or people embellishing the truth for their own weird reasons.

SleeplessInEngland · 21/02/2023 16:03

The idea that a newspaper would have paid good money for a story that a 45-year-old woman was going through the menopause and liked a drink is laughable. That's me and a large part of Mumsnet.

The papers wouldn't have eaten up those details on this specific woman? Are you insane?

limitedperiodonly · 21/02/2023 16:32

There has been a lot of interest in this story as this thread shows. But the information that a 45-year-old woman was going through the menopause and may have had an alcohol problem was not a particularly interesting aspect of it and would not have caused any excitement in newsrooms on the face of it.

Someone might have told a media outlet that piece of gossip about Nicola Bulley or it might have been picked up from social media. But if a newspaper had that information and more importantly, wanted to print it, they would do it only after consultation with their lawyers that it was legally safe to do so. The menopause thing is not libellous but saying someone has a drink problem, particularly a mother of young children and particularly if she drives those children to school is. Therefore it would not be worth it unless there was something more to it like a recent conviction for an alcohol-related offence which would be a matter of public record.

Someone saying they thought Nicola had had a few at the school gates would not meet that threshold.

Before publication they would approach the police and the family with that information in order to get more information known as letting the family tell their side of the story.

It would be the duty of Lancashire police and what is laughably known as their comms team to communicate with the media in an professional manner and give their advice to Nicola's family. I have no idea if that happened or what was decided by the family. All I know is that the information about Nicola's problems with the menopause and alcohol was not released by the official media but by Lancashire police and was then reported on as are all official police statements.

If the police hadn't made a statement then there was every likelihood that it would not have been covered by official media and would have remained internet gossip. Only the police and perhaps an inquiry into their handling of their media strategy can answer that.

As an aside, it is grossly unprofessional for the comms team to tweet a cocky response aimed at sections of the media. It might be tempting but it's not what grown ups do. What comms teams should do is maintain a detached attitude and talk to the media face to face or over the phone and usually off the record. That is their job, not indulging in Twitter spats. That is unprofessional for any employee as many people say on Mumsnet threads all the time.

Felix125 · 21/02/2023 16:45

The information does become relevant if it were to help locate her though.

Whilst she was still classed as a MFH - if it could be used to locate her, then surly its relevant?

plumduck · 21/02/2023 16:46

The idea that a newspaper would have paid good money for a story that a 45-year-old woman was going through the menopause and liked a drink is laughable. That's me and a large part of Mumsnet they would have. The media was obsessed.

ScentOfAMemory · 21/02/2023 16:51

plumduck · 21/02/2023 16:46

The idea that a newspaper would have paid good money for a story that a 45-year-old woman was going through the menopause and liked a drink is laughable. That's me and a large part of Mumsnet they would have. The media was obsessed.

Their raison d'être is to run with stories.
Like the Mumsnetters on their 10 obsessive threads made it theirs.

Untitledsquatboulder · 21/02/2023 16:58

plumduck · 21/02/2023 16:46

The idea that a newspaper would have paid good money for a story that a 45-year-old woman was going through the menopause and liked a drink is laughable. That's me and a large part of Mumsnet they would have. The media was obsessed.

They would have paid for any piece of tittle tattle at that point and it would have sold copies.

MarshaBradyo · 21/02/2023 17:00

Untitledsquatboulder · 21/02/2023 16:58

They would have paid for any piece of tittle tattle at that point and it would have sold copies.

Show quote history

If people think stories wouldn’t have sold maybe all the threads on here, and likely elsewhere on SM were missed

limitedperiodonly · 21/02/2023 17:05

No official media outlet ran the story before the police revealed that Nicola had problems with the menopause and alcohol. If someone had a story all ready to run that just needed official confirmation for the legal reasons I've outlined, then the police did it for them. But they still didn't do it which is odd because it's the perfect excuse for an editor to say: "We can run all those quotes from curtain-twitchers now the police have said it's true."

I have no idea why the police chose to do that.

Hooklander · 21/02/2023 17:06

Media intrusion finally got noticed by Ofcom, at least:

www.theguardian.com/media/2023/feb/21/nicola-bulley-family-complaints-ofcom-sky-itv

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-64713045

limitedperiodonly · 21/02/2023 17:55

They would have paid for any piece of tittle tattle at that point and it would have sold copies.

Do you have much experience of selling stories to newspapers and what makes newspapers shift copies @Untitledsquatboulder ? You'll forgive me if I don't accept a simple yes in response.

Puzzledandpissedoff · 21/02/2023 18:32

Media intrusion finally got noticed by Ofcom, at least

Most likely a waste of time; Ofcom may huff and wag fingers, but they know better than most that the media now run 24/7 and will do almost anything to fill it, no matter the cost

TrinnySmith · 21/02/2023 19:00

Puzzledandpissedoff · 21/02/2023 18:32

Media intrusion finally got noticed by Ofcom, at least

Most likely a waste of time; Ofcom may huff and wag fingers, but they know better than most that the media now run 24/7 and will do almost anything to fill it, no matter the cost

Yes, and freedom of speech means anyone can say anything ( unless it can be construed as racist, homophobic etc so hate speech).

new2mn · 21/02/2023 19:56

@plumduck is right.

www.dailymail.co.uk/home/index.html

Look at this hard-hitting compilation of think pieces. The Daily Mail and other tabloids, plus their readership, are far too highbrow and erudite for such a topic.

new2mn · 21/02/2023 20:01

Sorry, I meant @limitedperiodonly.

I've been offered (and turned down) twenty quid to talk about a horrid accident that happened near my home... A few tenners or a hundred quid for a blabby neighbour is hardly "good money", surely it's loose change for any corporation even in these times.

Abouttimemum · 21/02/2023 20:43

The issue is essentially that the initial comms was utterly dreadful. There is a massive difference between ‘woman mysteriously goes missing during a Teams call while walking her dog’ and ‘woman known to the police with mental health problems is missing (which basically happens all the time)’. If the media were given no guidance then the first story becomes national headlines. This honestly should not have even made the national news.

On the face of it there is nothing exceptional about this case. And I say that with a decade of police comms experience and having worked hundreds of missing persons cases.

Of course it is absolutely tragic for her family but honestly it just should never have made it out of the first few days of local media coverage.

Mirabai · 21/02/2023 20:46

Abouttimemum · 21/02/2023 20:43

The issue is essentially that the initial comms was utterly dreadful. There is a massive difference between ‘woman mysteriously goes missing during a Teams call while walking her dog’ and ‘woman known to the police with mental health problems is missing (which basically happens all the time)’. If the media were given no guidance then the first story becomes national headlines. This honestly should not have even made the national news.

On the face of it there is nothing exceptional about this case. And I say that with a decade of police comms experience and having worked hundreds of missing persons cases.

Of course it is absolutely tragic for her family but honestly it just should never have made it out of the first few days of local media coverage.

I totally agree with this.

GetUps · 21/02/2023 20:53

Abouttimemum · 21/02/2023 20:43

The issue is essentially that the initial comms was utterly dreadful. There is a massive difference between ‘woman mysteriously goes missing during a Teams call while walking her dog’ and ‘woman known to the police with mental health problems is missing (which basically happens all the time)’. If the media were given no guidance then the first story becomes national headlines. This honestly should not have even made the national news.

On the face of it there is nothing exceptional about this case. And I say that with a decade of police comms experience and having worked hundreds of missing persons cases.

Of course it is absolutely tragic for her family but honestly it just should never have made it out of the first few days of local media coverage.

This is all true but it was the family who ran the campaign to keep the story in the public eye and went to great lengths to present her as a hapoy carefree woman.