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

[MyrtIe]

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

I reckon it was because after the police said ‘specific vulnerabilities’ that probably led to more speculation, perhaps people even blaming the partner so the family ok’d the extra info to clear any doubt?

Common sense at last.

@CaponeOnTax please detail exactly why it’s sexist??

they didn't want to disclose the information did they. It’s all the people making idiot comments like those on here and even her own bloody bloody husband trying to subvert attention (who was likely the one who called the police on 10th January) and throw off the scent as it were. Of course it’s flaming well relevant….the husband called them that opening she’s gone missing okay well she could be just out doing her own thing….and is likely to be drunk as a skunk okay definitely much less likely she’s out doing her own thing!!

@BoredofEducation - exactly this! Well said.

There was no need to go into detail. If she did fuck off of her own accord, she's even less fucking likely to show up now.

Because she might have accessed or accessing support services which might help us find her.

The police are damned whatever they fo with this one

Clearly they've made decisions from an Informed position throughout but that wasn't good enough for the frothing true crime brigade people feel like they've hot a right to know this stuff seemingly.

I agree - so many people saying the police should be doing X, And Z when they aren't privy to a lot of the information.

They won't be doing this to trash her reputation, but to make people aware of how and what she was vulnerable and why they are looking in places other than the river.

My heart aches for her, poor soul - she must have been tortured mentally whatever has happened.

As fr being alcohol - dependent. This is an illness, like other illnesses. People shouldn't judge her on this. More people suffer it than we will ever know.

I said to my husband last night I thought it was incredibly inappropriate. How does the public knowing this change anything? It seems it's just about the police trying to justify their thinking to the public instead of keeping schtum and taking the flack (which is their job).

Does knowing she had alcohol issues mean a witness is now going to come forward when they previously didn't? Of course not. It is relevant to the case but not for the public at all.

They won't be doing this to trash her reputation, but to make people aware of how and what she was vulnerable and why they are looking in places other than the river.

^ that's none of our business. They only need yo justify themselves to the family.

Because she might have accessed or accessing support services which might help us find her.

I'm not making a call at the moment as to whether the info should have been released. Unfortunately, until Nicola is found, I have no idea as to the relevance (or not).

There's a lot of mentions on this thread of armchair sleuthing. The problem is that these idiots are not just sitting in their armchairs. They're on scene causing massive issues for the police, the family, and the whole community. They are sending malicious communications. If it were just social media speculation there wouldn't be anywhere near as big a problem.

But in this case, the police DID have to divulge this information to stop the idiotic armchair amateur sleuths who are hellbent on disrupting the investigation. They've have hoards of grief vultures traipsing all over the place, breaking into houses and causing the police more headaches. The only way to stop that was to explain further the reasoning behind their theory that she's most likely in the water. Why can't people back off and let the police do their jobs? The arrogance of some people to think they know better than the police when they aren't privy to all the pertinent information absolutely astounds me. There was a good reason the police acted the way they did, and now it's been forced into the open.

My STBXH would and could and did spread slander about me to any single person who would listen.

It did NOT make it true.

It is appalling for her daughters if they never see her again an read this.

I am simply horrified by this.

People now suggesting she was drunk on the school run, a dog walk and a work conference call, all before 9am.
Fuck that. She probablyjust downed a bottle of red at night. Not good, but not anyones business.

I live in Spain and it has now been on the news here. I have never commented previously.

@WaddleAway are you seriously that thick….?? Sorry to break it to you but you aren’t even a good armchair detective 🙄

I agree completely with this. The police were placed in a very difficult position. Had they disclosed Nicola's issues at the time, it would have explained a lot about why the investigation was escalated from the start and perhaps calmed down public and online speculation.

It seems to me that they've been pretty much forced into releasing these details now due to public pressure.

100% agree.

@WaddleAway it's not really. But the police have been facing a barrage of criticism and I suspect with what was circulating yesterday someone had tipped the press off/they'd found out about it already so it was deemed better that the police should release it instead.

The police have had huge search teams out on the river, the local area and have a further 40 officers viewing CCTV and dash cam footage. I suspect that is a huge number of officers for a missing person. They can't escalate it to a criminal investigation until they have evidence of criminal activity so have to continue along the missing person line regardless.

Yes, it’s inappropriate, but sadly this one is on the armchair detectives who have been told time and time again to stop speculating. I’d go so far to say it’s on the content providers who have facilitated this for traffic.

Having lived with addicts, it is very relevant. They were compelled to release this information because of police trolling on social media.

I agree. Why are people so against facts being released. If she had 'alcohol issues' then it's quite likely that people locally knew anyway and her reputation was already effected. There is a lady with 'alcohol issues' in our village and everyone knows about it no matter how far into denial she is. It's very sad but if she went missing I would definitely consider it relevant. If a working class man had 'alcohol issues' then to be honest I think they'd probably be a lot blunter about it and just call him a plain old alcoholic - so I'm not seeing the misogyny here (but of course that's not the same as saying it isn't an issue in the police).

To me the big issue here is the stigma around being an alcoholic, while we pretend it doesn't happen to nice, white, female, working parents we do all those nice, white, female, working parents a huge disservice IMO. The other issue of course is menopause and what a struggle it can be for women, Davina highlighted this but I think it is very poorly understood by most people who just think your periods stop and that's it. That women go through it all the time so you should be fine and not make a fuss about it.

If this had been a man I think any issues with alcohol would have been mentioned to start with. But is that because as a man the scenario of a third party being involved is much less likely (especially with no immediate evidence of a third party).

This case wasn't in the main media for a quite a few days, was it more down to family and friends that it became more prominent.

We don't hear about out most missing people, probably because the police will have been informed of their vulnerabilities and know statistically what the outcomes (without any evidence to the contrary) will be

They should have said from the start that "NB had prior MH difficulties and there had been a recent concern for welfare incident". That would have been adequate and not over the line and relevant 3 weeks ago. I struggle to see the point in this level at this stage.

Agreed.

The police have to release certain information which is private to help find her

Otherwise it will be "Woman has gone missing - can you help"

Nicola might not want the public to know she walks her dog in that area, or sits on that bench, or takes works calls in that area, or has a mobile phone etc etc

But the police have to release so much info to help find her

Releasing this new info might open new lines as she might have accessed or accessing support services which might help us find her.

Honestly, prior to the last twelve months I would have been firmly on the side of the police. Throughout my life I’ve believed that they act in our best interests, and I’ve always been outspoken in my support. But not anymore. It’s hard to think they act in women’s best interests now, after the revelations of the last few years.

They didn’t “have” to realise any information about Nicola - they chose to. Just like they didn’t have to protect Wayne Couzens and others - they chose to. And all these decisions have been made to the detriment of half the population - women.