AIBU to think the BBC should not air sympathetic neighbour clips?

[ForsterMcLennan]

A man is on the run after probably murdering his family - and the BBC makes the editorial decision to play a clip of a man who looked after their swimming pool. He was a “softly spoken man” apparently, a nice guy looking forward to his daughter’s sports day. I am furious. If this is the only background they have, ditch it. A monster made into a cuddly, kind dad. I can’t believe you would run this.

The juxtaposition is shocking in the light of what happened and can be deemed in the public interest, I suppose.

No. Are you? Not being snippy I’m genuinely curious.

I have had a lot of counselling and therapy, completed the Freedom Programme and another similar peer reviewed course to help me recover from my own domestic abuse and also learn from it. I really wanted to learn from it. Anyway, psychology interests me a lot and I don’t think I’m wrong in what I’ve said above, I completely stand by it.

Or the victims were in fear of their lives and unable to leave? Or the mother was afraid to split because the father would then have unsupervised solo access to his children? Or she had no money or confidence? Or she thought this was normal? All the reasons people don’t leave abusive relationships.

People are just surprised someone who appeared so normal could do such an awful thing. They are not sympathetic they are in shock.

And that’s fine, people are allowed to give their impressions. But there are family and friends grieving the deaths of Mr Nice Guy’s wife and his 15 year old and 5 year old. The BBC does not need to run wall to wall commentary on how nice he was.

Posters don't need to be psychologists to understand that these men fit a pattern; we just need to have listened to experts in male violence - there are plenty of books, substacks etc by people who have studied these men.

I always recommend, 'In Control: Dangerous Relationships and How They End in Murder' by Jane Monckton Smith.

Yes precisely. Who cares about him? That he was ‘nice’? That’s why I said misogyny - it’s always about the killer (let’s face it, rarely not a man) and how nice he seemed.

Yes, just the sort of biased nonsense we have come to expect from the beeb.

They seem to have form over many years for taking the side of the abusive man over the interests of women and children.

Is it really wall-to-wall coverage of how nice he was? Is it really though?

Or is it maybe a 5-second clip in the entirety of an hour's news cycle?

"Probably"
He hasn't been charged with anything yet and the Beeb airing a bunch of people saying "ye I always knew he was a wrong'un" before he's been found guilty opens them up to lawsuits if he happens to be found innocent later

The bit that I saw was three people one after the other, talking about what a lovely man he was.

He seemed nice that's the point. Obviously he wasn't.

What a lovely man they thought he was.

Most abusers are seen as ‘lovely people’ by everyone except those being abused.

This. People are so scared of the random scary looking bloke on the street. The real monsters are people you live with and the people you're closest to. The ordinary everyday people.

I see both sides. Obviously these men shouldn't be celebrated as victims in any way, shape or form, but I think it is very important to remind people that monsters don't come with flashing signs, and that just because someone seems like a lovely person it does not mean they are. I think too often people ignore warning signs because they've only seen the public persona, and I think it is really important to remind everyone that just because they seem lovely when they're in the pub, it really doesn't mean they're not a horrific sadist behind closed doors.

I say this as someone in a violent relationship with the much-loved 'cheeky chappie', who when I tried to tell people what was really happening announced I was a mad, drunken drama queen - and everybody believed him. Well, everybody except one girl who I didn't really know, or actually like. I think she was friends with someone I had fallen out with, so we never had anything nice to say to one another! Until she came up to me after he'd managed to get the whole group laughing at me, and she looked me in the eyes, and told me she believed me.

She was also in a relationship with a popular, funny, sweet guy who you'd never suspect.

Did they show similar clips with the neighbours talking about how lovely the murdered women and girls were or didn't they bother asking about the victims?

I don’t think it is wholly irrelevant - I think there is an important conversation to be had about how “upstanding citizens” can do horrendous unthinkable things you could never imagine - if we don’t acknowledge that chilling juxtaposition we miss an opportunity to think about how we safeguard other families.

I’m not naive to think that the BBC were coming even close to making that point well with their coverage though.

@ForsterMcLennan
I saw this.

The bit that gave me the rage was he was whining to friends and family "he couldnt live without her" then murdered her and his children.... AND happuly continued living.

I hope he gets a long stretch in a bad prison.

Absolute scum.

Exactly!

There's absolutely no need for interviews with acquaintances who thought he was lovely. Their answers are predictable and it's lazy journalism.

Focus on facts about the suspect (name, where police think he might be etc). Don't bother asking people how surprised they are. Don't do anything that could jeopardise a fair hearing.

Put the victims centre stage.

Yes but this is also why the airtime should be about how nice the victims were and other stuff about how they lived. If we're not sure whodunnit, (even if, really, we are pretty sure) then why make it all about the suspect at all.

The "right" way, in my opinion, to report on this kind of case is describing the victims, talking about what they did as a job or were studying, some brief interviews with people who knew them and miss them. Then as a footnote "the police's main suspect is Man A, who was the husband, who fled the scene", that's it end of, no character assessments of the suspect.

Edit to add - obviously if he's still at large then you'd add what he looks like, where last seen, how to recognise him etc. But no need to assess his character at this point especially not sympathetically