Tia Sharp

[LadyBeagleEyes]

Is this now a banned topic on MN?
With the new arrests, and nothing being posted, I'm assuming it is.
Fair enough if that's the decision, I'm just curious.

there were loads of threads yesterday, perhaps the miss marples over stepped the mark

There was a lot of overstepping the mark, I agree.
I suppose there's nothing that can be said now till there's a court case.
I had tears in my eyes today when they spoke to her utterly devastated aunt on Sky news.
RIP Tia.

Very, very sad.

There was a thread in chat, started a week ago with appeals to be on the look out in the missing person phase - it showed the positive side of MN, with lots of posters adding good wishes and bumping the thread to raise awareness, and later adding sympathy messages. There was also a more general "unfolding events" thread In The News. Both of these fell foul of speculating scribblers last night, as did another breaking news thread last night.

I have the impression that it's not the topic that is banned, but that posters who persistently break guidelines simply will not be reined in, either by other posters or even by MNHQ warnings. In that dynamic, deleting whole threads becomes the only option.

I would imagine that MNHQ have to tred carefully, it is also very unhelpful to start surmising.

One thing screamed out at me yesterday and i was at the same time. I had already said to my DP that i wondered if the police suspected a member of the family as they often ask people to do public appeals when they want to guage their demeanor - i read this somewhere. But anyway it turns out they had a suspect - but what i thought was totally out of order was the criminologist who was present making his assesment to the press, surely this should have been kept private as any comments made public surely cannot be used in any case against him?

As to what i think? Well i don't think anything, other than its so very very sad and i hope that they get the person who did this, quickly and they are dealt with severely. :(

All the threads have disappeared now so I guess it's something that is not to be discussed for a bit.

Yup, it's all going to be sub judice. And it's so annoying because I'm desperate to discuss it with someone and my DP just isn't interested.

Its not really for us to discuss though is it hackmum? Are we entitled to "news"? surely the role of the media here was to get as much publicity when it was a missing persons enquiry, but now needs to step back to avoid jeopardising the investigation. The public don't actually NEED to know anymore. Thats not a dig at you, just an observation in light of the leveson enquiry and how the press have totally skewed investigations.

There are plenty of other sites where speculation is welcome, so it would be easy for those who want to discuss and theorise to find somewhere to go.

surely though discussing something that is in the news is what people do.
why can't mn hq just delete posts that break the "rules"

Its not really for us to discuss though is it hackmum?

Well regardless people will talk, discuss, speculate, call it what you want - its human nature.

Legal minefield. MN are protecting themselves against problems. Try other sites.

"Its not really for us to discuss though is it hackmum?"

Well, legally, no - Mumsnet are probably right to be cautious and not allow discussion, as the law can come down hard on anyone who prejudices a trial.

On the other hand, if you're saying people shouldn't even discuss it between themselves, then I think that's a bit bonkers, as everyone has an opinion about this kind of thing and you'd have to be a saint not to discuss it with your friends or family.

Hi all, we're not censoring chat on Tia Sharpe, but we would ask everyone to avoid making speculation. This is what we posted on one of the threads we eventually had to remove last night:

Hello all
Just to let you know that we shall shortly be deleting this thread.
As we said, we do understand that feelings are running high this evening.
This is a situation every parent dreads.
But we don't think any good can come of unfounded speculation and blame.
And, as no one has been charged with murder, as yet, any posts that state or speculate on the identity of the killer are potentially libellous.
THANKS
MNHQ

HTH

It is human nature.
And will be something discussed among working colleagues, or friends and families.
I think there's different rules on line though, or maybe MN.
It's probably something to do with sub judice or slander/libel. (I can never remember which is which).
But we all know the grandmother has just been arrested, and I think that's what we're all getting at.

It got very nasty last night.

I see the police have appologised to Tia's Mum, thoughts with family and friends, especially the Mum.

Rip Tia.

The hour news will be on soon, I take it no one is charged?

No, I wouldn't recommend other sites. I would recommend reading up on contempt of court. Here's a start

People need to understand that their lust for rubbernecking and speculation may well end up prejudicing a trial. Which is a very serious thing.

Sorry hackmum, i did say it wasn't a dig at you - but i think it is very wrong that the press put all the information "out there" for discussion. I worry that in cases like this, having all the information in the public domain can be very damaging for any court proceedings that follow.

I am not sure about a "discussion" on MN, but it is dodgy. I wont say what my thoughts are, but we all judge on appearances, dont we - what about that poor sod who got accused and pretty much tried by the press who turned out to be totally innocent just because he looked like a "weirdo", i cant remember the guys name, or the murder victim, but it turned out her rather good looking, non weirdo looking architect neighbour was the killer.

I thought it wasn't sub judice (sp) till somebody has been charged. I've said a lot to DH but don't think an open internet forum is the right place to discuss the ins and outs.

I wasn't getting at anybody just saying that I've had a lot of thoughts but won't put them on here.

*I wont say what my thoughts are, but we all judge on appearances, dont we - what about that poor sod who got accused and pretty much tried by the press who turned out to be totally innocent just because he looked like a "weirdo", i cant remember the guys name, or the murder victim, but it turned out her rather good looking, non weirdo looking architect neighbour was the killer."

That was Chris Jeffreys, in the Joanna Yeates case. Actually, I didn't judge on appearances on that one - I thought he was probably innocent. In the initial heat of a murder enquiry, the police very often arrest the wrong person. And the things the papers were saying about him were clearly a bit daft - he was supposedly "obsessed with Cristina Rosetti". It didn't seem very damning to me. (It also turned out not be true.) I also remember with the Colin Stagg arrest in the Rachel Nicholl case, the papers attacked him for years, on the basis that he was a bit weird therefore he must have done it. They only gave up when the real killer was convicted.

in the milly dowler case the family went throught hell from the press

Unfortunately sometimes you do know who did it. I worked in east finchley in the early 90's. Colin Hatch was on parole for offences towards children. We had been warned he was dangerous. That particular nightmare was ended for me when a MNer linked me to a newspaper article.( last year) Thankfully he had been murdered himself whilst in prison

Harsh lessons were learnt. Too late for the little one though.