BBC on David Challenor - well, finally.... [Edited by MNHQ at OP's request]

[sociopathsunited]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-45328860

I wonder if their feet are sore from dragging their heels for so bloody long..

Just to say that it looks like the original article in the Op has now been updated to include fuller details of DC's crimes (there is a note in italics at the end of the article saying the update happened on 30/08).

Except it doesn't does it? It still omits any reference to the torture, beating, electric shocks and adult baby clothes.

There's no reason or excuse for not reporting the crime. It would be an extraordinary coincidence if the two news outlets which have been slowest in reporting this crime, eventually only doing so with Aimee taking priority in news terms over the victim, were the BBC and the Guardian, the two most significant mainstream media trans PR conduits. It defies belief that it was a coincidence that the heavily trans advocate BBC just happened not to see this story, of all stories, on the court list. Or in any of the papers afterwards. Or that none of their police calls managed to upend the significant information that DC was charged and on remand for these crimes - for years. That the local BBC wasn't actively waiting for this court case, as would be normal on a local patch with a major crime involving a minor local celebrity and political figure.

Pull the other one: it's not a coincidence and it's not an accident.

It took 7 days (a lifetime in news terms) for the BBC to get any piece out at all, and my feeling is that is only in response to complaints over the non-coverage. Even now the BBC still hasn't actually covered the initial story. It has only referred to the actual story in passing as a by-product of "transgender person has to step down".

The Green Party issued two statements on Saturday 25th August, about David and Aimee Challenor, followed by a statement from Aimee Challenor on Sunday 26th August.

The Sunday Times covered the Aimee Challenor angle on Sunday 26th August. BBC took until the Tuesday to cover that angle in their only story about it, in the Coventry and Warwickshire local news section. 4 days after the statements from the Green Party, and 3 days after Aimee Challenor's own statement.

We absolutely understood the seriousness and horrific nature of the convictions and followed it up as soon as we could

That seems unlikely since the BBC still hasn't reported on the seriousness and horrific nature of the convictions.

And the BBC did not follow it up as soon as they could. That is clearly untrue.

Having "missed" the court case about a 10 year old girl being raped and tortured, the BBC then took 4 days between the Green Party's statements about David and Aimee Challenor and reporting on the case at all.

To be clear - this is not one mistake. This is a serious of deliberate decisions that were taken by the BBC.

If you cannot acknowledge your mistakes and learn from them, then this will happen again and again. And the public will very quickly run out of patience.

For the sake of libel, the minor local celebrity and political figure I'm referring to is DC. Those sorts of actively engaged people across a variety of interests become known in local areas. Like the leader of the council, or the biggest local developer. They just do. They're always looking for publicity or involved in campaigning and making themselves known to reporters. It's the way of it.

Popchyk, that really is a shocking and embarrassing timeliness when you lay it out bare.

Everything Popchyk said.

Having "missed" the court case about a 10 year old girl being raped and tortured, the BBC then took 4 days between the Green Party's statements about David and Aimee Challenor and reporting on the case at all.

They didn't miss it. People complained to the BBC, some of them posters here and were told it wasn't newsworthy enough so other things had likely taken priority.

There's a new article on the BBC page now. This one has outlined the crimes of DC in greater detail. Astonishing it has taken so long and so much pressure to get them to report on it.

Of course they didn't miss it. The BBC will get news feeds the same way the other news outlets do. Whilst each red top used its own language there was a basic consistency in wording over all the papers who reported it.

It is beyond implausible that the BBC missed it.

I'm still waiting for a reply from them.

I think Squirmy is probably genuinely interested in pursuing this. Apart from everything else, it's a crushing miss of a major story, and the actions that led to him not grasping the lead on this major story are probably not his actions. I mean, if you're a local reporter, beating the nationals on this sort of thing can propel your career. So I reckon Squirmy is equally pissed off.

I think the BBC are probably afraid of 'suicidal threats if they come after any trans person even with just cause

For example, if there were injunctions and changing reporting restrictions flying around, somebody senior could have made a play safe decision not to touch it for fear of identifying the victim because DC was so well known, and local people would instantly jigsaw the connection, and jigsaw ID is contempt just as outright naming is contempt. Consulting a media lawyer, taking senior advice, would lead to more and more layers of 'playing safe' in the specific knowledge that TRA can be (not always) rather litigious. Meantime you don't think the nationals will come down to your local patch and splash it from right under your noses, because it's so local and so fraught with difficulty.

Maybe, maybe, maybe.

Except it doesn't does it? It still omits any reference to the torture, beating, electric shocks and adult baby clothes.

Exactly.

The BBC is reduced to timorous beastie with regards to any critical reporting of trans issues.

If it hasn't been posted already, perhaps AC calling out the BBC directly in May for "transphobia" has something to do with it?
Just speculating.
inews.co.uk/opinion/comment/bbc-transgender/

It's more likely to be a general fear of the borg. I've seen posts here deleted for mentioning TRA litigious enthusiasm but frankly, it's real, we all know it, and we all know that they mass scorch the BBC with complaints, and they have back office access and pressure, including no doubt from within the BBC. I think their insides turn to water on this, and a local reporter is no match for it.

By their insides, I mean BBC news bosses' insides!

The bottom line is The Sun , The Daily Mail, The Record and The Mirror have demonstrated they are more reliable news sources than the BBC.

Squirmy's "explanation" might hold water if the story had simply appeared on some anonymous, unverified twitter feed; but it didn't. It appeared on court lists and was followed up by at least 4 national newspapers.

It defies any belief that no one at the BBC spotted it.

I received an email from a BBC News Editor asking me for comment. This isn’t good enough.

Better than I got. I've had no response at all to my complaint.

Interesting timing of AC's complaint- 30 May 2018. Only week's before her father's conviction.

It does defy belief. I think it was sent upwards and sat on.

You would send it upwards, wouldn't you? I highly doubt it didn't get escalated.

Even by the standards of the horrific male violence against women that we see on the news daily, this is quite a stand out case isn't it? Man rapes and tortures a 10 year old girl in his own attic whilst dressed as a little girl, gets twenty two years for his crimes and it turns out that he had been appointed as a Green Party election agent just a couple of months before his conviction.

Its got everything it needs to be quite a high profile news story hasn't it? How can it have been missed?

Nasty, legally fraught story involving litigious people, over sensitive local party, obnoxious bullying dominating man, litigious campaign group, hot on the heels of cliff Richard - I reckon it was sent upwards and they were still umming and aahing for days after it broke. Pathetic. They've got phenomenally expensive lawyers and overpaid editorial standards people. And the Coventry Telegraph whipped their asses.

If nothing else, this case highlights the need for local outlets and independent journalism.

Btw all of you on MN who get the vapours about The Mail one thing I have noticed since looking at Daily Mail and Metro online is they report stories of violence against women and children which I don't recall being reported elsewhere.

The Mail may have its sexist , shaming of fat, failing to look glamourous side but they are generally robust on crime. It might ridicule an unfortunate dress choice but it does not mince its words when reporting anyone beating up a woman or cruelty to a child or animal.