Monthly Archives: November 2009

The Sun on Tiger Woods crashing into a tree – He’s having an affair!

Whereas the Guardian have written a normal article based on FACTS. The Sun have taken it into their own hands to publish unfounded accusations.

Many other newspapers have covered the story, including the Express, the Independent, and the Times and none of them have given these accusations the light of day.

So where did the Sun get the accusations that firstly, Tiger had a row with his wife and secondly, rather more seriously that he has been having an affair. The Sun claims:

Reports in the US claim he has been cheating on her with party hostess Rachel Uchitel, 34.

“Reports in the US” seems to be a sneaky way to print wild allegations without substantiating them whatsoever.

The Independent also prints the allegations, but unlike the Sun they don’t make them the centre of the story, in the last line printing…

Rumours about the golfer’s private life surfaced this week with a tabloid newspaper speculating about marital unrest, but it had little evidence to substantiate its outlandish claims.

Note how a respectable newspaper doesn’t engage in wild speculation and even the claim of marital unrest is said to be “unsubstantiated.” Even though the Independent is a quality paper, if they had found out through sources that they trusted and believed that Woods was having marital problems or even an affair, it would have featured more prominently in the story.

None of the American sources that claim this affair, such as this, this and this have any actual evidence to back it up and the Hollywood Gossip names the newspaper the National Inquirer (which first made the allegations) as “the unreliable tabloid”

Even the Mail and the Express have not gone as far as claiming an affair, with the former claiming an argument, and the latter – surprisingly – having the decency not to print unsubstantiated allegations.

It just makes you wonder, how low will the Sun sink?

Paul Dacre Must Die

The Daily Mail are a fucking disgrace of a newspaper. I hope Paul Dacre dies a slow and painful death and that people queue up to shit on his grave. The current top story on the Mail Website (betting it will be front page news tomorrow with a special defecation from Littlejohn who must be drooling reading this one) is this: ‘Mapping out the strain on your NHS: 243 sick babies treated in one London hospital ward…. and just 18 mothers were born in the UK‘. Naturally this story has already found its way onto the Stormfront forums and will no doubt be picked up by the BNP and other racist organisations gathering ‘evidence’ of how the poor white child is neglected in favour of the ethnically diverse child.

I’ve scouted the website of the hospital involved – London’s Chelsea and Westminster – and cannot find a copy of this map or any press release relating to it so I cannot verify any information or put it into any real context – exactly what the Daily Mail wants. The whole article concerns a map made to celebrate the diversity of mothers that give birth in the hospital. It seems to involve mothers being asked to put a pin on a map to show their original birth place. The Mail does not specify the timescale over which the data is collected, nor does it specify whether all mothers were asked or whether the hospital went out of the way to collect data only from foreign mothers.

The whole article is just whinging at the fact that people from other countries have given birth to children in a British hospital. We don’t get given any further information than that because the Mail knows that the headline is enough to get the usual idiots foaming at the mouth about ‘immigration’ and ‘loony-left madness’ etc.

As for those wankstains moaning about the cost to the taxpayer – £1400 a day according to the Mail, not a figure they provide a link for – I may complain about paying taxes as much as the next guy, but you know what, I get a warm feeling when I see this map. I pretend that all of the tax I’ve paid this year has gone on just saving one child’s life and it somehow makes it all worthwhile. A fellow human being has given birth to a child and thanks to the NHS it has survived. It is a triumph for humanity over arbitrary borders, of compassion over hateful ‘not in my country’ types who would pull up the drawbridge and say ‘fuck you’ to the rest of humanity even if they were sick children who would die without our assistance.

When you read this Daily Mail headline – and if you dare, the whole article and comments – it is easy to forget that Sue Reid – the author of this disgusting piece of hatred journalism – is actually talking about the lives of sick babies – something supposedly sacred. Here they are described as a ‘strain’ and used as an example of ‘the changing face of Britain’.

Personally I celebrate the fact that ‘The 243 mothers are from 72 different nations. They include Mongolia, the remotest regions of Russia, Japan, Africa, South America, swathes of Asia, Australasia and even Papua New Guinea’. I think it speaks volume about the value that we as a nation place on human life; that we are in the majority a nation who doesn’t worry about the nationality of a child that might die but instead save it – regardless of whether we can wring the money out of the parent.

I just pretend that none of my taxes go to treating a single sick Mail reader. And I consider them all to be sick for wanting to enrage themselves with such hateful bullshit each day, and for treating the lives of a few sick children as a burden which we must get rid off.


Update:

Thankfully Five Chinese Crackers has had the patience (and past experience with Sue Reid) to properly look into this story and has an excellent post on this, please go read it because Sue Reid really is a piece of shit. He also includes the following press release issued by the hospital that demonstrates just what a complete farce the story is, although I suspect the damage has already been done. If Littlejohn uses this story tomorrow (if he can even be arsed to shit out a column that is) then he really will demonstrate that he is never about ‘reporting the facts’ as he so laughably puts it. Here is the press release (massive hat-tip to 5CC for this):

‘Chelsea and Westminster Hospital is a specialist referral centre and cares for patients of many different backgrounds, reflecting London’s very diverse population.

‘Of the 550 babies admitted to our Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) every year, a very small number of these are overseas patients. In 2009, there have been just two overseas admissions.

‘The map was placed in the NICU nearly four years ago to provide the families of the babies we care for, as well as staff, with an opportunity to indicate their background if they wished. It is not an indication of country of residence or citizenship.

‘It was intended to illustrate the diversity of staff working on the unit and the families of the babies we care for, to encourage everyone to reflect on different cultures, in a fun and informal way.

‘Chelsea and Westminster Hospital’s NICU provides intensive care, high dependency and special care facilities for babies and is a specialist referral centre for neonatal surgery.’

PC Brigade Strikes Again

Another day another really old tradition destroyed by the PC Brigade. The actual story is about something different, but the Mail commenters are not put off as they get straight to the real problem: women shoved into jobs by the PC Brigade. The story is about a sorry case of bullying in the workplace: ‘Two Beefeaters sacked from Tower of London for bullying first female Yeoman‘.

It seems that two male members of staff didn’t like the fact that a woman had got the job – breaking a 500 year tradition of male only recruits. Getting the position was hardly easy – you need to have had a distinguished career serving Queen and Country for at least 22 years – and the appointed woman met this criteria. Surely not a problem is it?

Well it was for the two men who have been sacked for defacing her entry on Wikipedia – a pretty cowardly and pathetic act I’m sure most people would agree. However, Mail readers are not most people and they ignore the whole point of the story – bullying in the workplace – and instead focus on a good old bit of woman-bashing – something along the lines of: ‘It’s her own fault, she shouldn’t be there':

women_know_your_place

At least those comments are currently the worst-rated on the article.

Daily Mail Reporter gutted at lack of nipple

The Daily Mail was terribly disappointed today when it missed a chance to write a pointless story about a celeb… with a bit of nipple or lady-lips on display. Ashley Cole was inconsiderate enough to hide his wife’s underwear much to the disgust of crouched paparazzi who couldn’t wait to sell some flesh to the Daily Mail. Thankfully, because the Daily Mail exists to write pointless stories about celebrities they were still able to sell their photos to them, but probably didn’t get as much: ‘Ashley Cole protects his wife Cheryl’s modesty as they put on a public show of affection at Girls Aloud birthday bash‘. Naturally it is written by the Daily Mail Reporter which is why they can get away with staggering hypocrisy like: ‘The England footballer came to his wife’s rescue at the weekend as he protected her modesty from the paparazzi.’ That’ll be the paparazzi that your paper has just paid for a nearly up-skirt shot… So really he’s protecting her modesty from shitty tabloids like yours.

As if this wasn’t bad enough the Daily Mail had another near miss, this time with Kate Hudson: ‘Kate Hudson narrowly escapes a wardrobe malfunction with her incredibly low-cut dress‘. The Daily Mail Reporter (who else?) points out on numerous occasions that her chest is ‘modest’ and gets into the topic of whether she should have a boob job – you know, to better meet the high standards that the Daily Mail have imposed on women. You can sense the sexual frustration of the Daily Mail Reporter at not getting a glimpse of nipple (they could just watch Almost Famous):

the 30-year-old narrowly escaped exposing her breasts at the audience as her loose-fitting neckline hung off her chest.

Clearly aware of the lack of coverage the shimmering gown gave her modest cleavage, the How To Lose A Guy In 10 Days actress fiddled nervously with her top as she talked on stage.

Still, another nice celebrity filler story for the Daily Mail which seems to be rapidly giving up even pretending to be a newspaper.

Government Killing Us With Drugs!

The Daily Mail enjoys a good bit of scaremongering and the Swine Flu outbreak has been the perfect opportunity for them to keep trying to scare us with ‘X died from Swine Flu’ headlines that the article then has to admit that serious underlying medical conditions where present in each case. Today is no different, except that the virus isn’t the killer but the vaccine: ‘Patient dies after being given swine flu vaccine‘. The article admits in just the third paragraph that:

But experts investigating the death say it was likely to have been caused by the patient’s ‘significant underlying health conditions’ rather than the vaccine itself.

Which raises the obvious question: then why write such a misleading headline? This is what Dizzy Thinks would like to describe as a technically brilliant tabloid article: misleading but scary and snappy headline – check; short article with some scary numbers- check; article is total bollocks – check.

It is also interesting to see how the Daily Mail has blamed the government directly for the death:

One person has died after being given the Government’s new swine flu vaccination.

I have emphasised ‘the Government’s’ because the Mail seems to be implying that the government were personally responsible for creating the vaccine, as if they cooked up one day whilst in parliament. Not that they purchased them through drugs companies.

The article is a short misleading attack poorly aimed at the government – though checking some of the comments it appears to have had the desired impact – that has become typical of the tabloid press. I’m no fan of Labour but at least attack them for the right reasons (it’s not as if they are not enough) rather than making pathetic attempts like this.


Speaking of pathetic attacks on the government if you’d like a giggle have a look at this rushed attack from Dizzy Thinks that makes him look pretty foolish: ‘Ball and his Education team fail GCSE Maths?

Dizzy Thinks and the Technically Brilliant Sun

I noticed that Dizzy Thinks had a few things to say about this blog and people who whinge about The Sun the other day and I thought I’d offer some kind of response to the points he made.

Firstly, he seems to find it amusing that people dislike The Sun:

I see the Sun celebrating its “40th birthday” (Murdoch buy-out was year zero I think) is causing some frothing on some blogs. Whether its the likes of Tim Ireland complaining about Page Three in a way that reveals more about his own condescending view about the intelligence of Sun readers than anything else. Or simply general whining about how they’ve crossed the line in attacking Gordon Brown personally whilst simultaneously ignoring the Mirror engaging in similar attacks on Cameron’s (both of which as enjoyable to watch I should add), the message is clear. The Sun is EVIL!

I imagine some of the ‘frothing’ about The Sun’s celebration has to do with the fact that The Sun represents some of the worst aspects of tabloid journalism. It is the personal propaganda sheet for a wealthy media mogul, its editor and journalists are little more than pawns and it shows with the slant that is applied to all of its content. It revels in xenophobia, racism and homophobia. It lies a lot – like most of the tabloid press – in order to distort the world to fit its own agenda. These, I would argue are valid points to get a bit pissed-off when smug Sun journalists appear on your TV and inform you about what a wonderful and respected organ of the press it is.

Secondly he describes this blog as ‘a site that appears to specialise in moaning about the right wing press’. If he’d taken the time to read a few posts or dig around he might have perhaps re-phrased that slightly. He might have felt compelled to mention that – although I do occasionally rant a little – the bulk of this website is dedicated to demonstrating how the tabloid press (focusing on the Daily Mail) lies to construct a world-view that just does not correspond to reality.

Moaning implies that I’m just another whinger who doesn’t try to bring about change. I would argue that the fact I have taken the time to produce this blog, to write down my thoughts on why the Daily Mail writes as it does, and why some people feel compelled to believe it, shows that I am more than just a whinger. In some small way I am trying to change the way tabloid journalism sets agendas and spreads lies about minority groups. The ‘Angry Mob’ title of this blog refers to the readers of the tabloid press – the Angry Mob that is fed by lies and distortions – not myself. The group that picks up their tabloid newspaper just so that they can be enraged about something – irrespective of whether there is any truth in the stories they are outraged over.

The remainder of Dizzy’s post is below in full:

Uponnothing considers the Sun journalists and writers to be “utterly fucking shit”. When I read it I was reminded of the tale in Stick it up your Punter which chronicled a time when Sun hacks swapped jobs with hacks from a quality paper – can’t recall which. The Sun guys found the swap easy, the quality paper guys just couldn’t, if you pardon the pun, hack it.

The reason? Anyone can ramble on writing up a news story in 1000+ words. Doing it in 50 takes skill though. Just take any random day and have a look at a Sun leader and compare it to a Guardian one. They could even be making the same point but the former will be succinct whilst the latter will be waffle – not much different to the blog posts of some of those that moan about Sun funnily enough.

People may not like the political agenda of the Sun. They may feel that the Sun readership needs to be ‘educated coz they is thick init’ into realising that the girl with her tits out doesn’t really know about quantitative easing and campaigning is a matter of justice and truth goddamit! However, thinking that that the people that work and write for the Sun are shit misses the point of how difficult it actually is to do what they do compared to the so-called “quality press”.

He makes a perfectly valid point: The Sun could be written by a gifted set of writers and perhaps I am wrong to label them as ‘utterly fucking shit’. However, whether the writing is technically good is different to it being ‘good’ in my mind. For example, should I enjoy reading an article full of lies about immigration or snide ‘humorous’ digs at homosexuality because it happens to be a technically brilliant example of tabloid writing? Or should I remain saddened that people want to buy a paper that feeds them on a diet of such articles and pissed-off that a talented writer should sell their soul to write them?

If you are a talented writer and you work for The Sun I wonder if you’d really be proud about what you do – no matter how technically brilliant your work is. Can you look at an article wheeling out the same tired lies about ‘uncontrolled immigration’ and immigrants being ‘showered’ with benefits and be satisfied with what you have written because it is short and snappy? Somehow I was under the impression that accuracy counts in journalism, that truth matters as much as style. Dizzy seems to think not, he doesn’t even address the fact that The Sun and the tabloid press are an virtually unregulated body that can treat facts as an inconvenience to be overlooked or crushed out of all recognition and crammed into their one-agenda-fits-all editorial requirements.

I read an interesting and revealing article in The Times this week where Kelvin MacKenzie visits a tabloid newspaper created and edited by Oxbrigde students. Remember, Kelvin MacKenzie is the Sun editor responsible for the entirely false Hillsborough headlines that stopped virtually all sales of the Sun in Liverpool to this day. He is also the man responsible for the Sun headline: ‘Freddie Starr ate my hamster’ (as Dizzy would probably be keen to point out: a technically brilliant headline, regardless of the fact that it was completely made up).

In the article MacKenzie recalls a story about hiring only Oxford and Cambridge graduates during his days editing The Sun. The story seems to nicely sum up the journalistic standards of the Sun and other tabloids:

Satisfied that my bold move would take The Sun to a higher plain I waited for the results. They were not forthcoming. In fact, very little emerged from my new hirelings. Most disappointing.

I had to get to the bottom of this. It became clear that with their keen and analytical minds they had made a fatal mistake – they had continued investigating every story to the point where they had satisfied themselves that there was no story at all. This would not do.

I called in one of the super-brains and and explained a philosophy that had served me well over the years. The reporter leant forward with an earnest look as I told him the secret: if a story sounded true it probably was true and should therefore appear in the paper or there would be lots of white, unexplained spaces.

So there you have it, the magic ingredient in tabloid journalism is to not care about the truth. The consequences of this approach are the countless repetition of lies about minority groups, ‘elf ‘n’ safety gone mad’, ‘they’ve banned Christmas!’ and all the other shite that tabloids either make up or don’t bother fact-checking before going to print.

If the writers working for The Sun really are talented and bright, then it seems to make their articles worse because they are not the result of journalistic incompetence, but rather a cynically calculated distortion of the truth. The relentless scare-mongering and radicalisation of the tabloid reading masses seems to imply that sometimes humanity would benefit from more substance and less style. Dizzy might do well to ponder the same when considering his own ‘snappily written’ tabloid blog posts.

I hate these Sun adverts and the PCC

I found out via Twitter today that the Press Complaints Commission (PCC) chairman – Baroness Buscombe – has lofty ambitions for the PCC; such as extending its remits to the blogosphere. As the Tweeter (Unity) pointed out: they might want to actually start regulating the press first. Baroness Buscombe has a long history of working within industry and has spent the two previous years to taking up this role as Chief Executive of the Advertising Agency. Somehow, I don’t think she’s the sort of person who’s going to be on the side of the little guy against the abuses of the tabloid shit factory. In fact, I’d go so far as to say that the PCC won’t get any better under her leadership and that if she thinks that the PCC is doing such a fine job of regulating the printed press that they should branch out into the digital media field of blogs then we may as well give up on the PCC as an effective regulatory force until it gets some leadership that hasn’t been groomed from within the media industry.

The whole issue of what an utter farce the PCC is has been brought home by the recent advertising campaign run by the Sun newspaper. Every time one of their adverts comes on the screen I want to put my fist through it and punch every smug, ignorant and bullshitting fuck who appears in the advert. You see I’d like to think that the newspaper that printed the headline ‘The Truth‘ and lied about the behaviour of Liverpool fans – innocuous things like accusing fans of pick-pocketing the dead, urinating on Police officers and trying to beat up people giving mouth-to-mouth – and never properly apologised for it wouldn’t have the gall to pretend that they are a serious journalistic bastion of truth and decency.

However, what becomes more apparent every time we are inflicted with a Sun advert is that the complete failure of the PCC to punish any excess of the tabloid press – and such excesses happen daily – is that newspapers start to believe a false sense of their own self-worth. We have to listen to Sun writers – people barely able to form a coherent sentence or an argument without making smutty jokes about gays or blaming immigrants for everything – talk to a camera as if they’re the modern equivalent of Swift’s pamphlets. These people are responsible for the absolute bile that the Sun spews forth each day yet they somehow are under the illusion that they can portray themselves without any apparent sense of irony as serious writers.

The whole thing is bizarre and if it is some kind of joke I really do fail to see the funny side. Perhaps they are being slightly ironic, perhaps they are blaming the members of the public that are stupid enough to lap this shit up and buy the newspaper each day. They state that the Sun headline is ‘part of the British culture’, which I imagine includes ‘The Truth’ headline. As an example of how everyone loves a Sun headline they wheel out the ‘FREDDIE STARR ATE MY HAMSTER’ as if we’re supposed to go ‘Oh yeah, great headline, wow aren’t the Sun a great newspaper’ and totally ignore the fact that the whole story was a complete fabrication. Perhaps the Sun does have a sense of humour if they want to celebrate the fact that they are best known for making stuff up and printing it in huge block capitals on the front of their newspapers. Wow, don’t I want to celebrate this wonderful anniversary of the newspaper equivalent of a pub bore drunkenly telling me ever more ridiculous lies to try and get me to listen to them.

Simon Cowell in the ad talks about the Freddie Starr headline and says something like: ‘It wasn’t true of course… which just about sums it up’. I’m not quite sure why the Sun left this in unless they really were having a celebratory wallow in their own shitness. Maybe they’re celebrating the fact that they’re a load of shit but they still sell enough newspapers to make a profit, so who cares?

Whatever the point of the adverts one thing is abundently clear: even newspapers and journalists as utterly fucking shit as the Sun and its writers think that they are doing a fabulous job. With the PCC a complete and utter farce I can’t see any reason for them to change their grand opinion of themselves, can you?

Mail Online Invaded by Loony Left BBC-Lovers?

Another day, another Daily Mail attack on the BBC. This time it is for encouraging youngsters to drink ethanol: ‘Six pupils rushed to hospital after copying scene of schoolchildren drinking deadly ethanol on BBC’s Waterloo Road‘. First things first. this is a Daily Mail article, so lets tackle the scare-mongering exaggeration of the article: although three ambulances and a rapid response unit were sent to the school to take the children to hospital they weren’t exactly on the brink of death. The school was alerted to the situation when the students confessed drinking the liquid to a teacher, it wasn’t because any of them lay comatose on the floor or were vomiting profusely. After a blood test at the hospital they were allowed to go home – hardly the situation you’d expect reading the Daily Mail headline.

Secondly, the whole point of the Waterloo episode was to show the inherent dangers of drinking ethanol, the programme clearly showed the consequences. It wasn’t as if the BBC screened Waterloo Road in order to promote the drinking of ethanol in schools. Anyone who watched the episode would probably arrive at the conclusion that any 14 or 15 year old who thought that drinking ethanol was a good idea must be beyond stupid.

Naturally, Daily Mail parents’ brains are wired up rather differently to always apportion blame on something other than some young people being utterly thick:

A parent living near the school, who declined to be named, said: ‘I was watching the programme and I thought someone would copy it’.

‘It never should have been screened because children are very impressionable’.

Am I mistaken in thinking that if ‘children’ (although these students were 14 and 15 years old) really were that impressionable then every single one of them that watched the programme should have been downing ethanol during science lessons yesterday? The sad truth is that no matter how outraged parents (if they really exist in this instance, the reporter could just be making them up) and other utter morons like Vivienne Pattison (who the Mail quote, but couldn’t even spell her name right) who is the director of the ‘Watchdog’ MediaWatchUK – a barmy organisation that seems intent on blaming everything that they feel is wrong with the world on TV, computer games and the Internet. Vivienne had this to say on the matter:

it was worrying events on screen had translated to real life in such a shocking way. She said: ‘People say television does not have any effect on real life and then something like this happens. ‘Broadcasters keep saying viewers can tell the difference between TV and reality but this shows this is clearly not the case. ‘They need to know that what they put out does have an effect, especially on young minds.’

Funnily enough the Daily Mail’s misleading and biased interpretation of the events is linked to by MediaWatchUK, who seem to only think that ‘media’ covers the TV, computer games and the Internet. They seem to blame modern media formats whilst using print news sources such as the Daily Mail of bastions of accuracy and decency – that to me says everything you need to know about this ‘watchdog’. Vivienne is the kind of rent-a-quote that will always turn up on this sort of story: ‘think of the children’ they will wail, as if they are brainless sponges soaking up everything that they see. Funnily enough, when children are described as ‘feral’ by the Daily Mail we don’t see the same guilt-ridden hand-wringing about their behaviour being our fault. No, then children are perfectly in control of their behaviour and our evil etc, not that they are poor defenseless souls being corrupted by TV and the Internet.
Like most ‘news’ content served up by the Mail Online this story is an absolute joke. Some stupid kids copied a programme even though they knew what the consequences would be, and the Mail uses this as a pathetic attempt to attack the BBC. The most amusing thing about the whole episode is that the comments are making it perfectly clear that the Mail has approached this story in exactly the wrong way, and the Daily Mail website seems to have suddenly become a hotbed for ‘loony-left BBC values’. For example, look at the bottom-rated comments:
worst_rated
The BBC seems to be getting a lot of support by people who realise that the kids have themselves to blame. On the other hand, check out the highest-rated comments:

best_rated
I have never seen such sense in the comments section. Perhaps people are starting to get fed up at such piss-poor attacks on the BBC.


Update: I have changed the word ‘methanol’ to ‘ethanol’. Thanks to the person who pointed this out in the comments.

Update 2: I’ve also changes the second ‘methanol’ to ‘ethanol’ and I must try and proofread in future.

Daily Mail Attacks Beth Ditto for being fat

The Daily Mail has been busy with its usual annual campaign to bully everyone in the public eye to wear poppies for remembrance, but, as usual, it still finds time to attack the minority groups that it does not like – like fat people. It is perfectly obvious to everyone that Beth Ditto is larger than the average person, it isn’t news, it isn’t journalism and it certainly isn’t pleasant when the Daily Mail makes personal attacks on people:

Beth Ditto

Naturally this sort of snide, bitchy comment belongs to ‘The Daily Mail Reporter’ because like most bullies, the person writing this shit is a coward as well as shitty filler writer. And of course, the only 4 commentators on the story are also getting into the spirit.

Beth Ditto Comments

Still, keep trying to climb to moral highground, eh, Daily Mail, I’m sure your freedom to make snide comments about people is exactly what all those millions died for.

Police respond to grieving family concerns… Mail not happy

Another day, another attack on the Police Force from the Daily Mail. Today’s outraged headline is: ‘Unsolved murder’… who you gonna call? Ghostbusters! (Or how police wasted £20,000 probing suicide after tip-off by psychics). The article starts:

even the most diligent of officers would balk at the idea of launching a murder investigation based on a paranormal tip from a group of psychics.

This, however, is what Dyfed Powys Police did, even though officers were faced with what looked like a clear case of suicide.

Well, they didn’t really launch a murder investigation on a tip-off from a group of psychics, the truth is buried (as usual) at the very end of the article:

A spokesman for Dyfed Powys Police said: ‘The revelations of the mystics were brought to our attention via the family and these were followed to reassure the family that the full circumstances of the death were as they appeared.

‘Police have a responsibility to investigate all deaths thoroughly.’

The police were pretty much in an impossible situation, if they had ignored any concerns that the family had, then they’d be accused of neglecting the concerns of taxpayers, if they do investigate then they’re accused of wasting money. That is the trouble with Tabloid newspapers, they can never really lose because they can damn someone if they do, and damn them if they don’t.

Imagine the family’s point of view in this situation; they have to deal with the suicide of a family member and they would probably want to cling to any possibility that the family member did not take their own life. If they are offered any possibility that there was something more to the case I imagine they would want the police to investigate – no matter how slim the chances are of success.

But the Mail only like to pursue the human angle when it suits them, in this case they’d rather go down the ‘police wasting money’ mocking of a force trying to do the right thing by a grieving family. Just another day of gutter journalism.