Am I being heartless?

[BJ.]

No doubt you will all have heard of the fire on Victory Road in Derby last week the result of which six children died. I have just watched the first TV appearance of the parents since it happened and I have to ask myself why did they bother?

They were seen to be crying as soon as they were led into the room. The father only managed a couple of sentences at a time before crying and the mother sat silent, only crying when her husband did. He is quoted as saying "I beg you, leave us alone and let us try and grieve in peace and quiet." If they want to be left in peace and quiet, then surely the thing to do is to issue a statement to that effect and not to court publicity with such appearances.

The more times I see people 'breaking down' during a TV interview, the less of an impact it has on me.

[DickyP]

I agree - endless sympathy for them and any bereaved parent - but why are they on TV. I'm sure it's not them and they clearly did not wish to be there.

I feel they are put into the situation where they're damned if the do and damned if they don't. Perhaps they had reached the stage where they felt that they had to do it to get people to go away and leave them alone.

As to the title question BJ: whilst you still question your own motives you're probably not heartless. There are no simple answers to complex moral questions.

[Rizzo]

I suppose someone told them that making a media appeal for information would spur someone into coming forward, but if they haven't done yet, I doubt the press conference thing would make them do so. I did feel the bereaved parents had probably been encouraged to appear so it looked like something was being done.

Heartless? No. I don't believe in the stiff upper lip but I do believe in doing your weeping in private.

[Daveyboy]

A ghastly thing to happen to anyone. I can't begin to imagine how they must feel.

The parents can't really be blamed for being caught up in the media circus.

Heaven knows how I would react in their circumstances.

[BJ.]

I agree - endless sympathy for them and any bereaved parent - but why are they on TV. I'm sure it's not them and they clearly did not wish to be there.

I feel they are put into the situation where they're damned if the do and damned if they don't. Perhaps they had reached the stage where they felt that they had to do it to get people to go away and leave them alone.

I dunno. Nobody can force them into making a TV appearance but they have courted publicity in the past. I believe a well-worded statement requesting privacy read out by a spokesperson (as long as it's not Max Clifford!) would carry more dignity than being led blubbering in front of a TV camera.

[Kinoulton]

I recall watching the horrible antics of Matther Eappen's parents blubbering and weeping on TV and claiming that their au pair, Louise Woodward, had killed him, and instantly knew something was wrong. They were weird.

Despite the fact the lad's family had caused the poor lad horrendous injuries, the American court managed to shift the blame onto Louise, who I believe to be totally innocent, so conveniently convicted her and shipped her back to England.

And does any one remember Ian Huntley appearing on national TV expressing his "shock" at the death of the two girls at the school where he worked?

It's just not natural. If you grieve, you grieve in private and don't go on national TV for your 15 minutes of fame.

[BJ.]

Interesting ...

From the Beeb

[Crumbie Dweller]

I know from personal experience that the police try and push you into these interviews, they tell you it could help the investigation and in a confused state when you are not thinking very clearly you agree to do them.

[fleabane]

. . . but how often is an arrest the case after grieving relatives appear on tv?

[Crumbie Dweller]

I dont know the answer to that one fleabane, but looking back it didnt help me in any way and I wish I hadnt been put in that position

[Kinoulton]

It appears I inadvertently predicted what happened.

[BJ.]

From the Beeb

And there you go ...

[Zdzislaw]

I detect an under current in some of the posts. Would the same be said about the doctors from Rothley?

[BJ.]

Would the same be said about the doctors from Rothley?

In my case, yes.

[Kinoulton]

The Doctors from Rothley are bound to be suspects, not because of any particular evidence, but because they were the last people to see their daughter before she went missing.

But the flip side is that Lindy Chamberlain was jailed for life and became the most hated woman in Australia because no one believed her story that a dingo had taken her baby.

Such was the frenzy to have her convicted, that in a country of just 23 million people, it didn't seem to occur to anyone to point out that dingo attacks on humans were very common and often fatal. And that the forensics that suggested that she'd slit her own baby's throat in her car turned out to be rubbish.

She served three years of Hell, just because people wanted her to be guilty.