Wednesday, December 13, 2006

How many days has it been now, that the "Suffolk Ripper" has been on all the front pages?

Bar the FT, obviously.

I noticed the BBC thoughtfully removed the story, at least for a few hours, from the website homepage, perhaps in a bid not to be irresponsible, in light of comments made by police that the publicity frenzy may be spurring the offender on.

Of course, there's no reason to suspect the police aren't right on the money, they've certainly been taking good council. Take for example, the remarks of a Dr Ian Stephen, "Consultant forensic psychologist who has worked on previous serial killer cases and advised the makers of the TV drama Cracker" - if that wasn't a CV to silence anyone.

"My worry is that his perception of women will change and he will see any woman who's out on the street at night on their own as a prostitute."

In sum, it's alright to go on a killing sprees, as long as he can competently draw the distinction between lowlife whores, and the rest.

"He maybe had a mother who has let him down, or a mother who has abandoned him," he added. "In some sense he may have idolised women and then they let him down."
But he also said the killer might believe he is on "some kind of Christian mission... clearing the world of prostitutes".

Gosh, how credible does that sound?

Interestingly, the
"If this story upsets you, click here" link, which appears embedded in this story on the CBBC Newsround page (not a resource I consult quite as frequently, reassure yourselves) does not feature in the reports of the daily murder & carnage in Iraq. Perhaps because of the distance, but then again, terrorism is hardly localised nowadays. Here's some advice for the beeb - perhaps if you were to mention on the Newsround page that all the women who've been pulled out of ditches so far have been prostitutes, children might be less anxious and prone to having nightmares as a result of reading the story. That's of course, as long as our Ripper pursues the trend. No doubt Dr Ian is keeping his fingers crossed.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/suffolk/6171571.stm

No comments: