Kopek Posted June 15, 2022 Share Posted June 15, 2022 but that doesn't answer why the Coroner called for silence on who made the misidentificstion? Who was the Coroner trying to protect? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrighty Posted June 15, 2022 Share Posted June 15, 2022 5 minutes ago, Kopek said: Who was the Coroner trying to protect? Not who but what. The truth. The more speculation and rumour that is out there, the more it can distort memories and facts. It goes something like this - anonymous forum user makes stuff up about what he thought might have happened. This gets copied on another forum. Mail online, seeing it twice, report it as ‘a reliable source’. This is picked up by The Sun and repeated. The Guardian, seeing it in two tabloids jump on the same bandwagon. Now in the quality press it appears on the BBC and is seen by the original bullshitter who pats himself on the back saying “I bloody knew it”. Eyewitnesses now question their own recollection of events as it was a stressful time, and well, the BBC must have reliable sources so perhaps their recollection is flawed. Etc. etc. 8 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted June 15, 2022 Share Posted June 15, 2022 4 minutes ago, wrighty said: Not who but what. The truth. The more speculation and rumour that is out there, the more it can distort memories and facts. It goes something like this - anonymous forum user makes stuff up about what he thought might have happened. This gets copied on another forum. Mail online, seeing it twice, report it as ‘a reliable source’. This is picked up by The Sun and repeated. The Guardian, seeing it in two tabloids jump on the same bandwagon. Now in the quality press it appears on the BBC and is seen by the original bullshitter who pats himself on the back saying “I bloody knew it”. Eyewitnesses now question their own recollection of events as it was a stressful time, and well, the BBC must have reliable sources so perhaps their recollection is flawed. Etc. etc. Exactly. The stories and speculation that are circulating could well colour someone's recollection. The idea that the deceased body was taken to Liverpool just doesn't make sense, surely the body is released by the Coroner to the family or their representative (undertaker)? Even if it was taken to Liverpool would it be taken to a hospital rather than another undertaker? I don't know much about these processes but the stories and rumours are filling in gaps, possibly where there aren't gaps. You can understand the Coroner's request. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted June 15, 2022 Share Posted June 15, 2022 5 hours ago, manxman1980 said: Are you relying on the Google translation for this statement? Google translate is okay but it seems to translate individual words rather than the full sentence. We might think that is okay but in languages like French the structure of the sentence can alter the meaning. The French is straightforward though, the key bit is - ne portaient pas leur “pass” . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted June 15, 2022 Share Posted June 15, 2022 45 minutes ago, Gladys said: The idea that the deceased body was taken to Liverpool just doesn't make sense, surely the body is released by the Coroner to the family or their representative (undertaker)? Even if it was taken to Liverpool would it be taken to a hospital rather than another undertaker? I think it's more likely that the Dad, who's being quoted, doesn't know where the brother went to identify the corpse, but does know that his son is in hospital in Liverpool and probably thinks the Isle of Man is just off Liverpool anyway. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted June 16, 2022 Share Posted June 16, 2022 23 minutes ago, Declan said: I think it's more likely that the Dad, who's being quoted, doesn't know where the brother went to identify the corpse, but does know that his son is in hospital in Liverpool and probably thinks the Isle of Man is just off Liverpool anyway. That may be the case, but from personal experience, you do tend to track where your deceased relative is until you have them home for the funeral. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted June 16, 2022 Share Posted June 16, 2022 7 hours ago, wrighty said: Not who but what. The truth. The more speculation and rumour that is out there, the more it can distort memories and facts. It goes something like this - anonymous forum user makes stuff up about what he thought might have happened. This gets copied on another forum. Mail online, seeing it twice, report it as ‘a reliable source’. This is picked up by The Sun and repeated. The Guardian, seeing it in two tabloids jump on the same bandwagon. Now in the quality press it appears on the BBC and is seen by the original bullshitter who pats himself on the back saying “I bloody knew it”. Eyewitnesses now question their own recollection of events as it was a stressful time, and well, the BBC must have reliable sources so perhaps their recollection is flawed. Etc. etc. You’re spot on, wrighty, that’s exactly the sort of thing that this type of request by a coroner is hoping to protect against. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTF Posted June 16, 2022 Share Posted June 16, 2022 11 minutes ago, John Wright said: You’re spot on, wrighty, that’s exactly the sort of thing that this type of request by a coroner is hoping to protect against. aren't we past that stage already though, who hasn't heard yet ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted June 16, 2022 Share Posted June 16, 2022 6 hours ago, Gladys said: That may be the case, but from personal experience, you do tend to track where your deceased relative is until you have them home for the funeral. I just find it more likely that a father in this situation talking to his local paper is more likely to be mistaken than lying about an irrelevent detail. All he knows is he's got one son in hospital in Liverpool, his other son was initially sent to identify a body on the Isle of Man, possibly via Liverpool. It seems this understandable misunderstanding and people are making too much of it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newbie Posted June 16, 2022 Share Posted June 16, 2022 20 minutes ago, John Wright said: You’re spot on, wrighty, that’s exactly the sort of thing that this type of request by a coroner is hoping to protect against. Unfortunately, preventing a full explanation from being put in the public domain only serves to increase the amount of speculation, rumour and gossip, which in turn may lead to the situation wrighty describes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoops Posted June 16, 2022 Share Posted June 16, 2022 I've been an eyewitness to someone getting run over, and also an attempted murder (Machete attack). It's a weird thing, you, or at least I, soon start questioning what you saw, even without outside speculation. So the sooner any statement is given, the better. Fortunately, wasn't called to court for either, the second perpertrator was sectioned. Wife looked out our window and saw the initial attack through the neighbours window, I saw something, called the police and went out, looked through the front window of the house, and the guy is talking normally, no sign of a weapon or victim. By the time ob turn up, I'm doubting what I saw, so I tell them it might be a false alarm. One copper stood talking to me while 2 knocked on his door, he answers politely and quietly. At this point I'm feeling really stupid, until they ask to be allowed in and he bellows and attacks.The copper with me watches for a couple of seconds, shrugs, and says "I suppose I should help really"! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted June 16, 2022 Share Posted June 16, 2022 18 hours ago, Markduc said: The baying gossip mongers on social media probably drive the rush to put out information the organizers would of been criticized if they had kept details to themselves, dammed if they do dammed if they don’t I don't think they were baying for names. Just information about what was going on. Its a tricky one isnt it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0bserver Posted June 16, 2022 Share Posted June 16, 2022 23 minutes ago, Happier diner said: I don't think they were baying for names. Just information about what was going on. Its a tricky one isnt it? A basic statement along the lines of "There's been a racing incident on the course that the organisers and emergency services are dealing with. More information will be provided in due course" would be more than sufficient. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newbie Posted June 16, 2022 Share Posted June 16, 2022 6 minutes ago, 0bserver said: A basic statement along the lines of "There's been a racing incident on the course that the organisers and emergency services are dealing with. More information will be provided in due course" would be more than sufficient. That does happen. It gets announced to the paddock, broadcast on Manx Radio, and within 10 minutes of the incident it was on Manx Radio's news site. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevster Posted June 16, 2022 Share Posted June 16, 2022 9 minutes ago, Newbie said: That does happen. It gets announced to the paddock, broadcast on Manx Radio, and within 10 minutes of the incident it was on Manx Radio's news site. People have short memories when the facts don't fit their cover-up theory 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.