Speculation is not necessary

[thommo2010]

13 minutes ago, Gladys said:

You are missing the point. 

I do not need or want to know who the poor unfortunate was who, presumably, died. 

My point is that the press releases could simply have said the identity will not be released until family members are notified  or whatever reason.  Perhaps they want to recover the body or some other reason.  That would be thoughtfully managed communication, not just saying don't speculate then provide ill conceived information which will inevitably lead to the very thing the police don't want - speculation. 

People will speculate regardless of what the police say, that is what people do. 

[Ringy Rose]

4 minutes ago, thommo2010 said:

People will speculate regardless of what the police say, that is what people do. 

Absolutely. The PPRUNE forum is full of speculation, and it will be right up until any air crash investigation is completed. 

[Alberttwatmunch]

9 minutes ago, thommo2010 said:

People will speculate regardless of what the police say, that is what people do. 

Its what people with empty lives do.

It doesn’t have any impact on my life and so I was sorry to hear the news but then that’s it.  To be honest if it wasn’t for this thread I would have forgotten about it by now as I have enough going on in my own and loved ones lives without wondering what happened to someone I don’t know.

It obviously concerns some people and I guess that is up to them, but I will never claim to understand why someone would be interested in who was involved if it doesn’t impact them directly.

It takes all sorts I guess.

[Gladys]

2 minutes ago, Alberttwatmunch said:

Its what people with empty lives do.

It doesn’t have any impact on my life and so I was sorry to hear the news but then that’s it.  To be honest if it wasn’t for this thread I would have forgotten about it by now as I have enough going on in my own and loved ones lives without wondering what happened to someone I don’t know.

It obviously concerns some people and I guess that is up to them, but I will never claim to understand why someone would be interested in who was involved if it doesn’t impact them directly.

It takes all sorts I guess.

Again missing the point.  My query is not about who it was, but how communication is being handled by the police. @Derek Flint has alluded to how poor the communication is.  

There are other threads on here about how bad news is stifled or communication withheld, potentially heavy handed suppression of the press and so on.   

There are likely very valid reasons why there has been no name and most people would accept them on face value.  But to not give those reasons does fuel speculation and that is what the police do not want. 

There is a fine line between open policing (which we are always told is by consent) and compromising the integrity of an investigation or the right to privacy of those involved,  that we accept.  But that fine line has to be trodden, not ignored. 

[offshoremanxman]

3 minutes ago, Gladys said:

But that fine line has to be trodden, not ignored. 

Maybe something happened that is, currently, absolutely none of the business of anyone not directly affected? 

[Gladys]

Just now, offshoremanxman said:

Maybe something happened that is, currently, absolutely none of the business of anyone not directly affected? 

Very possibly, in which case the announcement would be that the police are not releasing the name until further enquiries are carried out or some other carefully crafted words.  

Again, it is not that I want to know, just that the communication has not been good and fuels speculation. 

[kevster]

4 minutes ago, Gladys said:

Very possibly, in which case the announcement would be that the police are not releasing the name until further enquiries are carried out or some other carefully crafted words.  

Again, it is not that I want to know, just that the communication has not been good and fuels speculation. 

They do say "However, at this time, no further information is being released as we are still undertaking enquiries on behalf of the coroner in order to establish the full facts and circumstances of what has occurred"

[thommo2010]

16 minutes ago, Gladys said:

Very possibly, in which case the announcement would be that the police are not releasing the name until further enquiries are carried out or some other carefully crafted words.  

Again, it is not that I want to know, just that the communication has not been good and fuels speculation. 

So what information do you expect that would stop speculation?

 

bearing in mind even 20 odd years later people still don't believe planes crashed into the twin towers.

[Shake me up Judy]

So why do you think the BBC has covered it Thommo ? Nothing to do with them, and most wouldn't even know where the IOM was.

[Gizo]

3 hours ago, Zarley said:

Maybe there are off-island family members they've not yet been able to contact? I don't think I'd want to find out about a loved one's demise via the BBC.

But they’re not. We all know what he did.  It ain’t hard to work out and as human nature people like to talk. 

[CrellinJoughin]

On 7/17/2023 at 7:22 PM, The Phantom said:

They often do. I sometimes get some interesting bits of info on my VHF from Belfast on the emergency channel. Although you are effectively listening into emergency conversations and people actually calling for help or providing warnings.

Totally possible a fishing boat or kayak saw it and called it straight into Belfast Coastguard, they control the emergency channel. Certainly on the west coast. 

Very interesting. VHF Radios and such have always fascinated me although I'm totally ignorant to the proper workings on how they operate ect. CB radios too. I love the idea if sitting and listening in to various bits of conversation.

[Albert Tatlock]

There are other reasons to name someone as soon as reasonable in any inquiry...e.g. other people that know someone's state of mind, stress at work, been in the pub etc. etc.

[Guest]

53 minutes ago, CrellinJoughin said:

Very interesting. VHF Radios and such have always fascinated me although I'm totally ignorant to the proper workings on how they operate ect. CB radios too. I love the idea if sitting and listening in to various bits of conversation.

A lot of the world has gone digital, but you can still hear various worldwide broadcast stations, shipping, aircraft, satellites and the international space station, radio amateurs, CB enthusiasts...

You can get started with just your web browser, for example at: http://hackgreensdr.org:8902

And if you like it, you can get started with a receiver to plug into you computer for around £20.

 

Edited July 19, 2023 by Keyop
Changed URL to non-mobile version

[The Phantom]

1 hour ago, CrellinJoughin said:

Very interesting. VHF Radios and such have always fascinated me although I'm totally ignorant to the proper workings on how they operate ect. CB radios too. I love the idea if sitting and listening in to various bits of conversation.

Just using a handheld marine VHF sometimes you'll only get half the conversation, as you'll only pick up the powerful or close broadcast.  Also you often can't tell where the incident is happening.  Could be anywhere in the Irish sea.  Last year I was paddling south from Douglas and was half listening to some rescue going down, hearing fires, people in the water, lifeboats.  All very enthralling.  When I eventually turned round, I saw the pall of black smoke rising just off Douglas bay.  It was a boat that had gone up in flames behind me and I was completely oblivious to it all!! 

[WTF]

10 hours ago, offshoremanxman said:

That’s unfair. If you’re that bothered it’s easy to track who owned the plane. The public don’t have a right to know anything really until the family has been told and investigations concluded. 

you can track who owns a plane , but it isn't necessarily the owner who was flying it at the time.