Peter Sutcliffe

[steviedm]

Beeb now have a story about the Yorkshire police apologising about the descriptions and language used during the manhunt!

Here's a bit: At Sutcliffe's trial, prosecutor Sir Michael Havers, who was the attorney general at the time, said: "Some were prostitutes but perhaps the saddest part of the case is that some were not.

"The last six attacks were on totally respectable women."

Beeb, get over yourselves. This is 40 years ago. You going to apologize for the Black and White Minstrels too!

Not sure what your point is. Firstly, the misogynistic attitude of the police during the case absolutely requires an apology regardless of how long ago it was. The context of the story is that the son of one of the victims, who was just short of his sixth birthday when his mother was murdered, was on Adrian Chiles programme on Five Live today and said what would be worth celebrating is not the death of Sutcliffe but an apology for the way his mother and other victims were treated. West Yorkshire police responded by offering the apology he asked for. Secondly, I've got no idea why the BBC need to get over themselves for reporting a bona fide story in the public interest. A case of shoot the messenger if ever I've seen one.

[Sotv]

Beeb now have a story about the Yorkshire police apologising about the descriptions and language used during the manhunt!

Here's a bit: At Sutcliffe's trial, prosecutor Sir Michael Havers, who was the attorney general at the time, said: "Some were prostitutes but perhaps the saddest part of the case is that some were not.

"The last six attacks were on totally respectable women."

Beeb, get over yourselves. This is 40 years ago. You going to apologize for the Black and White Minstrels too!

Not sure what your point is. Firstly, the misogynistic attitude of the police during the case absolutely requires an apology regardless of how long ago it was. The context of the story is that the son of one of the victims, who was just short of his sixth birthday when his mother was murdered, was on Adrian Chiles programme on Five Live today and said what would be worth celebrating is not the death of Sutcliffe but an apology for the way his mother and other victims were treated. West Yorkshire police responded by offering the apology he asked for. Secondly, I've got no idea why the BBC need to get over themselves for reporting a bona fide story in the public interest. A case of shoot the messenger if ever I've seen one.

I think his point was about judging history by today’s standards. As much as the police like to pay lip service to how things have changed, I’m not convinced it’s all as rosy as made out. I’m not sure if it’s been stopped now, but very recently women who made complaints of rape or sexual assault could be expected to hand over their phones where the police would trawl through messages, photos, mail and whatever else they fancied. If they refused to hand over their phones then the case would invariably be dropped. Strikes me as the digital equivalent of “she was asking for it in that short skirt”

[HawkingsHalfpint]

Saying sorry is great, especially when it wasn't they who actually said it. But I'd rather they instead focussed their efforts on preventing their own discrimination in future, which still exists.

The Beeb love an apology, however. I wonder if they will apologise tonight for the Children in Need of help from paedos on their payroll, which was still going on when this celeb-wankfest all started.

[The liquidator]

Beeb now have a story about the Yorkshire police apologising about the descriptions and language used during the manhunt!

Here's a bit: At Sutcliffe's trial, prosecutor Sir Michael Havers, who was the attorney general at the time, said: "Some were prostitutes but perhaps the saddest part of the case is that some were not.

"The last six attacks were on totally respectable women."

Beeb, get over yourselves. This is 40 years ago. You going to apologize for the Black and White Minstrels too!

Not sure what your point is. Firstly, the misogynistic attitude of the police during the case absolutely requires an apology regardless of how long ago it was. The context of the story is that the son of one of the victims, who was just short of his sixth birthday when his mother was murdered, was on Adrian Chiles programme on Five Live today and said what would be worth celebrating is not the death of Sutcliffe but an apology for the way his mother and other victims were treated. West Yorkshire police responded by offering the apology he asked for. Secondly, I've got no idea why the BBC need to get over themselves for reporting a bona fide story in the public interest. A case of shoot the messenger if ever I've seen one.

I think his point was about judging history by today’s standards. As much as the police like to pay lip service to how things have changed, I’m not convinced it’s all as rosy as made out. I’m not sure if it’s been stopped now, but very recently women who made complaints of rape or sexual assault could be expected to hand over their phones where the police would trawl through messages, photos, mail and whatever else they fancied. If they refused to hand over their phones then the case would invariably be dropped. Strikes me as the digital equivalent of “she was asking for it in that short skirt”

I think going through the phones is just plain wrong but they just don't want any nasty surprises coming out at trial.

[Atomic]

The BBC making apologies. Absolutely priceless. Someone mention the name Jimmy Saville to them.

That organisation is a joke.

[Spandaubaggie]

Beeb now have a story about the Yorkshire police apologising about the descriptions and language used during the manhunt!

Here's a bit: At Sutcliffe's trial, prosecutor Sir Michael Havers, who was the attorney general at the time, said: "Some were prostitutes but perhaps the saddest part of the case is that some were not.

"The last six attacks were on totally respectable women."

Beeb, get over yourselves. This is 40 years ago. You going to apologize for the Black and White Minstrels too!

Not sure what your point is. Firstly, the misogynistic attitude of the police during the case absolutely requires an apology regardless of how long ago it was. The context of the story is that the son of one of the victims, who was just short of his sixth birthday when his mother was murdered, was on Adrian Chiles programme on Five Live today and said what would be worth celebrating is not the death of Sutcliffe but an apology for the way his mother and other victims were treated. West Yorkshire police responded by offering the apology he asked for. Secondly, I've got no idea why the BBC need to get over themselves for reporting a bona fide story in the public interest. A case of shoot the messenger if ever I've seen one.

I think his point was about judging history by today’s standards. As much as the police like to pay lip service to how things have changed, I’m not convinced it’s all as rosy as made out. I’m not sure if it’s been stopped now, but very recently women who made complaints of rape or sexual assault could be expected to hand over their phones where the police would trawl through messages, photos, mail and whatever else they fancied. If they refused to hand over their phones then the case would invariably be dropped. Strikes me as the digital equivalent of “she was asking for it in that short skirt”

Cheers. This precisely. Trying to look at life now through the same lens as in 1980 is futile. 
Issue now is, rightly in most cases, people take judgement on words used and stereotyping.