Why are random folk contacting the media on something which is not their business? What were they hoping to achieve, to publicly undermine the widow's grief?
Yeah her grief may have been tinged with guilt, but I do think it is genuine. People are not one dimensional.
Random folk? I think you'll find that it was his sister, the closest person to him for the majority of his life.
Also, please read my post on page three before you jump in two footed. They contacted her. Everyone in Eccles knew so she wasn't uncovering some big secret out of spite.
She isn't asking for sympathy nor making a fool out of anyone. The story was going to hit the press at the weekend. Hundreds of people from Eccles had contacted the press to say what they knew. Alan's sister was approached to give her view of things rather than the press print their own story. We all know what the Sun are like when they are given the freedom to make their own stories up. We only have to think of the filth they wrote about Hillsborough to confirm what utter scum they are.
If she wanted to do this out of spite, she'd have done it back in October and made the situation unbearable for the wife. She didn't. She maintained her dignity throughout in the face of unbelievable pressure.
I'm sure she won't lose any sleep over not receiving your sympathy. Please do not talk nonsense about a person you know almost nothing about.
I'm not interested in the gossips of Eccles or anything they did.
Of course she's making a fool of Alan and his children. More so herself which is all she deserves after such a betrayal to the press. What has the time she's chosen to do this got to do with anything? It's personal to the family and should have stayed that way as far as anyone in the family is concerned.
I find it hard to believe that there was not an element of self pity and spite about it.
Would she have given the press such intimate details about Alan's wife had she not been the injured party?
As a family member, it didn't cross her mind to maintain her dignified silence, for the sake of her brother and his children?
Now they all have a media storm and public comment to deal with. That goes with the territory.
I'm not interested in the gossips of Eccles or anything they did.
Of course she's making a fool of Alan and his children. More so herself which is all she deserves after such a betrayal to the press. What has the time she's chosen to do this got to do with anything? It's personal to the family and should have stayed that way as far as anyone in the family is concerned.
I find it hard to believe that there was not an element of self pity and spite about it.
Would she have given the press such intimate details about Alan's wife had she not been the injured party?
As a family member, it didn't cross her mind to maintain her dignified silence, for the sake of her brother and his children?
Now they all have a media storm and public comment to deal with. That goes with the territory.
Please, stop talking about a person who you simply know nothing about. You are suggesting it didn't cross her mind to stay silent. I can tell you - the poor woman is broken. She has been through the year from hell. At each and every tribute, she faced the World with dignity and respect. Never once did she forget the real tradgedy of all this. I held her in my arms on October 4th and let me tell you that the affair was the last thing on her mind. She has been through a living hell.
I implore you to stop making assumptions about my family when you know only what the Sun newspaper have told you.
Please, stop talking about a person who you simply know nothing about. You are suggesting it didn't cross her mind to stay silent. I can tell you - the poor woman is broken. She has been through the year from hell. At each and every tribute, she faced the World with dignity and respect. Never once did she forget the real tradgedy of all this. I held her in my arms on October 4th and let me tell you that the affair was the last thing on her mind. She has been through a living hell.
I implore you to stop making assumptions about my family when you know only what the Sun newspaper have told you.
This is a perfectly legitimate discussion forum and only one of the inevitable outcomes of her actions.
That should have been thought out and considered and is one of the main reasons many people are upset by it.
I'm not suggesting she feels anything other than huge pain, loss and anger. I feel very sad for her, but this action was unacceptable for me.
If you are a relative I would suggest that reading any comment on this is not the healthiest decision.
It's made all of their lives more miserable. Inevitable and obvious to most people, sadly not her.
Random folk? I think you'll find that it was his sister, the closest person to him for the majority of his life.
Also, please read my post on page three before you jump in two footed. They contacted her. Everyone in Eccles knew so she wasn't uncovering some big secret out of spite.
I was not talking about his sister. Your OP implied that these were random folk from eccles that contacted the media with information.
Hundreds of people from Eccles had contacted the press to say what they knew
.
I'm just pointing out that there was no real reason for them to come forward with this information- it really was none of their business. There was no reason for this story to be in the press.
I'm sorry for the confusion. I was not attacking his sister.
She isn't asking for sympathy nor making a fool out of anyone. The story was going to hit the press at the weekend. Hundreds of people from Eccles had contacted the press to say what they knew. Alan's sister was approached to give her view of things rather than the press print their own story.
If she wanted to do this out of spite, she'd have done it back in October and made the situation unbearable for the wife. She didn't. She maintained her dignity throughout in the face of unbelievable pressure.
This sounds perfectly reasoned to me. The press can be a nightmare I agree and it is well known how they can operate. This is nothing new and I would imagine many people when in that direct situation may do the same.
Some may remain silent, but others not. Neither option is deserving of condemnation for me.
i have absolutely zero issue with her giving her side of the story, especially if a story is going to break regardless. The criticism for her, for me is pretty distasteful, especially given the circumstance.
There seems to be huge sympathy for the wife from some people (and understandably so) and yet not so much for her, which I find strange and lacking in consistency.
Many people can be affected by a horrific incident like this, and I for one certainly don't see her giving her side of the story to the press as in any way a slight on her character especially given the nature of the story and the context of the situation.
It is very easy for people to judge and pour self righteous condemnation on others. Far far harder to try and look at things like this from more than just one angle, or perspective, and have an understanding of how different things can affect different people and in different ways.
I was not talking about his sister. Your OP implied that these were random folk from eccles that contacted the media with information. .
I'm just pointing out that there was no real reason for them to come forward with this information- it really was none of their business. There was no reason for this story to be in the press.
I'm sorry for the confusion. I was not attacking his sister.
Fair enough. I thought you'd posted without reading the 3rd page. I apologise for the misunderstanding on my part. I saw your username and the red mist descended (I'm a City fan).
Also, the chap just above this - quality post. Titbits of information through the press do not give you an understanding of a persons morals and motives. I have learned some life lessons this year and judging people because the media want me to believe something is high up on that list.
So running to the DM is the lesser of two evils? Her distress could surely have been alleviated by confiding in friends or counsellors. It really wasn't necessary to run to the DM and open up the children's wounds again unless she's taking a spiteful revenge -and making a few quid at the same time.
Why do you think the onus is on her to cover up for the two people that actually are the ones that did wrong?
If they didn't want the facts acknowledged or their children hurt they shouldn't be ****ing each other. Once they do it people are bound to comment. And I really can't imagine how it being in the papers,or not, makes the fact that your mum committed adultery by sleeping with your uncle more wounding!
Why do you think the onus is on her to cover up for the two people that actually are the ones that did wrong?
If they didn't want the facts acknowledged or their children hurt they shouldn't be ****ing each other. Once they do it people are bound to comment. And I really can't imagine how it being in the papers,or not, makes the fact that your mum committed adultery by sleeping with your uncle more wounding!
Seriously?
I think if something like that happened in my family I would want to keep it as private as possible.
I think if something like that happened in my family I would want to keep it as private as possible.
Then you'd be disappointed. If you shack up with your family member people are bound to notice and comment on the circumstances. The only way to prevent it being discussed is to do a disappearing act or chose not to do it.
And if you sleep with someones husband they have a right to discuss what happened as it is their life that is effected too. You can't expect or demand silence from the victim just because it suits you to hide your embarrassment.
One thing in the sister's statement did hit home to me the thoughts that must have been going through her mind..
"I never told Alan before he went. It has tortured me ever since. After his capture Alan must have been in his cell thinking about getting back to his family.*"He will have had so long to ponder things...and what would he have had to come back to ?"
If her brother had been aware of the affair before he left, then I would agree there's no need to make it public. But I can see his sister's anger at the deceit involved, her brother met his end without ever knowing the truth. All those tearful messages, the campaigning for him to be spared, and his wife was sleeping with the brother-in-law throughout. It's all a bit grubby and sordid.
One thing in the sister's statement did hit home to me the thoughts that must have been going through her mind..
"I never told Alan before he went. It has tortured me ever since. After his capture Alan must have been in his cell thinking about getting back to his family.*"He will have had so long to ponder things...and what would he have had to come back to ?"
If her brother had been aware of the affair before he left, then I would agree there's no need to make it public. But I can see his sister's anger at the deceit involved, her brother met his end without ever knowing the truth. All those tearful messages, the campaigning for him to be spared, and his wife was sleeping with the brother-in-law throughout. It's all a bit grubby and sordid.
If that's what happened and there's nothing else to it, I agree. The tabloids are known for twisting things though.
Comments
Random folk? I think you'll find that it was his sister, the closest person to him for the majority of his life.
Also, please read my post on page three before you jump in two footed. They contacted her. Everyone in Eccles knew so she wasn't uncovering some big secret out of spite.
I'm not interested in the gossips of Eccles or anything they did.
Of course she's making a fool of Alan and his children. More so herself which is all she deserves after such a betrayal to the press. What has the time she's chosen to do this got to do with anything? It's personal to the family and should have stayed that way as far as anyone in the family is concerned.
I find it hard to believe that there was not an element of self pity and spite about it.
Would she have given the press such intimate details about Alan's wife had she not been the injured party?
As a family member, it didn't cross her mind to maintain her dignified silence, for the sake of her brother and his children?
Now they all have a media storm and public comment to deal with. That goes with the territory.
Please, stop talking about a person who you simply know nothing about. You are suggesting it didn't cross her mind to stay silent. I can tell you - the poor woman is broken. She has been through the year from hell. At each and every tribute, she faced the World with dignity and respect. Never once did she forget the real tradgedy of all this. I held her in my arms on October 4th and let me tell you that the affair was the last thing on her mind. She has been through a living hell.
I implore you to stop making assumptions about my family when you know only what the Sun newspaper have told you.
This is a perfectly legitimate discussion forum and only one of the inevitable outcomes of her actions.
That should have been thought out and considered and is one of the main reasons many people are upset by it.
I'm not suggesting she feels anything other than huge pain, loss and anger. I feel very sad for her, but this action was unacceptable for me.
If you are a relative I would suggest that reading any comment on this is not the healthiest decision.
It's made all of their lives more miserable. Inevitable and obvious to most people, sadly not her.
I have nothing more to say.
Thank **** for that.
I was not talking about his sister. Your OP implied that these were random folk from eccles that contacted the media with information. .
I'm just pointing out that there was no real reason for them to come forward with this information- it really was none of their business. There was no reason for this story to be in the press.
I'm sorry for the confusion. I was not attacking his sister.
This sounds perfectly reasoned to me. The press can be a nightmare I agree and it is well known how they can operate. This is nothing new and I would imagine many people when in that direct situation may do the same.
Some may remain silent, but others not. Neither option is deserving of condemnation for me.
i have absolutely zero issue with her giving her side of the story, especially if a story is going to break regardless. The criticism for her, for me is pretty distasteful, especially given the circumstance.
There seems to be huge sympathy for the wife from some people (and understandably so) and yet not so much for her, which I find strange and lacking in consistency.
Many people can be affected by a horrific incident like this, and I for one certainly don't see her giving her side of the story to the press as in any way a slight on her character especially given the nature of the story and the context of the situation.
It is very easy for people to judge and pour self righteous condemnation on others. Far far harder to try and look at things like this from more than just one angle, or perspective, and have an understanding of how different things can affect different people and in different ways.
Is it a nice view up on that high horse of yours?
Fair enough. I thought you'd posted without reading the 3rd page. I apologise for the misunderstanding on my part. I saw your username and the red mist descended (I'm a City fan).
Also, the chap just above this - quality post. Titbits of information through the press do not give you an understanding of a persons morals and motives. I have learned some life lessons this year and judging people because the media want me to believe something is high up on that list.
Why do you think the onus is on her to cover up for the two people that actually are the ones that did wrong?
If they didn't want the facts acknowledged or their children hurt they shouldn't be ****ing each other. Once they do it people are bound to comment. And I really can't imagine how it being in the papers,or not, makes the fact that your mum committed adultery by sleeping with your uncle more wounding!
Seriously?
I think if something like that happened in my family I would want to keep it as private as possible.
Then you'd be disappointed. If you shack up with your family member people are bound to notice and comment on the circumstances. The only way to prevent it being discussed is to do a disappearing act or chose not to do it.
And if you sleep with someones husband they have a right to discuss what happened as it is their life that is effected too. You can't expect or demand silence from the victim just because it suits you to hide your embarrassment.
"I never told Alan before he went. It has tortured me ever since. After his capture Alan must have been in his cell thinking about getting back to his family.*"He will have had so long to ponder things...and what would he have had to come back to ?"
If her brother had been aware of the affair before he left, then I would agree there's no need to make it public. But I can see his sister's anger at the deceit involved, her brother met his end without ever knowing the truth. All those tearful messages, the campaigning for him to be spared, and his wife was sleeping with the brother-in-law throughout. It's all a bit grubby and sordid.
If that's what happened and there's nothing else to it, I agree. The tabloids are known for twisting things though.