Royal Baby

1235

Comments

  • why pretending to be someone you aren't.they should be on their gurads againgst that sort of thing.i would have expected lots of press and public to phone up to try and get some information...........it was such an obvious thing to do.........who on earth would believe that royalty would use the phone system....

    how on earth did they inflict a nervous shock.she picked up the phone.they asked to be put through and she did that........not exactly a nervous shock situation....they doidn't tell her that a family memvber had died or that she had cancer.........they asked to be put through to a ward

  • They inflicted on someone who isn't in the limelight the nervous shock of having her voice, answering the phone, broadcast on hundreds of radio and TV stations all around the world, including e.g. the BBC TV News and Radio 4 News as their lead item. How would that make you feel, it you were portrayed in a bad light, this fool who gets a voice impersonating Her Majesty the Queen very badly, and yet you treat the call as bona fide and pass it on - subsequently being left thinking everybody is talking about you and laughing at you for your foolishness?

    You are excusing pranksters for the consequences of their prank. If they hadn't carried out their prank, in all probability the woman would be alive now.

    The trouble with pranks is that people don't accept the blame for the consequences that flow from them. You're trying to say they aren't to blame. They are to blame. They were reckless as to the consequences of their prank, and now someone's dead.

  • if that was enough to push her over the edge.......then there was not much chance for her.......

     then surely the BBC  and all the other news stations etc are just as guilty as the pranksters.they are the ones that fed it to the world........otherwise if it was on an australian radio station she would bnever have heard it........

  • if you call me an idiot on here and i go away and get upset and kill myself....is it really your fault as you called me an idiot

    no the responsibility is with the person who commits suicide.even if they have to have many more problems for it to get that bad for them

  • The CAUSE is the pranksters themselves, who chose to create a news item which would obviously be spread around the world if they pulled their prank off and broadcast the result.

    The media aren't the cause, they are simply reporting the news.

    The pranksters are to blame, assuming the woman topped herself because of how the prank left her feeling. The media aren't to blame.

  • it doesn't seem clear yet exactly who was to blame. we may never know.

    it is possible that she was placed under huge scrutiny at work because of the incident. maybe her job was at threat. but possibly not. it is possible that the media attention laced huge pressure on her which she couldnt cope with. or possibly not. there may be a million other issues in her life which we don't know about which conributed to this. or possibly not.

    we just don't know.

     

     

  • crap......the media reported it because they thought the poublic wanted to hear it.so its the public who lapped up the story w3ho can take the blame..the media only spread the story as you lot were all interested in in.........

    see.its easy to pass the blame....they did a prank/ joke.nothing major ...nothing threatening....they protended to be the royalty......how on earth is that a crime...and before she killed herselfhow many people were thinking.what a funny joke.or how did they get away with that...........

  • wow, runners' world, the compassionate forum.

    Full of... fucking hypocrites....

  • If you listen to the whole clip from the radio station... these were a couple of complete amateurs.  The only thing they intended to do was goof around and get an English receptionist on the line... and get cut off. I'm certain that that was to be their joke.

    It was absolutely clear that they were totally unprepared to get past the receptionist. They didn't know what to say

  • I feel sorry for everyone involved in this.  It was a childish prank, unfunny and trying to get confidential information that they were not entitled to was wrong, But they couldn't have foreseen this as an outcome and must be devestated. Kate herself must feel very sad about it all at a time when she needs rest (not that I'm a royalist but she's still human). We all make mistakes and hindsight is always 20/20. Its tragic set events and apportioning blame is a bit soon right now for me.  There are possibly a number of things that contributed. 

    Condolences to her family. 

  • Colin McLaughlin wrote (see)

    You can. It's intentionally or recklessly inflicted nervous shock.

    Did you just make that pile of crap up??

  • I think Leveson has demonstrated the risks of quoting from wikipedia. image

    The other key phrase in your quote is "intentionally or recklessly". To prove that is a very high hurdle which is beyond the scope of an internet thread. 

     

  • i think tose who are making threats etc to the pranksters are much worse

  • No one's trying to prove it, Soup Dragon. I was asked, "Did you just make that pile of crap up??" Answer, no, liability for nervous shock is a well-recognised area of law; here's a wikipedia page that discusses the general area.

    If you want to delve into it further, buy yourself a textbook on the law of tort.

  • how did they cause her a nervous shock.they spoke briefley on the phone while she transferred them......

    its not like they suddenly jumped out on her.................and said boo loudly

  • I don't need to buy a book on tort thank you. image image

    Seren - I agree, and the hypocrisy is staggering. Advertisers didn't complain at the time of the prank I don't think. So it was okay for them then and only now have they pulled the plug. Same with the threats to the presenters. Says a lot about human nature, the mob mentality is so strong.

    Time to move on now I think. 

  • They are likely to have caused her nervous shock by e.g. (a) telling her it was the Queen phoning, (b) inducing her to tell someone else it was the Queen on the line, that other person therefore divulging confidential information, (c) there being a major row in the hospital once it was discovered it was a prank caller she had put through, fingers pointing to her as the primary culprit, and all the related embarrassment and explaining; (d) having to report to senior staff in a series of internal investigations; (e) hearing her voice on radio and TV receiving the call and putting it through, because the only bit the media played was her part of the conversations, the rest being a breach of privacy;  (f) she becoming profoundly upset, alarmed and depressed and ultimately killing herself - I imagine by an overdose.

    It's all rather foreseeable that if you pretend to be a caller you aren't, and succeed in your mission, someone else is going to end up in trouble for the chain of events, and be made to feel bad about themselves. How they deal with that depends on their own mental stability, but you must take your victim as you find them.

    I'm actually surprised that there's someone dead, yet you're repeatedly coming back and trying to excuse the pranksters, seren nos. This is typical of pranksters: going too far in what they do, but then retreating from the consequences when serious harm results.

    They must take their victim as they find her. If she isn't as robust as you and me, and they play a prank on her, and it upsets her so seriously she takes her own life, then they and their employers should take responsibility for it and not just shrug and say oh well, it's an accident, just one of those things, nothing to do with us.

    Pranksters want freedom without responsibility.  

  • Its civil law not criminal, so its about getting compensation not justice.

  • What is?

  • Your quote on nervous shock.

  • I draw a parallel with Dr David Kelly the quiet scientist who allegedly committed suicide when thrust into the media spotlight over Iraq and this nurse finding herself in the full glare of the media.

    Public pranksters and jokers are always "devastated" when their japes go wrong but they earn their living doing it because like journalists they invoke  "public interest" . I don't believe there is wide interest in pranks but clearly it takes all sorts. It is no different to a journalist creating a story out of nothing. 

    Probably the big idea of Australia becoming a republic after Queen Elizabeth's death will feed this sort of thing. 

     

  • But the nurse wasn't in the full glare of the media. She only became known after her death.

    It's all very sad but I don't think the pranksters can be blamed. I sense there are other factors at play in the poor woman's life or work that we don't know about.

  • What Muttley said.

    There is no way on earth that this prank was the sole cause of this woman's death and the pranksters thenselves can't possibly be held reponsible for what happened.

    Interestingly, there was a case reported last week where an inquest ruled that a girl who had got into trouble at school for being drunk - and actually still was drunk - died after falling from a motorway bridge. It was ruled it a suicide but her parents (who presumably know her better) want it changed to misadventure because they don't believe she would have reacted so extremely.

  • Muttley wrote (see)

    But the nurse wasn't in the full glare of the media. She only became known after her death.

    It's all very sad but I don't think the pranksters can be blamed. I sense there are other factors at play in the poor woman's life or work that we don't know about.

    Sorry, my point being what this poor woman feared was about to happen.

    Probably the positive will be that the privacy of the nurse that actually divulged the details will be preserved. Surely the press post Lord Leveson will not publish?

    Both nurses will have been disciplined or at least severely spoken to (despite the kind words now being uttered) most likely by

    a) The Hospital b) The Palace flunkies c) Royal Security

    The Palace and Security will not have trod gently on the woman's feeling and will likely have been all over her family history - perhaps that will prove to be the other factor.

  • None of us here knows what happened or how the poor nurse felt. Maybe we should wait for the inquest.

    I dont really think that the health of a patient/baby is something that people should joke or make entertainment out of really.  What if it was really bad news ? I think the radio station prank went out live ?

  • I read it was prerecorded and OKed by the management.  

     

  • RicFRicF ✭✭✭

    Media full of this story this morning.

    Australia says all the DJ's did was to make a phone call and from I can determine, all the nurse did was say, " I'll put you through".

    From the UK we have statements based on pure hindsight, along the lines of 'surely these people (dj's) must have realised that their actions of making a phone call would result in someone's death. How irresponsible. Get the police!

    Think about it.

    Some individuals live their lives in anonymity until one day they are exposed as the source of some hideous crime. Not surprisingly they kill themselves. But not in this case.

    Some just find existing too much to handle. It doesn't take much more to push them over the edge.

    At what level of stress applied to others do we become responsible for their subsequent actions?

    Will people be committing suicide over getting a parking ticket or being short changed in a restaurant?

    The answer is sadly, possibly.

    Will the level of opprobrium I might receive from writing this post cause me to end it all? I think not.

    But we all have our limits.

     

  • I think the hospital trying to put all the blame on the radio station is trying to cover up for what must be a lack of training for their staff.........

Sign In or Register to comment.