hmmm

[emmelinemay]

This article is bothering me for some reason.

A teenage girl has been convicted of murdering a 16-year-old boy who she had lured into a "honey trap".

From the the first sentence - "Shakilus Townsend would still be alive today if it had not been for a teenage temptress who toyed with his emotions and then betrayed him." through to the last - "Joseph now faces a life sentence and will have plenty of time to mull over the part she played in the death of an innocent boy." the article bothers me.

I can't put my finger on exactly what it is that is getting to me. There's something about the way the girl is presented in the piece, the language used, the way the victim is referred to by his first name throughout, and yet she is referred to by her surname.

What do you think?

Edit - One thing has just hit me. Hidden away at the bottom of the article is the comment "McLean and five other youths were also convicted of murder on Wednesday."

So ALL of the kids were convicted, but the girl involved is the one that gets the article. Because she's a girl. Are girls involved in murder more evil than boys involved in murder? Or is this girl's crime, in the writer's eyes, the 'betrayal' of a boy who (after seeing her for 6 weeks) wanted to make her his 'future wife'? Is that her crime? Not being a 'good future wife'?

The boys that actually BEAT THIS BOY TO DEATH get about 2 sentences in the whole article. They BEAT HIM TO DEATH and yet the true villain of the piece is this foolish girl?

Edit the second: I am not saying what she did was ok, or 'less evil' than the beating up. My issue is SPECIFICALLY with the language used to report this crime, which makes her 'womanly wiles' out to be a crime as horrific as sticking the knife in herself. I am unsurprised that the female commenters get it, and the male ones (with a few notable exceptions) don't.

Comments

[yaruar.livejournal.com]

I don't think it's that simple, from what i read about the case (albeit in the press) it was the girls idea to set the guy up because she was dumped for having a fling with him and brought him to her ex in order to gain favour with him again. Bearing in mind the boy and mcclean had had previous fights and the girl is almost definately complicit in knowing he would be stabbed/killed when she handed him over.

However there are the other aspects such as the whole transgression of a girl doing something bad when society expects women to be nice and kind and nurturing, but expects men to be evil sadistic killers.

[emmelinemay.livejournal.com]

I am sure there is more to the story than we are getting, but there were 6 people convicted for murder, not one. The way this article reads, you'd think it was only her.

Do articles about murder etc usually use first names for victims last for killers in that way? I've never noticed before.

[gaius-octavian.livejournal.com]

I dunno, what she did was ice cold. She put on a pretty dress, told him she was taking him to meet her relatives, and all along she knew what she was doing.

Not to excuse for a second what the 5 boys did, mind. But she took it to another level, she was not a "foolish girl".

[bluekieran.livejournal.com]

The reason she's news is that her role in the murder was unconventional, and if it was true that she only expected him to get beaten up, her conviction is questionable (or at least interesting, not sure how that part of the law works).

[blonde-venus.livejournal.com]

Oh God, as soon as I heard the words 'honey trap' on the news yesterday I winced. Would there be a equivalent phrase used for a woman you was tricked by a man? I don't think so.
Also I'm no legal expert but surely she is an accessory to murder as opposed to a murderer? This also raises some interesting gender based questions. Hmmm.

[ant-girl.livejournal.com]

Yeah, the 'honey trap' thing has been really bugging me too.

[gaius-octavian.livejournal.com]

I don't think I've seen on the news a man leading a woman into an ambush by a gang of women who then killed her, but I suppose the same term would apply.

[emmelinemay.livejournal.com]

Would there be a equivalent phrase used for a woman you was tricked by a man? I don't think so.

This is definitely one of the things that is bothering me, added to Nick's point that society 'expects' men to be evil, but when women do it, it's OMG MORE EVIL THAN ANYTHING.

[lydiamorgan.livejournal.com]

This story has definitely taken on a different slant since it was first reported, when I remember her involvement was mentioned as an aside. The article is definitely a little more sensationalist than I'm comfortable with, especially coming from the BBC News site which is usually a bit more sensible.

There are a few things that bother me too - firstly that first paragraph. 'Teenage temptress'? 'Lured to a honey-trap'? It's like they're trying to make her out as some kind of femme fatale, subtly glamourising the murder whilst at the same time condemning the culture that allows it.

Also, as you've pointed out, the fact that the 5 youths that actually stabbed, clubbed at beat the poor kid to death hardly get a mention, whereas her name and picture are splashed over the article. Why are they drawing more attention to her (admittedly heinous) crime? Why, because it makes for an interesting twist on what would otherwise just be another gangland murder, of course.

And one last thing - if we're looking at ways of reporting this, why is the villain the 15 year old girl who is being used for sex by a violent older boy, and threatened with 'the beats' unless she betrays the poor kid who wants to do right by her, rather than the 18-year old thug who forced her to set the situation up? There is a definite bias here, and it reflects the trend to portray female criminals as 'worse' somehow than men.

I'm just saying, it's all about spin.

[aliasrob.livejournal.com]

I think it just comes down to novelty. This is an interesting story, hence it gets press. That's all it is. Ad revenues.

[suicideally.livejournal.com]

The language of the article bothers me too. It reminds me of some of the coverage of Amanda Knox "Foxy Knox! She's a SEX killer, phwoar!".

[gaius-octavian.livejournal.com]

She is quite cute, that Amanda Knox, you know, for a stone killer.

[cookwitch.livejournal.com]

They are making her out to be some kind of Black Widow as far as I can tell.

ALL of them knew what they were doing, noneo f them is more guilty than the other, yet they are making her out to be worse than the boys.

She was cold and calculated, thinking she would get her man back by bringing him what was, esentially, a sacrifice, but did she really know they would kill him?

She lured him into a trap, that much is certain. She betrayed a boy who said he loved her, also true.

Whether that makes her better or worse than anyone else involved? I don't know.

The press does seem to be treating her differently, but perhaps because she was pivotal in this crime. She led him on, and brought him to his death, knowlingly or otherwise. She says she thought they were 'just going to beat him up'.

Had she not done it, they wouldn't have killed him then. They may well have killed him later, as he was already on their list.

All of them are complicit in his death.

[emmelinemay.livejournal.com]

And had she not done it, they may well have gone after her instead. That's how gangs work.

I think the journalist has misunderstood, deliberately or otherwise, how gangs operate.

[aliasrob.livejournal.com]

I think the issue is that she created the situation, by a) cheating on her gangster boyfriend and b) setting up the other kid in an bid to get back with him.

[mark13.livejournal.com]

The article is written in very salacious terms, and is nowhere near as neutral as news should be.

This has been worrying me recently about the BBC, both online and on radio. Their news reporting has really started to slip more towards tabloid style sensationalist reporting, and prioritising trivial made up news over serious events.

[emmelinemay.livejournal.com]

I noticed it a long while ago, back when the congestion charge was introduced.

I was off sick that day, and saw the BBC news coverage of the introduction of the charge for most of the day. Pretty much every update was 'well, there is no chaos, YET. But it is still early, there may be CHAOS AND CONFUSION LATER. We will have to WAIT AND SEE if there is going to be an CHAOS later'.

When no CHAOS occurred, and the congestion charge's introduction was comparatively straightforward (and actually seemed to have the desired effect in that it reduced the number of people driving into London) they just dropped it and pretended they'd always known it would work.

She did..

[brute-force.livejournal.com]

... set him up. The boys who killed him were just tools.
it's like taking him to the aquarium and pushing him in the shark tank. do you then say, "well she was just an accomplice, the SHARKS were the real murders here."? Sure the reporting is not perfect, People have an expectation of pretty girls as innocent. Maybe the article has a point there....
There are men who Tell a girl she is special and lure them into prostitution, drug running, getting raped, and murdered. She did the same type of thing.
The end result of her direct actions was that she made sure the boy was there to be killed. I can't seem to be to worried about her being liabled in the press.
Personally I think I would through a party if I found out she was beat up in prison.

Re: She did..

[suicideally.livejournal.com]

Can you draw a parallel between human people and sharks so easily?

(Not to diminish her crime, but I don't see why you are holding her responsible and not them also)

[aliasrob.livejournal.com]

Well, she did use her "feminine wiles" to aid this crime (actually the kid was stabbed) or "she used abilities specific and unique to her gender" to manipulate the victim. This is a simple statement of fact. Perhaps the language could have been less emotive, though. But these are just the facts of the case. A reporters job is to report the facts. The other perpetrators are covered in seperate articles.

She is an accomplice to murder, and needs to be held accountable. Should women be given special treatment in the eyes of the law just because of their gender?

[emmelinemay.livejournal.com]

The reporter hasn't just reported the facts though. He has used deliberately emotive language to make her part in the murder seem worse than the actual murder itself.

You, as an advertising man, should know the power of the use of language. I am surprised that you cannot acknowledge it's use here in this particular article.

There are ways of reporting facts of a case of a 15 year old's role in a gang murder without resorting to sensationalism.

[load-of-flannel.livejournal.com]

.

Thats a damn good point you know.

The language here is inaccurate and unhelpful. Im wondering however whether thats actually your objection or whether your actually just hikjacking this as a 'womens' issue.

Its similarly inaccurate an unhelpful that newspapers automatically report by name men who have been accused of rape before a trials been held. They then get treated like rapists.

Except you never seem overly concerned about that....

If I took your viewpoint Id now be saying thats because you were sexist.

At least this girl was actualy tried before the papers villified her.

You seem to think this is some anti fermale crusade rather than an indemic problem with newspapers reporting.

It happens everywhere Emmeline, its not in this case a pogrom or Jihad against your sex. Its everyones and every sexes problem.

It hapens everywhere in newspapers...

Cambridge evening news Yesterday reported a callous burglar who kiilled a pet rabbit. Actual story was the owner of a house which had been subject to an attempted break in from which no actual theft had occured had come home some days later to find her rabbit dying. The vet said there is no sign of injury on the rabbit. She says the burglar kicked it to death..... thats what the headline is.

Same situation. Bad reporting for the sake of sensationalism.

However yet again emmeline youve spent time saying how men 'don't get it but women do.' as if this is obviously some indicator of the massively masoginistoic society we live in. You have effectively started the debate by stating that men do not understand and attemopting to undermine their commentary.

SO thats kind of the same thing isnt it? your sensationalising an issue to become something involved with gender politics which isnt. Its an issue that affects everyone across the board.

So lets be honest. Your not actually concerned about the case, you think this is a 'feminist issue' thats whats got your goat. I bet mybottom dollar that if a boy had been singled out of a multi-sex group that beat someone to death youd not be standing around complaining that they didnt mention the girl involved.

*shrugs*

You may now attempt to invalidate my point by accusing me of being some kind of sexist pig whose sole mission is to tread women beneath my feet.

[emmelinemay.livejournal.com]

I wondered how long it would take for you to post.

I don't need to invalidate your point, because you always manage to do it spectacularly all by yourself.

[aliasrob.livejournal.com]

This discussion is degenerating into personal attacks, so I'm going to withdraw. I hope my contributions have provided food for thought.

Hmm. I seem to have gotten drawn back in. Oops.

[cookwitch.livejournal.com]

There's a whole load of whooshing noises here as the point gets missed.

This is not 'equal' reporting.

This is how it comes across.

The Girl.
Oh noes! Sex crime! She used her beauty the floozy! How could such a fragile, pretty creature do such an awful, terrible thing! We are SHOCKED and HORRIFIED so we are. It's a heinous crime, far worse than that of the boys. What a vicious, nasty little woman!

The Boys who Actually Plunged the Knives In:

Yeah, they stabbed him, how awful, bad boys, but that's what they DO innit?

Did....

[brute-force.livejournal.com]

.. they hunt him down? find him in the park? Go to his house and drag him out?
Or did a pretty young girl say "would I do that" when asked if it was a set up?

Maybe you are correct, and this should not be news... after all, it is not the first time a boy had a girl say "trust me"....

[spoox.livejournal.com]

The interest partly comes from the fact that despite not sticking a knife in anyone, she was nevertheless convicted of murder. It is a classic example of aiding and abetting or joint enterprise. The vast majority of murders are committed by men. I suppose what she did is much rarer, and therefore more newsworthy, than just sticking knives in someone until they bleed to death.

[preachermuaddib.livejournal.com]

While I agree with the (mis)use of language I think one of the interesting points is that this girl has been convicted of murder (not just assisting in some way) despite she didn't lay a finger on him.
From what I understand this is a relatively new law designed to help with gang attacks/problems.
Basically you and me and 5 others go to beat up a guy and unbeknownst to you I have a knife and kill the guy, we all get done for murder.

Granted the review is a bit manipulative and something I'd expect to see in the sun, but overall I'm glad she was done

[emmelinemay.livejournal.com]

From what Nathan said somewhere further up (a signal lost in the noise) accessory to murder and actual murder are considered the same thing.

I'm not disputing that she should be held accountable for her part in it, I don't know why some of the other commenters think I am!! My only issue was with the language of the article, which I felt very uncomfortable about.

[pygar.livejournal.com]

mmm... emotive topic.

i think we can all agree on the reporting being sensationalist and generally crap - but then journalists are not known for their impartiality, this kinda smacks to me of a journalist trying to create an angle to get people to read it. i would like to offer for discussion the premise that if it read that "a gang member was lured to his death, by the members of another street gang" that while a faithful representation, would likely not evoke the desired "read me" response.

lets face it its kinda worked.

maybe we should all treat it as a shocking incident, made worse by the sensionalist reporting of a complete muppet/muppets.

just a thought.

[aliasrob.livejournal.com]

"but then journalists are not known for their impartiality"

I must admit that I have so far been going on what I read in the Metro, not the BBC article. I wrongly assumed that was what we were discussing. I do find myself veering more towards Emmie's position re:impariality, as the BBC is subject to supposedly higher or at least different editorial standards than the likes of Metro (which is only responsible to its shareholders and advertisers).

However, I'm not sure impartiality is still mandated once someone's been convicted of a crime.

Commenting without reading other comments first

[blue-cat.livejournal.com]

I think that 6 youths beating another youth to death over a girl isn't news anymore, and what can you say to plump out an article on death-by-beating other than go into WHY it happened.

But yes, the whole 'temptress' angle IS news ~ it titillates and you can write about it in nice juicy sordid detail. It plays into stereotypes of what a Good Girl is and isn't ~ and it doesn't (as far as we know) happen much.

[crazymeandave.livejournal.com]

it's bothering me too... it should read "whom she had lured" not "who she had lured"

[unclesatan.livejournal.com]

Thinking about it I thought i'd jump in on the dying embers.

In the article the term Honey Trap is in inverted commas, which means it's probably a quote and if I was to take an educated guess I would say that it's quoting the prosecuting counsel, during his opening or closing speech. I reckon it's probably this as this is the sort of middle English term Barristers (especially QCs) use and they will use emotive language when trying to sway a jury.

Also I feel the article is concentrating on the most shocking/ more news worthy (delete as appropriate) aspect of the story, rather than singling out females in general. Sadly teenage boys seem to kill each other with alarming regularity these days, but that aspect of the case is new/ news.

Personally I'm more shocked by that aspect, not because "girls shouldn't be involved in that sort of thing", but I guess I have outmoded ideas based on my childhood memories that teenage infatuation is somehow innocent and so I find somebody corrupting that to bring about another's death somehow more chilling than the actual brutality of the murder itself

I could go on but I have to be up at half 5

[cabbagemedley.livejournal.com]

Weeell... a lot of the people I know got screwed over by the people they were infatuated with as teenagers. Teenage infatuation is sweet but dumb and, as I recall, teenagers have no idea how to treat one another decently. What's less usual is the stabbing to death part.

[blonde-venus.livejournal.com]

I've been away from a computer for the last 24 hours so here's my more considered thoughts on the matter.

Something about this article bothers me. It's the use of the phrase 'honey trap'. This is a gender-specific phrase, it has an obvious correlation with the female anatomy, it wouldn't have used if a man had lured a woman to her death. I suspect the more neutral phrase 'a man lured a woman to her death' would have sufficed.
I don't like the phrase 'honey trap' because it implies and evokes various associated beliefs which share a similar common origin. Eve tempting Adam with the apple; original sin; if you wear a short skirt you're asking for it.
And thus this is a feminist issue because it embodies the sexist attitudes still inherent in language and media today and the constant conflation of feminity with sexuality.