Duchess Of Cambridge Hoax Call Nurse Found Dead

[Fozfromoz]

BBC has said the owners of the station told another station, that they tried to contact the nurses 5 times before broadcasting. They did not say if they had got through or not.

They are very much on the back foot now. Excerpt below from ABC News Australia ( not sure if OK to show it). They are having 5 bob each way.They reckoned that they tried 5 times to contact them. Thing is, they went ahead anyway. Edited December 10, 2012 by Scott
Fair Use

[Fozfromoz]

Apologies Mods.

ABC news link here

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-12-10/2day-fm-tried-to-contact-nurses-before-prank-aired/4418548

[Baerboxer]

And sometimes that victim cannot take the pressure.

But Humbug and others think that is their problem, nothing to do with the pranksters.

"It was only a joke, we meant no harm" is the excuse of bullies worldwide when their vicitims can take it no longer.

Humbugged and others appear to accept that excuse; but will they if, God forbid, it ever happens to a member of their family; I doubt it.

No.

Bullies's goal is to make a personally known victim suffer, pranksters just want to make fun of a situation for general entertainment.

In the first case "making fun" is an excuse indeed, while in the second case it is just the truth.

And yes, if a victim reacts very unexpectedly in an extreme way, it is the victim's problem.

A bit like religious nuts who can't see a woman's naked tit without freaking out and throwing incendiary grenades or going to Denmark to murder cartoonists.

If your logic was followed, any communication would stop.

And who decides what is reasonable and what is extreme? Your view is that if someone does something to someone else, just for a laugh then it's ok? The victim should just laugh it off, regardless of what happend. If not, then it's the victims fault for reacting??? You must have some interesting views on how society should be contstructed, social justice and the idea of duty of care.

[whybother]

And who decides what is reasonable and what is extreme? Your view is that if someone does something to someone else, just for a laugh then it's ok? The victim should just laugh it off, regardless of what happend. If not, then it's the victims fault for reacting??? You must have some interesting views on how society should be contstructed, social justice and the idea of duty of care.

Are you sure you should post on TV if you're worried about who you might affect with your posts and opinions?

Why isn't there world wide condemnation of all the other pranks that occur daily?

This woman put a phone call through. Nothing else. Should all receptionists be on suicide watch just in case they put the wrong phone call through?

[Baerboxer]

And who decides what is reasonable and what is extreme? Your view is that if someone does something to someone else, just for a laugh then it's ok? The victim should just laugh it off, regardless of what happend. If not, then it's the victims fault for reacting??? You must have some interesting views on how society should be contstructed, social justice and the idea of duty of care.

Are you sure you should post on TV if you're worried about who you might affect with your posts and opinions?

Why isn't there world wide condemnation of all the other pranks that occur daily?

This woman put a phone call through. Nothing else. Should all receptionists be on suicide watch just in case they put the wrong phone call through?

I'm not worried because I don't post insulting, intimidating, piss taking, posts; or play stupid pranks, continuously ridicule people or expect everyone to share my values and beliefs.

Why don't you think about the specifics of this case instead of making wide irrelevant generalisations and asking silly quetions. There is plenty of media comment on-line for you to read now.

[whybother]

I'm not worried because I don't post insulting, intimidating, piss taking, posts; or play stupid pranks, continuously ridicule people or expect everyone to share my values and beliefs.

Why don't you think about the specifics of this case instead of making wide irrelevant generalisations and asking silly quetions. There is plenty of media comment on-line for you to read now.

She wouldn't have been aware of any of that.

The DJs called. She put the call through. She wouldn't have heard another thing of it until being contacted and hassled by the British media.

That would put her death squarely in the British media's court, not the DJs.

If you want to use the "If the DJ's didn't call ..." argument, then it's all Kate's fault. "If Kate wasn't sick ..."

[cmsally]

I could write at length on this, so I'll just make it concise instead.

1. Do we have proof of suicide - what was the cause of death?

2. Will April Fool's Day be banned next year as a result of this.

3. I just gave a lost tourist directions. I told him to go down the road 50m and left at the next junction - will it be my fault if he dies crossing the road.

[Credo]

I could write at length on this, so I'll just make it concise instead.

3. I just gave a lost tourist directions. I told him to go down the road 50m and left at the next junction - will it be my fault if he dies crossing the road.

I don't know if you would be responsible. Did you give him the directions in good faith or did you intentionally send him into a situation that might be dangerous?

The DJ's are not responsible for this lady's death. They have some culpability, and probably feel a lot of guilt, but they have no legal responsibility.

[Chicog]

It may have been funny to them, and it may have been funny to some of their listeners, but at the end of the day they were trying to profit from someone else's misery and embarrassment. Even if she had not killed herself, they should still be ashamed of themselves.

How anyone can not be disgusted by the antics of this pair of talentless <deleted>, I have no idea.

And as for their faux tears and fake concern, tough sh*t, they should have thought about that before their schoolboy prank. I hope they go to sleep every night haunted by this lady's needless death.

[whybother]

It may have been funny to them, and it may have been funny to some of their listeners, but at the end of the day they were trying to profit from someone else's misery and embarrassment. Even if she had not killed herself, they should still be ashamed of themselves.

How anyone can not be disgusted by the antics of this pair of talentless <deleted>, I have no idea.

And as for their faux tears and fake concern, tough sh*t, they should have thought about that before their schoolboy prank. I hope they go to sleep every night haunted by this lady's needless death.

I take it, you've never been to see a comedian.

[Mosha]

At the end of the day. They broke the law in 2 countries. Trying to get permission is not enough, The needed to be given permission. They weren't, they did the crime now do the time.

[cmsally]

It may have been funny to them, and it may have been funny to some of their listeners, but at the end of the day they were trying to profit from someone else's misery and embarrassment. Even if she had not killed herself, they should still be ashamed of themselves.

How anyone can not be disgusted by the antics of this pair of talentless <deleted>, I have no idea.

And as for their faux tears and fake concern, tough sh*t, they should have thought about that before their schoolboy prank. I hope they go to sleep every night haunted by this lady's needless death.

The media to a large extent produces material that is popular with their audiences. Ridicule and embarrassment has seem to become more of a staple as of late. Why is this so? Well basically because the society seems to like it. Before it turns its talons on a couple of media employees who have to slavishly improve their "appeal" and ratings; society should turn the mirror around and take a look at itself. There are a lot of people who take pleasure at other peoples' misery and they are not all based in the media. Society to a certain extent gets a media it deserves.

[whybother]

At the end of the day. They broke the law in 2 countries. Trying to get permission is not enough, The needed to be given permission. They weren't, they did the crime now do the time.

I don't think the issue that has everyone talking is that they broke privacy laws.

People want them charged with murder because she committed suicide.

[simple1]

At the end of the day. They broke the law in 2 countries. Trying to get permission is not enough, The needed to be given permission. They weren't, they did the crime now do the time.

The Australian regulatory body for media will probably have a hearing, the station owners will have a barrister on $3/4k an hour to argue their case that best endeavours were made to comply with regulations and find some wriggle room, then a fine levied on the station owners. In the meantime the radio station will have lost revenue from putting on hold adverts for a few days and will need to replace a few large corporate clients - a bit of fiscal pain. Maybe someone in management fired with a good redundancy package to feed the regulators concerns regarding management professionalism. The two media people will have been suspended on full pay under their contract and will probably have to retake a course in the relevant commercial code of conduct and then carry on their merry way, knowing full well they achieved their objectives for name recognition and notoriety. QED

[Mosha]

If they had obeyed the law, she might just be alive. Her friends say she had no other issues in her life.

[simple1]

If they had obeyed the law, she might just be alive. Her friends say she had no other issues in her life.

may be so, but the stations lawyers and management permitted the segment to be broadcast, so they "own" the liability

[7by7]

At the end of the day. They broke the law in 2 countries. Trying to get permission is not enough, The needed to be given permission. They weren't, they did the crime now do the time.

I don't think the issue that has everyone talking is that they broke privacy laws.

People want them charged with murder because she committed suicide.

Who has said that?

They humiliated her and her colleague on air without first obtaining her or her colleagues permission.

That is against the law in both the UK and Australia.

She found the humiliation too much to bear; the two idiots who made the call and the station which allowed it to be illegally broadcast must bear responsibility.

Whilst it wont bring their mother back, I hope her children will be suing both the radio station and the presenters for every penny they've got.

[whybother]

If they had obeyed the law, she might just be alive. Her friends say she had no other issues in her life.

Actually, at the point that they talked to her, they had obeyed the law. It was only when they talked to the other nurse that they got into the privacy issues.

[whybother]

At the end of the day. They broke the law in 2 countries. Trying to get permission is not enough, The needed to be given permission. They weren't, they did the crime now do the time.

I don't think the issue that has everyone talking is that they broke privacy laws.

People want them charged with murder because she committed suicide.

Who has said that?

They humiliated her and her colleague on air without first obtaining her or her colleagues permission.

That is against the law in both the UK and Australia.

She found the humiliation too much to bear; the two idiots who made the call and the station which allowed it to be illegally broadcast must bear responsibility.

Whilst it wont bring their mother back, I hope her children will be suing both the radio station and the presenters for every penny they've got.

OK ... charged with causing her death.

She would have never have heard anything they did on the radio. Her stress would have been caused by the British media camping on her doorstep.

[7by7]

They broke the law by broadcasting the pre recorded call without the nurses' permission.

And the British media did not camp on her doorstep, for the simple reason that until she died no one outside the hospital knew which two nurses had been involved!

Edited December 10, 2012 by 7by7

[whybother]

They broke the law by broadcasting the pre recorded call without the nurses' permission.

Yes. That doesn't make the DJs liable for her death.

[Dorothy1985]

Some people need to really harden up and develop a thicker skin.

If I ran off crying every time someone makes fun of me, I would be begging to be a pussy with 9 lives.

There is most definitely some hidden factors here for a caring person such as her to take her own life. Killing ones self is not a light decision, nor one you can change.

[simple1]

At the end of the day. They broke the law in 2 countries. Trying to get permission is not enough, The needed to be given permission. They weren't, they did the crime now do the time.

The Australian regulatory body for media will probably have a hearing, the station owners will have a barrister on $3/4k an hour to argue their case that best endeavours were made to comply with regulations and find some wriggle room, then a fine levied on the station owners. In the meantime the radio station will have lost revenue from putting on hold adverts for a few days and will need to replace a few large corporate clients - a bit of fiscal pain. Maybe someone in management fired with a good redundancy package to feed the regulators concerns regarding management professionalism. The two media people will have been suspended on full pay under their contract and will probably have to retake a course in the relevant commercial code of conduct and then carry on their merry way, knowing full well they achieved their objectives for name recognition and notoriety. QED

Got that wrong, the two presenters show has been cancelled. No mention at this stage if it means their employment contracts have also been pulled. As I said before you would think the main culprits would be the management team who authorised the segment to go to air against the regulatory conditions

[Humbugged]

If you had an arguement with your gf and she was in an unstable mindset and you told her to go jump off a bridge....and she did....should you be charged with murder ?

[Scott]

Some personal attacks and very insensitive posts have been removed. If you have nothing further to add to the thread, then please feel free to NOT post.

[chiang mai]

Some folks fail to understand the difference between what's appropriate and what's not, this is all about good judgement or the lack of it, surprised so many still argue the toss on this point.

[Humbugged]

Some folks fail to understand the difference between what's appropriate and what's not, this is all about good judgement or the lack of it, surprised so many still argue the toss on this point.

You don't seem to get the difference between calling for someone to be charged with murder for a harmless prank which is operated tens of thousands of times a day across the globe.....and calling for them to be labelled fools perhaps, possibly reprimanded for doing an illegal act if they violated any rules....yet even that is only being granted because of hindsight.

[chiang mai]

Some folks fail to understand the difference between what's appropriate and what's not, this is all about good judgement or the lack of it, surprised so many still argue the toss on this point.

You don't seem to get the difference between calling for someone to be charged with murder for a harmless prank which is operated tens of thousands of times a day across the globe.....and calling for them to be labelled fools perhaps, possibly reprimanded for doing an illegal act if they violated any rules....yet even that is only being granted because of hindsight.

I don't believe they should be charged with murder, I merely want to see people stop trying to convince us that their actions were acceptable, that they are labelled as fools goes without saying.

[Steely Dan]

At the end of the day. They broke the law in 2 countries. Trying to get permission is not enough, The needed to be given permission. They weren't, they did the crime now do the time.

The Australian regulatory body for media will probably have a hearing, the station owners will have a barrister on $3/4k an hour to argue their case that best endeavours were made to comply with regulations and find some wriggle room, then a fine levied on the station owners. In the meantime the radio station will have lost revenue from putting on hold adverts for a few days and will need to replace a few large corporate clients - a bit of fiscal pain. Maybe someone in management fired with a good redundancy package to feed the regulators concerns regarding management professionalism. The two media people will have been suspended on full pay under their contract and will probably have to retake a course in the relevant commercial code of conduct and then carry on their merry way, knowing full well they achieved their objectives for name recognition and notoriety. QED

Got that wrong, the two presenters show has been cancelled. No mention at this stage if it means their employment contracts have also been pulled. As I said before you would think the main culprits would be the management team who authorised the segment to go to air against the regulatory conditions

I remember when a program called the house party hosted by Noel Edmonds had a feature involving a daredevil stunt being performed by a member of the public, which tragically resulted in the death of a contestant. The program was taken off the air, just as the show hosted by the Aussie presenters was. This is not unusual in such circumstances and does not mean any legal culpability can be assumed. I'm sure the two will be haunted by the incident for the rest of their lives, and no post-hoc legislation should be used to punish them twice.

[7by7]

You don't seem to get the difference between calling for someone to be charged with murder for a harmless prank which is operated tens of thousands of times a day across the globe.....and calling for them to be labelled fools perhaps, possibly reprimanded for doing an illegal act if they violated any rules....yet even that is only being granted because of hindsight.

I don't recall anyone in this topic saying that they should be charged with murder; perhaps you can link to the posts where this has been said?

Harmless prank? Which set out to obtain confidential medical information and humiliate hospital staff; which resulted in one of those staff members taking her life. You call that harmless!

Yes, as has been said many times, other radio stations make prank calls, but they do, or legally must, obtain the victim's permission before broadcasting them This pair and their bosses didn't.

I've just heard their interview on the BBC; lots of weasel words about how bad they feel, but very little expression of regret and no apology to the hospital or, more importantly, the nurses family.

The radio station say that they tried to contact the hospital 5 times before deciding to broadcast the piece; so they must have known permission was required but decided to go ahead anyway.

Steely Dan, Noel Edmonds was, and still is in my opinion, a talentless individual, but others do seem to like him. I remember the incident you refer to, but the big difference between that case and this is that he took part in the stunt of his own free will.