SUMMARY OF RELEVANT ARTICLES IN THE GLASGOW HERALD

1. "Diane had the Smart White Socks of The Daughter of The Labour Aristocracy, Glover did not. And Looked Down on others with Disdain".

If McLean had taken the time to find out more about Glover's victim, Diane Watson and her family background he would have known that Jim Watson had been unemployed for two years and had only managed to get casual work in the post office which meant one week he could be working the next not. And that I was working part time for very low wages as a school dinning attendant. For three years we had struggled to keep a roof over our heads and food on the table. No one in their right mind could possibly perceive us as the Labour Aristocracy by any stretch of the imagination.

2. "In A Culture In Which Getting A Blade to Threaten Another Adolescent is not Uncommon. I Told You Once I carried One Myself".

McLean makes a lot of his personal exploits as a teenager, how he carried a razor. Instead of taking this opportunity to condemn the carrying of knives McLean is in fact trying to justify Glover's actions by continually reminding his readers that he personally carried one. Any right thinking person must condemn his views on the carrying of weapons as unethical especially given the context of McLean's article. One young girl (Diane) was dead because another. (Glover) carried one with the clear intent of doing bodily harm.

3. "That Hardened Young Killer Was So Hardened that She Wet Herself in The Dock Once: Is That Likely To Be The Sort Of Thing Which Some Appalling Young Psychopath Would Do. Is it not More Likely to be What a Frightened Child Would DO".

We were there throughout the trial, as were most of our family and Glover most certainly did not Wet Herself In The Dock. This is just another example of McLean Presenting a completely false picture to his readers in order to gain public sympathy for Glover.

4. "In That Moment Of Madness This Poor And Distressed Child", (Glover)

Glover herself stated in court that she had placed the kitchen knife in her school bag the night before. And was it a moment of madness to run out of her class hide near the tunnel that she knew Diane would be passing under and lay in wait for Diane to come out of her class. Glover was the pursuer not Diane.

This man simply refuses to accept that it was Diane who was being tormented by Glover, it was Diane who had a large kitchen knife thrust into her body, it was Diane herself who pulled the knife out of her body. The thought of our dear daughter Diane pulling out that knife from her body is to much to bear. Dear God! it is like something straight out of a horror movie. This is something we personally will never come to terms with.

5. "That The Law Cannot Protect Children From The Effects Of Such A Tragedy, Both Victims Is Disgraceful".

How was the law or anyone else suppose to protect Diane, when absolutely no one knew what was behind Glover's aggression, except Glover and Silvestro. There is only one true innocent victim in all this and that's Diane. Glover attacked Diane with malice of forethought and left her to die an agonising death. Glover had a choice Diane did not.

6. "Nobody In The Court Could Possibly Understand The Peculiar Circumstances Of Playground Confrontations In Inner City Schools. I Told You Once I Carried A Blade Myself".

McLean running out of ideas of blaming the innocent murdered victim Diane for her own murder, then blames the legal system for Glover's plight. McLean's logic is beyond belief, here is a man who was not present at any stage during the trial, who did not hear any of the evidence, decrying the judge, jury and the QCs for not understanding. They heard the evidence he did not.

7. "Right Now As you Read This, There is a Lost And Distressed Child Locked Up and with no Future to Look Forward to".

McLean's ends his attack on the truly innocent, Diane, by asking his readers to consider Glover's plight. What about Diane and her hopes and dreams for the future, what about the added pain and distress McLean's ill informed article had on us as a family. And in particular our son Alan. The fact is given his past exploits as teenager McLean refused to accept that justice had been done in this case and decided he would campaign on Glover's behalf. In order to get public opinion on his side he set out to blacken Diane's character.

A close friend of McLean's said on Tuesday afternoon the columnist had not been warned in advance that he would be named during the Leveson hearings and may seek legal advice. "He's in a bit of a state of shock," the friend said. "He's quite upset.

Maclean was an art teacher before he became a journalist and, presumably, he had some idea of what actually went on in schools - although I certainly don't buy his portrayal of violent criminals as victims, no matter what their age.

I'm glad I failed the quali for his old school Allan Glens - would not have thought your AG pupils were your razor carrying types.



Ian

Teen Driven To Suicide By 'Sick' Journalism

Mrs Watson went on to tell the inquiry that on the day of Alan's funeral, further articles by Mr McLean appeared in The Herald.

"They took away his respect, they took away his dignity on the very day we were laying our son to rest. If any journalists here say that's good then God forgive you because I won't."

She said the public needed protecting from the media.

"Just because a person's died, their reputation shouldn't die with them.

"It shouldn't be dismissed at the will of some sick journalist - because that's what they are, sick.

"They unjustly attack the memory of the deceased.

"You've got to remember - that memory is all the living have of them. So please don't besmirch the innocent to make a case for offenders. It's not right."

The Herald & Times Group later issued a statement saying it "deeply regrets" anything which added to the Watson family's grief. ...

Many sources have taken the Watsons evidence one step further...

Your post might have been removed now Ian. I went as far back as 5th Oct. and couldn't see it.

"Comments critical of Herald columns published after the 1991 murder of 16-year-old Glasgow schoolgirl Diane Watson were made at today’s Leveson Inquiry into the culture, practice and ethics of the press.

The Herald and Times Group deeply regrets any action which added to the Watson family’s grief over the tragic loss of their daughter and later their son.

The columns were published some 20 years ago when the group was under different ownership and editorial control, and the freelance columnist involved has not worked for the company for some years.

The Herald and Times Group is committed to the highest quality of journalism and accuracy in its reporting and analysis and adheres to the Press Complaints Commission code of conduct."

http://youtu.be/Sb5MORLi8K0

I wonder if the apparent apathy on facebook concerning this issue is because, both the original story and the subsequent follow up ones in the Herald and Marie Claire, were covered extensively at the time in the press and on TV. Mrs Watson has also, over the years, been a regular contributor to discussions on a personal level and, at some time, through her involvement with the organisation, Mothers Against Murder and Aggression (although I am not sure if she is still involved with that or not).

That's possible Ash ... but when I came down from the mount today I found that my message had been removed from Herald Scotland's home page, so what might seem to look like apathy on this issue is really a case of cencorship.

Ian, I can understand what you are saying but there is a difference between an error related to a misrepresentation of fact and the right of a journalist to express opinion based on their judgement of the person being interviewed. If a critic had to give the right of censorship to every actor, musician, director, chef or whatever, it would swing the pendulum too far the other way. I doubt any newspaper or magazine would offer a proof reading to anyone who submitted themselves for interview, they certainly wouldn't if the article was unsolicited.

The problem for these guys is they need the publicity and no newspaper would hand over editorial control to the subject. I guess if it was a precondition they would walk away or just do an article without doing the interview. As it worked out Coogan got a double dunt of publicity, from the original article and his follow up action.

... What I do want to say just now is, in light of the following part of the Herald statement "the freelance columnist involved has not worked for the company for some years", will the Herald please comment on who wrote the following article, published in the Features section of the Herald on 11th January 2010?

http://www.heraldscotland.com/comment/obit...iation-1.997427

The article was in fact written by Jack McLean, so this obviously calls into question the credibility of the Herald statement. The suitability is quite another issue entirely.

"Mr McLean is entitled to the free expression of his opinions. However, he might reflect on the impact his remarks have had on the victim's family. Sadly, his articles have caused distress.

Journalists have a responsibility to the wider public, including victims and their families. Those families are caught up in events beyond their control and unwillingly become the target of considerable publicity.

It is the role of the responsible journalist to ensure that such publicity is not unnecessarily distressing to innocent parties."

''I cannot begin to describe the despair and suffering that we endured from the day that Diane was killed. Our friends and relatives, the school staff and the wider community in Dennistoun have sought to give every help and comfort to us but some members of the media have been so cruel and insensitive that they have caused us nothing but additional hurt and sorrow.''

''Jack McLean may want to reflect on the fact that when Alan took his life he had in his hands articles which Mr McLean had written. His articles, and that in Marie Claire, contributed to the terrible depression which Alan was suffering from after his sister's death.

I would hope that in future he and the Marie Claire journalist, Meg Henderson, would think more carefully about their actions and that they would realise that when they write they do so about real people who have real feelings."

''I look upon these articles as an attempt to blacken my daughter's name. Additionally, in August, Jack Mclean wrote an article which implied that our daughter had looked upon her murderer with snobbish disdain and that Diane regarded herself as being better than her.

What he actually wrote was 'Diane came from a background which was rather upper working-class. For years this class element determined that young Barbara was something of an object of the kind of snobbish disdain that occurs within the working-classes. Diane had the smart white socks of the daughter of the labour aristocracy.''

''Mr McLean, in his articles, often tries to make a great deal of his working-class origins and the article he wrote about Diane is no exception.

Those who know my husband and I also know of our working-class origins but we feel that our social background is irrelevant in the case of our daughter's death. No parents, regardless of social background, should have to suffer the loss of a child but it might be helpful to know that I was brought up in the Gorbals and my husband was brought up in Easterhouse.

We both left school at 15. On the week Diane died my husband's take-home pay was #75 and I was earning a small living as a school meals' attendant. I wonder how Mr McLean can call people such as ourselves 'the labour aristocracy?''

... Diane was never snobbish. It was an important part of her upbringing that she treated everyone with respect. Given that her father had been unemployed for two-and-a-half years she would have been the last person in a position to look down on anyone.''

''Diane was a hard-working student and at weekends she worked in a shop from which her earnings helped supplement the family income. She was also involved with pre-vocational training at a local hospital and I have references to the effect that she carried out her course with distinction.''

''I am totally bewildered by Mr McLean's assertions that he based his articles on discussions he had with professional people involved with my family, including doctors and teachers when, in fact, my GP and all the teachers at Whitehill Secondary School have given written testimony that they did not enter into discussions with Mr McLean. None of my neighbours has spoken to the press.''

''I feel that Mr McLean's insensitivity knows no bounds. On the day of Alan's funeral he wrote a further article attacking Michael Martin and Lord James Douglas-Hamilton. He accused both MPs of hiding behind parliamentary privilege. Contrary to Mr McLean's assertion that these MPs would deny people, expecially journalists, free speech, Mr Martin gave me a voice in Parliament.

Our lives have been further ruined by insensitive treatment such as this. We have never sought to get our names in the paper. We have always been a hard-working and respectable family and I just hope that no other family has to endure the suffering that we have gone through.''

Yep.... its censorship alright when a paper blocks comments just because it does not agree with what the comment says even though it was said in a mannerly way. Makes you wonder what the press are really up to. Would it be worth contacting a competitor newspaper to let them know what has happened at the Herald??

Would it be worth contacting the Herald to let them know of the attacks on it from this board?

• Charlotte Church claims she was offered £100,000 or 'favourable coverage' in News International titles if she sang at Rupert Murdoch's wedding to Wendi Deng.

• Chris Jefferies tells how he was portrayed as a "creepy oddball", a "pervert' and a "peeping Tom". He says he will "never fully recover" from the libellous coverage and some will still think he is a "weird" character who is "best avoided".

• Anne Diamond says she felt "emotionally blackmailed" after the Sun rang to say they had a photo of the funeral of her son who died in a cot death.

• Former army intelligence officer Ian Hurst alleges corruption at the highest level at the Met police. Says his computer was hacked and the police took years to notify him that his security had been compromised even though he was working in a very sensitive area, acting as a "handler" to IRA spies.

• Paul Staines who runs the Guido Fawkes blog has been summoned to appear before Leveson on Thursday (for allegedly publishing a leaked copy of Alistair Campbell's Witness Statement).

Chile mine to open as theme park

Angelina Jolie to play Susan Boyle in film

Bubbles to give evidence at Jacko trial

Jade is back in Big Brother (she was dead at the time)

"We've obviously had the Maddy in the freezer story which you have heard of already."

Muslim-only public loos