Ripping off the scabs of grief

You could say that the media outfits clamouring for Saviour Gauci's immediate release from prison have been successful. Not because the authorities have granted a pardon; at the time of writing there is no sign of any such pardon for the man - now suffering from terminal cancer - who was convicted of causing the death of Anna Kok, his sister-in-law. However, the media companies have benefitted by being able to find a suitably juicy item to feature and to tide them over a period of time which is essentially a news desert.

During the last two weeks of December, political activities are suspended and there are only so many hours of airtime or column inches they can eke out from round-ups of the year's highlights or discussions about what local celebrities expect to find in their Christmas stocking.

So something like a request for a pardon for a sick prisoner - an item which can be reported under the convenient heading of 'the public's right to know' is a godsend for people who are scrambling around for items to fill their programmes with.

It is also a perfect topic to feature during the Christmas period - as the producers can make much of the fact that it is the season of goodwill and forgiveness and utter platitudes about the seasonality of their programme-filler. People who object to the choice or treatment of subject can be dismissed as stony-hearted people who are not receptive to a dying man's last wishes.

Clearly there is no legal bar or direct objection that can be made with regard to these programmes because the producers will counter with self-righteous cries about freedom of expression and a providing a forum for the exchange of opinions. Yet, that same freedom entitles me to voice my distaste at programmes such as the Xarabank edition which featured Saviour Gauci's relatives' appeal for his release.

The producers may claim their actions were motivated by a sense of compassion for a terribly sick man. I view them as a lack of respect and gross insensitivity towards the relatives of the murdered woman.

The families of homicide victims have had their lives blighted by a violent act committed by someone else. They have been catapulted into the limelight through no fault of their own. Trying to rebuild their shattered lives is not an easy process. They have to come to terms with the fact that the world is not a safe place and that sorrow is to be their constant companion.

Having to put up with the media, which stir up their most horrific memories for profit and viewership, makes it even harder. The scabs which have formed over their scars of grief are ripped off, making them relive the pain they felt at the time of the murder of their loved one.

There are several accounts of the relatives of crime victims expressing their anguish at the way the media keep on bringing up the incidents which have changed their lives forever. A striking example is the outcry which arose following the publication of Gitta Sereny's book, Cries Unheard, about child-murderer Mary Bell.

When Bell was 10, she strangled four-year-old Martin Brown. Two months later she killed and mutilated a three-year-old boy. She was convicted of manslaughter and released after 12 years in prison, after which she was granted anonymity to be able to make a fresh start.

In 1998, Sereny, the widely respected biographer and journalist, published a book about Bell. The book contained interviews with the killer, and Sereny announced that she would be paying her for her collaboration. This caused an uproar because Bell was benefitting from her crime, but also because her victims' family had to relive the agony of the murder.

Brown's mother said, "She murdered my son then, 30 years later, she murdered him again on paper. Should I have had to go through that? Should she have been allowed to make money telling how she killed my son?... It takes us months to pull our socks up and start getting on with our lives again. I want her to be anonymous but I don't want her to be able to come anywhere near me or to bring all of this back again in a film or another book... Mary Bell left me with a hell of a life. I never, ever want to hear her name again."

Though the media treatment in the Gauci case is different, the feelings expressed by the mother of the boy murdered by Bell are echoed by the relatives of Kok. In an online comment they wrote: "The family finds it extremely distressing that this issue has been brought up again. We have already suffered for 12 years, losing a wife and mother, having to endure the period when the murderer was on bail and the trial itself... Our wounds will never heal but we do not deserve to be put through more pain. Please let us get on with what is left of our lives."

Their appeal should be heeded. This is not a call for secrecy or refusing to investigate and highlight possible miscarriages of justice. The media have an investigative role to fulfil there.

However, there are no issues of miscarriages of justice in the Gauci case. It is not an issue of dignity or ill treatment either. It goes without saying that he should be afforded all the medical treatment necessary together with all the comfort to ease his pain. But this constant clamouring for compassion before the cameras by people who should know better, should stop. Let justice take its course and stop dredging up the past for profit.

cl.bon@nextgen.net.mt