In the wake of a terrible and mysterious tragedy, everyone seems to be playing out their own version of popular TV series Crime Scene Investigation.

But the speculation, especially online, is starting to infuriate some who have now turned their guns on the mainstream media.

According to most commentators, however, this is a result of the fact that the police have, at least so far, failed to brief the media on the perplexing double stabbing.

Historian Dominic Fenech says the media has a responsibility to report the story, especially because the original botched burglary theory seems to have been debunked.

“We don’t even know if the killer has been killed,” he says, adding that there are many questions left unanswered. “Ideally, we should stick to facts. But short of facts, it has to fall on speculation,” he says, adding that the police should issue regular bulletins.

Prof. Fenech says the speculation is mostly being fuelled by interviews with relatives, contradicting those calling for respectful silence.

The fact that people can now comment online strengthens the fourth estate (the media), Prof. Fenech notes, ensuring that the formal power brokers cannot take the public for a ride.

“I would much prefer this than self-censorship.”

Digital media academic Alex Grech believes the tragedy has significant human interest and “in a national village like ours, the interest in magnified”.

The case, he says, has also highlighted the changing and permeable state of the media.

In the recent past, speculation was left to bloggers and people in the streets but newspapers are now inviting people to submit comments to attract traffic to their websites. Newspapers are also taking more of an interest in what bloggers say and are starting to delve into subjective speculation in order to remain relevant.

“This inevitably creates a reflexive cycle, one of the consequences of which is that bloggers are increasingly critical watchdogs of traditional media, not least because traditional media are increasingly doing what they used to criticise bloggers for doing.”

One such blogger, Josanne Cassar, agrees the case is in the public interest and the police should have a daily press briefing not to allow the current media “free-for-all”. However, she thinks online newspapers should disable comment boards, “firstly for the family’s sake but also because of the police investigation”.

She saw a shift in thinking recently when more people started to share their disgust of the media coverage. “I think a line is being crossed. Every day the newspapers try to outdo each other with a new scoop,” she says, acknowledging, however, that there was some hypocrisy in the fact that those complaining were also consuming the stories.

She also questioned whether the families of the victims were being advised properly because their interviews were fuelling speculation.

Ms Cassar says the story has all the elements to attract attention, more so because this happened to less-than-ordinary people in a quiet street in the heart of Sliema. “Social class comes into it too,” she points out.

News reviewer Pierre Portelli says the public is shocked and has a right to have “accurate information”. He lashed out at media organisations “hiding” behind question marks in news headlines or coming up with theories without any sourcing. “For example, The Times is giving an excellent service because you’re discussing the case without hiding behind sources,” he said, criticising the police for not giving out regular information.

When contacted yesterday, Police Commissioner John Rizzo said no crime conference was held on this case because “the basic facts emerged immediately in all the newspapers”.

“There was nothing to add. Obviously, the police investigations must establish what exactly happened but just because the public is interested in the case it doesn’t mean it makes sense to hold a press conference.”

“At this time, the police do not feel it makes sense to hold a crime conference because the investigation is ongoing and everything that can be divulged could be of detriment to the investigation,” Mr Rizzo says.

Mr Rizzo did not exclude holding press conferences in the future.

Meanwhile, the discussions, some more sensitively than others, continue both between four walls and on their on-­line equivalents.