A strange question
 

Please excuse the vagueness but I really cant go into too much detail.
Basically: A soldier who died in action...

Somebody now deciding to tell "their story" in magazines etc. Family are quite distressed about this. Is there anything they can actually do about this?

Yes,

Dont buy the magazine

Depends on the "teller". Are they mil? Did they cstep over any lines in the sand?

Whether or not mil, did they slander or libel anyone?

If it was a simple case of say, "I always thought Fred was a fool" then there's not much you can do about it officially. It's just a point of view. But then there's more than one way to skin a cat. If "the teller" has been bad mouthing a fallen comrade, I'm sure the relevant regimental association would have its ways and means.

I find it sad that people would disrespect fallen soldiers.

Basically its claiming to be closer than they actually were and using it as a platform.
Not aware of anything libellous.

The only way I see about this is that a member of the family contacts someone like Max Clifford or somesuch to do 'here are the facts' type thing, probably to a rival publication.

Money should be obtained and given to Help for Heroes or the like.

Either this, or a dignified silence knowing that those who knew him know the real facts.

Awkward, my smpathies to you/your friends.

x213a, a similar issue may have existed after GW1 where two people, now world-famous authors, wrote up the same incident but put quite different interpretations on it.

Touch of the Walts perhaps?

I believe there may now be a phenomenon such as a "fiancee walt". They have suffered one round of this already in the media, looks like the person concerned has decided theres more mileage in this. I really cant explain any further as I dont want to compromise identity - that is not my call.

Thanks for the replies.

It may be worth talking to a media lawyer to find out whether there are any privacy rights the families can claim. These stories don't appear to be in the public interest (the usual test for such coverage) and they will clearly cause additional distress to the families.

An alternative tack you may consider is to see if one of the pro-Forces tabloids would consider naming and shaming the publications in question (providing they are not from the same publishing stable).

Its an awkward situation. The family just want closure. They have had closure. This is somebody who keeps raking the coals once the initial wave of sympathy and attention subsided. Its hard to really explain without going into detail, which I am unable to do. Theres nothing unsavoury (to my knowledge) as such, its just a case of somebody using the death of a soldier to gain public sympathy.

Is it in the new Chinook book per chance?

knocker, I believe it is a little more mercenary than you suggest.

ah ok - still none the wiser but if its written and you can prove its not true - libel?

And at least three other versions of the same story also published, all differing, one by a direct participant!

It's an old legal pronciple that you can't libel the dead.

Libel

About the only thing you could threaten the person with is in the circumstances hinted at is being exposed as a liar or walt - a few of the papers have taken to this with some relish in recent years.

There is a legal case where the family of Gladstone called a writer a liar, and he sued them but couldn't prove that he wasn't, so lost his case.

BBC NEWS | UK | Magazine | Can you say anything about the dead?


Sadly, I do know of one similar circumstance (some years ago) to the one the original poster hints at.

'cough' er.. Post details on ARRSE maybe? tis amazing what the outrage bus can do on there!!! 'cough'



I reserve the right to deny I ever suggested letting ARRSE loose on the miscreant, I wasn't here right....