Tuesday, July 15, 2014

Confessions of a Failed Author #6 UPDATE [16/07/2014]

Sometimes, during the course of your work, you get this sort of response:

Interrogation of Oscar’s motive ought to happen in court; there is no evidence before us or the judge at this stage to suggest there was a particular reason Oscar may have wanted to rid the world of Reeva. But of course we remain open to any leads or evidence that may reach us. [But] At this stage we will not take up your offer to publish your piece

Date is sometime today, 15 July 2015, forwarded to me by a freelance friend of mine.  The above opinion (because that's all it is) belongs to the editor of one of South Africa's largest newspapers. He says 'we remain open to any leads or evidence'.  Okay then.  Since he is a bigshot editor, it must mean the call he is making is...., well....right, right?

There's also this (received 16 July 2014 from a Professor of criminal law - yes, you didn't misread (and his allegations of rudeness or that I am upset are odd to stay the least.  I simply asked him why he had unfollowed me on twitter after I asked him to have a look at my ideas on motive):

Dear Nick

I don't know what I said or did that has you so upset. But for my part I need to tell you that I did read your original email several times because I struggled to understand it. It could be that I’m just stupid, but, it is virtually incomprehensible. Eventually I decided you must be referring to motive and that was the basis for my response. A civil and polite response. Your reply to that was outrageously rude [Actually this was my respomnse, not outrageous or rude: I see you're playing it safe, even unfollowing me on twitter.  Lol.]

I don't know what world you live in, but in my world no one speaks to another person with such disrespect. 

[Perhaps Mr X is referring to this extremely impolite email to him from me:

Hi X

I am talking about motive yes. I am also thinking about it, which I believe I'm allowed to do.  I also understand the sub judice rule.  I also understand case law (I have studied law myself).
I'm afraid I am a poor writer, but you are welcome to call me or we can skype.  
Phone is 072 555 5555
I agree one should tread carefully but it is not a case of lunacy or getting emotional, or seeking sensation, or stupidity (on my part) I can assure you]

I unfollowed you because I only followed you to send you my contact details and I use my twitter account as a news feed.  Also, at this point, from my perspective, based on both of your replies, you seem to me like a raving lunatic [my emphasis].

Let me be clear, I have no agenda. I am currently being hounded by “rag” mags for comment on Pistorius that are sensationalist and I decline to comment. Please give me the benefit of the doubt and call me or lets meet: 071 xxx xxxx. I want to understand better and help you if I can. 

kind regards

What's good to remember is not everyone in an industry is going to be as dismissive of you, or as closed open minded to you, or your work.  And when they are, it's not necessarily a reflection of you, as it is of...well, make up your mind ;-)

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Nick, I am just someone who now and then visits your blog to see what's new on the case, and I must say, you do yourself a disservice by posting these email communications. They paint you in a very bad light. If that is how you speak to a Professor of Criminal Law - so casually dismissive and off-hand - and then you make your communication public, whether or not you use a name...that looks to me like very bad form. Seriously, think twice before you do this again. It leaves a sour taste, makes you look churlish, and takes away from the very interesting work you're doing on the case.