A READER WRITES IN...

It's ironical but not entirely difficult to understand why support for Fiona MacKeown comes mainly from people who havent' met her, or personally watched her and her lawyer team in action.For some of us who have, its difficult to miss the disingenuity, after the initial two encounters. For one --- the team of Fiona MacKeown and her Indian lawyer Vikram Varma ---- are a tad too media savvy. They have worked and manipulated the media in their campaign, with a great deal of shrewd finesse.
The type of finesse, one notices these days with political parties who stage dharnas and vocal protests only after ensuring that every single TRP-hungry electronic media troupe are in attendance, to capture their simulated "anger" and air it live on television. The protest is faked and the anger is faked, and for those who have to watch such insincerity "go places", the display is disturbing.
It's this sort of posturing that makes the Fiona/Vikram Varma campaign a little insincere, and them more than a little suspect. As a fellow British media person covering the Scarlett case and her mother's "campaign" put it --- there are no angels in this script.
When Fiona MacKeown's campaign was just picking up, she already had Britain's Sky television crew trailing her. Between Varma and herself, they made sure there was enough simulated "action" to capture. So Varma would arrive at the state secretariat earlier and keep the media briefed about Fiona's imminent arrival. When she arrived in a Maruti Esteem, seven smaller children in tow, barefoot and one of them shirtless --- the camera's whirred. The family obliged with some of the angles and postures necessary for television. So did the lawyer.
The media, especially the British media, trailing her were led to government offices, where meeting were not even scheduled and the resultant long wait was posited as some more "examples" of a hard hearted administration that was "harassing the mother". It soon became apparent that the British media were being sold this story a lot more often than the national or local media. For obvious reasons.
TheScarlett case was a British cause celebre and Fiona was cast in the role of avenging mother fighting for justice from a corrupt police and insensitive government.
When the first arrest was made, based on Fiona's insistence on rape and murder charges, the British press were told police had picked up the wrong man, "small fry", to shied the bigger ones. British radio stations began calling up local journalists seeking quotes to butress claims that "the Goa police were unreliable, and given to catching anybody and framing them". The first man was arrested for statutory rape, since senior officials on the case believed the sexual acts had been consentual. With the second arrest, and murder charges levied against two individuals, Fiona continued talking about a "cover up and larger cover up", going on to levy accusations against the home minister and DGP.
The evening Fiona got her summons to depose in the case at the Panaji police station, British media persons were "presold" the story by Fiona's team that she was going to be "targeted" by police and "arrested for negligence". The British media and an Indian news agency playing ball, already ran stories of her imminent arrest and targeting by the Goa administration. When she wasn't and it was just a routine recording of a statement, there were no retractions and the Goa administration was further villianised.
Varma told the media, that the police had not dared to arrest her because of the large media presence. By now, it was becoming obvious even to more loyal members of the British media ---who had united uncritically and unquestioningly behind Fiona --- that they were being manipulated rather adroitly. "The Fiona is going to be arrested" episode was not the only sleigh of hand.
British press persons are being regularly sold stories of how Fiona was being threatened, how she was offered money for her silence, and most recently that she is forced to go underground because she had exposed the drug nexus --- all of these allegations suitably vague and cleverly unsourced. British Michael Mannion aka Masala Mike --- the man who left Scarlett to her fate --- addressed the press on how it was so difficult for a witness to give a statement in a "civilised society". When pressed, he said he had no quarrel with the Goa police, but had perceived (not actually been threatened, mind you) a threat from his former Goan buddies!!!
It's these numerous sleigh of hands to stay in the media spotlight -- this constant shifting of the goalposts to keep the media constantly engaged with a new angle, a new twist, a fresh new allegation of cover up, larger cover up, drug link, home minister-DGP involvement, CBI enquiry, court challenge, going into hiding, under threat from fresh new villains etc etc ---- that rings the Fiona MacKeown portrait of an avenging mother as untrue. Sincerity is an intangible trait, but most people can pick up insincerity. To make errors of judgement is forgivable, to be calm and stoic in the face of personal grief is understandable --- but to display no motherly remorse can be very telling indeed. So far Fiona MacKeown has expressed no remorse or criticism for her own failings --- she holds herself above reproach, while everyone else in the script is blameworthy.
The inconsistencies and "coverups" are too many to sustain belief. Scarlett was no drinker or drug taker according to her mother ---- the statements of too many people and friends of Scarlett have belied this. Scarlett was left only for a few days with boyfriend Julio Lobo, Fiona had said. When Ms MacKoewn realised that it was culturally unacceptable for a mother to consent to her 15 year old's live-in relationship, she adroitly changed the story to "I left her with Julio's Catholic aunts". Fiona glossed over details ---- forgetting to tell the press that Scarlette had been left with no money or mobile over three weeks she stayed with Julio and they were in Gokarn. Or that her other small children were often left alone at Curlie's.
For media establishments chasing eyeballs, the sensational accusations of Fiona MacKeown are just what the doctor prescribed. Critical judgement is suspended.
Having said all this, it is hoped that the higher echelons of the police also move to retain credibility. If there were more macho men than the two arrested--- who took advantage of a reckless minor girl that night, in the feudal Indian belief that fallen women are fair game --- they should be arrested and tried. If there were no more actively involved, the police should be able to say this with conviction, rather than leave it to media speculation.
The obvious "boys club" mentality that resulted in the initial cover-up by the Anjuna police, in seeming collaboration with the coroner, has disgraced the police and the state, exposing its flanks. If it is to recover its image even somewhat, justice must not only be done, butseen to be done as well. There should be no compromise on that. (ends)