BBC ton bien dir nou pa envi ki sa 2 boug la trouver coupables. C'est ki nou envi c'est kone la veriter. Si sa 2 boug la mem kin touye Michaela Harte nou d'accord ki zot condamner mais si pa zot sa nou envi kone la verite. Li paret couma dir BBC in fini condamne sa 2 boug la avant la Cour rend so verdicte.

Journalist BBC pe fer bel bel critique envers ban homme de loi mauricien , be cot zot ine fer zot letude pas dans ban British institute cot BBC sorti .

Journaliste BBC bizin alle neyyoye divant so la porte avant ki li vine juge ban mauriciens...Alle dimande ban politiciens britannique ki zotte in faire contre bah Chagossiens...Pas ene crime contre l'humianit a? Li triste ki ene innocente in perdi la vie in mort par culpabilit ene criminel ki bizin payer pou a...Full daccord mais fodr pas ban journaliste britannique ek irlandais vine ici pou juge ban mauriciens dans so l'ensemble...ban britannique aussi ena pou ran compte divant la loi pou c ki zotte in faire ek sa ban milliers chagossiens cotte in tire zotte dans zotte ziles et laisse zotte vivre couma lisiens..Ban souval la reine pli bien trait ki ban chagossiens ki ziska aster la apres des annes de misere et d'humiliation par ban britannique encore p souffert... Britannique pna aucaine lesson humanit pou donne mauriciens. Encore moins maniere vivre.

tout mauricens menteur sa hein. plaigner zot meme ki zot pays pas bon, mais kan mettre zot devant banne faite, zot faire poule mouiller. accepter zot pays ene dechetterie. accepter dire la veriter ki fois zot capave merite gagne ene chance sa ile la vine civiliser. ene lot pe cause chagos, dire la verite to ti ile li ziste ene l'ile pas ene pays. dire tourist discriminer bizin paie tout plis chere. dire to pays rouler lor la drogue, mafia. sign : gopia

Be qui sa an ti fair deal avec banes anglais pou Diego? SSR ti le a tout pris vine premier ministre qui li pas ti casse la tete avec bane chagossiens ! BBC ena full raisons et malheureusement la veriter blesse. Mauriciens ena encore bocoup pou apprane.

As per above article,Natasha Sayee has written a load of bullshit and by so doing has sullied the reputation of the BBC!She sounds very much like the bunch of idiots from UOM to whom the same Natasha Sayee has refered too.It would appear that Natasha Sayee has been feeding her brain,by watching too much of the soap operas broadcast by the BBC!Mauritians must not confuse BBC World with BBC broadcast in the UK!BBC WORLD IS NOT AVAILABLE IN THE UK!!! However what did Natasha Sayee expect from Mauritians...for them to dress in black and wlak head bent?Or telephone hacking the relatives of the victim?By the way why is it that the BBC has felt it necessary for the BBC to despatch an amateur to report on this case?A very sad case all be it...unfortunately another murder ,another case.another victim,another bereaved family...lnot at all different to the murders that do take case in Ireland!Finally,who is Natasha Sayee to decide at what pace should this case take to complete its course?What about the BBC editorial line...could it be that they are all of Irish descent...as it has always been the case most of the time!

@Yannis- La BBC fait son travail d'information pour le public nord-irlandais et britannique, y compris les dizaines de milliers de Mauriciens tablis en Grande-Bretagne, sans oublier les Chagossiens qui y rsident. La famille de la jeune marie, assassine durant sa lune de miel, n'est pas concerne par la question chagossienne. On ne peut non plus reprocher la BBC le deal de SSR qui a vendu les Chagos aux Britanniques. Notez quand mme que Ben Fogle, prsentateur vedette de la BBC, a pris officiellement position en faveur des Chagossiens.

It is grossly repugnant to attempt to link the murder of Ms Harte and the current trial with the Chagossian's struggle. Out of respect to both Chagossians and the family of the victim, please resist from doing so , as your actions will play the game of the in-experienced BBC Ireland Reporter Ms Sayee whose own professionalism should be called to question. Her reports contained inaccurate facts and is geared for the tabloid press. The bulk of the Mauritian population like their contemporary British people have a great sense of justice and we all wish to see justice done. Point barre ! By her reference to the age /competence of the Prosecuting Consel, she has prejudiced the case. In the UK, she would have been done for contempt of court. Furthermore, journalists are not entirely free to report court cases as quite often a sitting judge sets Reporting restrictions under subjudice rule.Who is Ms Sayee to comment on the competence of Mehdi Manrakhan? We should complain to the BBC ( comments options seem not available for Ms Sayee's articles) or even send a complaint to the UK Press Complaint Commission?

Ca coup la, reputation Maurice fini net. Mo dimanne moi ki touristes trouver de bon pou vine Maurice. La vie cher, dimoune crvre, pickpocket ek voleurs partout. La plaze ek la villes sales, pena distraction. Lor la Mauriciens dclare faizeur.

Nothing to see there people, it's a piece of ignorant journalism on the BBC - e.g the article says Mauritius's economy relies on Tuna, agri-business and tourism...

And also the arrogance expecting tourists from other countries to be aware of this case.

Was it right for the Chief Justice to chose a newly appointed Judge to preside on this high profile case? The problem with the Judiciary is that even judgements of experienced judges of the Supreme Court are quashed by the Privy Council...

Cher bleatarn, facon to ecrire creole faire moi penser que to pas reste maurice. Ki droit donne toi traite mauriciens de poule mouiller, ki droit traite nou pays de dechetterie. Ici nou dans ene pays civiliser, kot la plupart dimoune travail dans l'honnet ek gagne zot la vie .ena problem oui, mais couma partout ailleurs. Kit fois tone pane vine maurice depi bien lontan, vine faire ene letour si to croire nou encore en 1960. Aprs coumence servi imp nouveau mot creole: gopia n'est pli tand ca

nous envi ki la verit triompher.un point c tout,la police bizin vine explike ki fer ti bizin bouze baignoire et pak biscuits pou analyse forensic .mo kroir pa bizin tire aukaine photo ene fois exhibits bouze pou analyse .photo c avant bouz quoi ke ce soit.dommage la police et astere-la procecution avoye bann novice pou ene case pareil.zott meme en tort ki mauriciens et l'ile maurice pe perdi point.at the end of the day, hope justice be done and seen to be done.aprs tout tamtam pou fermer

moi mo enn mauricien ki dan ireland, pou nou ossi li difficile ici. Enn seul dimoune inn fer crime la me cuma dir tous mauriciens ki finn fer sa. ek sa, gouvernment maurice la li pa trouver li ki tou dimoune pe bizin quite morice. Be ki fer zot pa done ogmentation? ki fer zot pa baise prix tou quitchose pou ki dimoune capav vive bien... coumsa nou capav retourne dan nou pays.

These law students were cracking a joke. So are they making fun of someone? Does the BBC reporter understand creole? Can the reporter affirm that these youngsters making fun at the victim's family? In 2008 Sharon Stone and many thousands in the US and UK cheer to the news that a strong earthquake hit Sichuan in China and more than 20,000 people perished. Check it in you tube. So who are the uncivilized in this world?

It is obvious that BBC & others are in a way influencing the decisions of the jury. If these 2 are not found guilty then for sure we mauritians are after money trying to protect our reputation. Great BBC shouldn't play this game we are not that stupid believe me.

Ca fait mal quand on prend un coup sur la tte? Mais tous les jours la presse crite, tlvise, parle nous bassine avec des neries sensation. Si je condamne sans rserve les affirmations d'une journaliste qui se contente du point de vue de quelques personnes et qui s'adonne ensuite une interprtation personnelle qu'elle publie, il faut bien dire que l'on veut souvent passer sous silence nos travers pour afficher un large sourire aux autres, voulant donner le signal que tout va bien. Cette journaliste sait bien que le public ne ragit souvent qu' ce que dit la presse, sans rflexion personnelle, et capitalise dessus pour faire plaisir son patron qui souhaite vendre le plus et ainsi s'assurer une carrire. Dans un cas pareil, la justice est seule habilite trancher, mme si l'avocat de la dfense s'est offusqu des pratiques sexuelles supposes du couple. Madame la journaliste, je suis un Mauricien, je ne suis pas insensible et je ne souhaite pas uniquement que les touristes viennent dpenser leur argent ici. Vous pouvez ne pouvez donc dire que les Mauriciens pensent ainsi.

As in the uk with rupert murdoch's phone hacking scandal including murdered schoolgirl there are insensitive people everywhere. to generalise this comment to mauritians as a whole is probably racist imperialist and coloniasist. But it's ok because we have our own bbc in mauritius that is our beloved mbc

Ben oui mo dire li bien fort, maurice ene decheterie. Zot vantard content blaguer met zol la haut la haut. La police meme peur banne bouncer ki penan kalification. to enan un peu la graisse en plus to vine tappeur dans sa zoo la. Accepter ca ile la ene waste, bizin recycle ca ile entier. passe tout dans broyeur et refaire. rendre ca ile la europeen. li pas exister ca ki ene mauricien pas voleur et menteur ki reste la-bas Moi mo dire tous mauricien ki vine faire vacances dans l'europe ou ailleurs, zot bizin paie plis chere et tout ce ki zot acheter faire zot paye vat en plis.

Dear Miss BBC,I do understand your frustration regarding the case as a journalist......only advice that i will give you is to make sure all your article are not against the laws of mauritius,....

A banne touristes occidentaux en general qui pense pou vine passe vacances a Maurice,mo ti envie dire qui zotte banne pays ena tous c'est qui nous mauriciens et banne citoyens du tiers monde rever.Zotte ena banne pays magnifique,moderne,banne places of interest,banne magnique paysages mille fois plis joli qui Maurice.Mo demande moi qui zotte trouve appealing et jolie dans Maurice quand l'occident ena tous.Mo suggere zotte si zotte envie passe banne vacances,passe zotte vacances within Europe,L'amerique ou L'australie ou meme faire du tourisme interne connaitre l'histoire de zotte pays et zotte civilization qui mille fois plis interessant qui Maurice.Maurice c'est juste ene artificially created tourist destination pou faire du tourisme de masse qui pas environmentally friendly et qui pas sustainable.Le secteur touristique fine juste creer pou banne jeunes chomeurs et ene population mauricen grandissante.Li bon Mauriciens pe gagne honter en irelande and en angleterre.Moi mo contre immigration vers banne pays occidentaux.Moi mo dire Mauriciens bizin reste a Maurice et travail pou zotte pays et faire Maurice progresser.Ou pas immigrer dehors ou pas tende banne insultes ou banne remarques li simple.

It is obvious that Natasha is trying very hard to send a bad signal about Mauritius. Does she know that we are a multi cultural society. People are living in peace and harmorny in Mauritius. Whereas overhere in the UK we only just started implemented Equality and Diversity. She must be fairly new in the journalism otherwise she would have done her research. I am definitely putting a complaint through the BBC in London to stop her crap news. Hope she learned from her mistake. Otherwise she will end up working in the shoe shop.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/search/?q=Natasha%20Sayee

Si vous regardez la page facebook de BBC World News, ou le BBC Newsline, on n'y parle pas! Tant mieu! Je pense que "the news" ne merite pas l'attention du monde,meme pas notre colere, meme si la nouvelle derange.

I acknowledge that the report by Natasha Sayee is inaccurate and does not even deserve our attention (even if we are angry about that...). Whatever happens, we must keep our heads up. These are the times where we realize how the media is manipulative, misleading and inaccurate (Mauritius is just another victim from now on...).
Does it mean that she said that we are insensible? I didnt see that in any 3 reports. (Now, I'm criticizing something else! )
I learn from this story that BBC, or at least this journalist does not have credibility anymore, at least in my eyes. end of story. and what, this is the kind of episode that everyone will forget! We all truly know that mauritius is not the most secure place in the world! and so what? We know that this issomehow a great place to live! It's just a country/society that lacks severity in its system, like any country in the wolrd.

TO Miss NATASHA SAYEE : YOUR REPORT, your judgment about the people from Mauritius, your statements prove that you barely lived here. You don't know us, yet we respect you(probably because you mentioned that mauritians are outraged, want justice, etc). Ever heard of the Fundamental Attribution Error? (please check it out) You know how people generally respect BBC WORLD NEWS (and therefore BBC NORTHERN IRELAND) and I sincerely think that you misused your ability to create sensations (like sensational stuff to stimulate people: "Mauritius fascinated by Michaela McAreavey murder trial" _ COME ' ON. As observers, (yeah we are observers, like you) we understand share the ongoing frustration we are frustrated, we feel sympathy, (do you know that we are normal after all???)
In the future, think about the consequences of your words, upir judgments: THEY ARE VERY OFFENDING besides the fact that they are untrue!

Thanks for reading!

mo ti a contemp done un lexample de nou system la justice, et invite la justice, ek ban moricien tire sot conclusion .
example un moricien frustre met un case la cour avec ban preuve solid.... premier apparicion defendeur la dire magistrat mo fine gaingne papier summon la just la motie..... case renvoyer pou 3 semainnes. apres tros semainne case vini sa coup la li dire magistrat mo pou engage un avouer...... case renvoiyer pou 4 semainnes..... case vini apres 4 semainnes ..avouer defendant present un lette la cour li dire li fek prand case li dimand 4 semainnes pou etudier case la..... case re renvoiyer pou 4 semainnes....... apres 4 semainnes avouer la dire la cour li bisin ban particulars....... avouer plaignant soumet particulars..... case re renvoiyer.... avouer defendanr dire li bisin better particulars... tout sa la case la pa encore coumencer...... re donne li better particulars........ sa coup la defendant vine avec un motion limine litis magistrat rendre un jugement en faveur plaignant...... aster case coumence trial si avocat defendant connais li so client pou perdit li traine case la 3 a 4 ans avec certificat medicale, no disponibilite etc etc... la pli part ban avocats en cour... magistrat pas ena aucum moyer pou connais si sot ape cause vrai ou menti car sot dire sot pas disponible simplement pou faire sot client gaingne plis le temps ala system la justice. chapeau a un sel juge de la cour supreme mo evite nome so non
mo imvite la press radio priver faire un debat lor nous system la justice ler la ou va tender
p l s

Mo croire qui jam nou pou avanc dan sa pays la,, la vrit p blesse grave. Et pourtant li vrai c ki banes journalistes BBC p racont. Mme pas ne semaine qui banes journalistes ine rentrent dan nou pays qui bana fini con zot banes manires qui zot faire envers bane non rsident et touristes. Bze sa.

am in uk since 7 yrs tell this natacha about scandal of phone hacking , scandal of soft sentences n leniency of british judges, daily crimes n often kidnapping reported Everyday in english newspapers.. BBCr always in controversial rows.. i know all this bcoz ALL English papers report these Everyday. So, where is it more safe 2 live

This murder could have happened anywhere in the world. The most important aspect is that justice is done. Not for the sake of sensationalist journalism, not for the sake of foreign currency brought by tourism, not for the sake of anything else than the fact a young woman has been deprived of her future. A mother and a father have had their daughter taken away from them. A sister and a brother are still mourning the loss of their sister.
If someone left the hotel in a haste that night, then track them down, find out whose DNA was on Michaela's body. If there have been mistakes made by the initial investigators, get a review done, get it right.
The Irish Examiner last week (Friday) writes about law students sniggering and laughing in the gallery. This is not the image we want to see. Anyone with common sense would know that this poor woman's family was in court, then why behave like imbeciles, you are meant to be our lawyers for the future!
Defence lawyers need to respect the victims' family too, rather than playing to the gallery, in knowledge of the media attention the case is getting. Michaela's did not kill herself; one or more people are guilty and I hope that justice is done. I hope that those guilty torture themselves with remorse and get their comeuppance.

There is no doubt that this journalist let her personal sentiments cloud her objective judgment on the court case and mauritians in general. She has been there one week spoken to some people on the streets and had been to court that she already has a harsh depiction of the how mauritians treat foreigners. What is the theme of the article anyway? Insensibility of mauritians, the court case itself, the treatment of foreigners and the fact that they are encouraged to come on holidays? what is the theme exactly? It is poorly written this is why we can't readily establish a theme and its illustration is missing. However, I must agree that 'mentalite mauritienne', persist. Mauritians jokingly employ this term, but the idea behind it is derogatory and convey the feeling of disdain towards mauritian people from other fellow mauritians. We are slowly becoming a variation of capitalism in the Indian Ocean type scale. We do not respect each, drive without rules or courtesy, may or cause an accident be it minor or major and just walk away waving a hand with a smile as if nothing happened! Our workplaces are riddled with employees who do not have work ethics, OHS simply non existent and of course do not forget the politicians who are cheap, very little intelligence in specific professional fields requiring urgent attention such as water and transport and seem to picky back on each other when something goes wrong. HOnestly I don't know what it will take for us to finally get it.

Here's a clear example how narrow minded & unfair some foreign journalists can be towards us, yet it's incomprehensible how some idiotic local folks like yogesh fall into their trap & suck up to them even more. I'm more disgusted with the lack of patriotism of some than the unfair comments of the Irish gutter press and that Natasha Sayee character. I wouldn't trust the rumor mills from either the Irish media or the BBC one bit. For me it's them who have no credibility at all yet they continue spit their lies to the world. One day the worm will hopefully turn and all will see through their deception as their aim is to throw dirt on others. It's what they have been appointed for...A well-oiled dirt spitting machine !

C est plus Maurice c est un plaisir,mais plutot Maurice le plaisir de tuer..

WHY DON'T YOU GIVE YOUR READERS THIS WEBSITE AND LET THEM SEE AND HEAR THESE VARIOUS REPORTS SENT BY NATASHA :-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/search/news/?q=Natasha%20Sayee

Mrs. Natasha has been completely biased about the topic that she is writing. She is tarnishing the image of a Country by simply saying that "Each day small clusters of supporters of Sandip Moonea, one of the accused, hang out of nearby office windows and stand on terraces, shouting messages of support." These are inaccurate facts as shown by this very article in the "L'Express", a Mauritian Local newspapers (http://www.lexpress.mu/story/38645-en-marge-du-proces-la-bbc-decrit-les-...
). Moreover our Supreme Court cannot afford more that 40 Persons, then how could say that there were 50 laws students plus the other people present in the Court Room, this clearly shows that she has something personal against Law Students, just because Law Students want to learn how Court proceedings are done and that they arrive early at the Court and that they get proper sitting accommodation and that Mrs. Natasha Sayee doesn't get a proper sitting arrangement because of all the places are taken up by people, doesn't give her the right to say such harsh words against Law Students. How can Mrs. Natasha Sayee say that we, Mauritians, are supporting criminals? We believe in the fact that If they are guilty, they should punished but if not then be freed. Mrs. Natasha Sayee is simply indulging herself in what in legal jargon, one calls a "trial by the media."

This is a complaint that I sent to the BBC because their Journalist, Mrs Natasha Sayee, was biased and was inaccurate about her topic that she discussed. As a Mauritian and a Law Student, it is outrageous to lie about such matters like for example the sitting accommodation as if our Supreme Court can accommodate 50 law students plus journalists, plus families of both parties plus counsels plus Judge. If it was so, believe me, the Judge himself would have no place to sit!

This article by L'Express clearly shows that the Journalist was lying blatantly about our supposedly support towards the suspects!

Thank you L'Express.

hey, a young lady has been killed during her honey moon in our island and this is no joke at all for me. whoever done this and for whatever reason, we cannot accept this sort of thing - We can neither accept that our students "rient gorges dployes vis--vis des proches de Michaela Harte et de John McAreavey venus assister au procs." come on students, un peu de respect pour l`institution au moin.

I refer to recent article published on the BBC website on the
Michaela McAreavey murder trial and was hugely surprised to find that that one of BBC reporters had so critically been able to distort information and present same in front of such a reputable institution such as the British Broadcasting Corporation. I, being one of the attendees of the murder trial of Mrs Hart in the capital of Mauritius, find it hard to believe that even the BBC can go wrong and publish anything and everything that their so-called journalists seemed to have 'gathered' at the trial. The situation is critically alarming. The entire world are followers of the news broadcast by the BBC and I cannot afford staying put as the world is being misled by publishing falsified information. There are various areas that requires particular attention in the BBC article and I shall only refer to the most important one. Do the articles written by BBC journalists undergo any kind of screening? or the BBC just take their word for it? Is it because Mauritius is such a remote and small island that the BBC can afford to publish anything they desire?
I believe that journalists in the United Kingdom have a code of ethics to which they have to abide. To my knowledge, I do not see that same are being followed in the Hart case. At this juncture, I only see a desperate lack of ignorance and judgment in the article. It is an act of despair that have been shown by the journalists. Are they publishing such impotent news to attract mass public attention?

It goes without saying that the inaccuracy of the facts laid down in her article is alluring and threatening to the reputation of Mauritius. BBC journalists have left no stone unturned to decapitate the reputation of Mauritius and its citizens. Criticisms made in the article are unfounded and assumptions vulgar. For example, claims that Mauritians support criminals is pure nonsense. Notwithstanding the other discoveries made by the BBC reporters. Why is reference even being made to University of Mauritius Law students? I do not understand. Students were at the trial, not to support their heroes but to get an glimpse of the trial that is being talked about in every corner of the island.

Another example would be her distorted fact that there were about '50 or so law students' in the court room. It is nevertheless an undisputed fact that the courtroom cannot support such a huge audience.

There are so many examples in the articles that I can cite that are blatantly acts of pure ignorance and despair again. The public is not being informed on the proceedings of the trial inside the court given the importance and sensitiveness of such a murder trial but rather, the BBC journalists are taking their time to tarnish the reputation of Mauritius.

I would firmly request that all of the 'facts' that the BBC journalists have presented and published be questioned and necessary actions be taken against non-compliance to the code of ethics that should be used by the UK journalists.

Here is a tip for both the defence and prosecutor
When tea was ordered, the first thing the waiter does is to take the room number to accept the order and he can say when the order was taken whether the lady was present or not.

The remarks that Natasha Sayee made recently in the case of Michaela McAreavey are mostly biased information. How can she criticise the students of the University of Mauritius like this? This is not appreciating at all. As per here around 50 student were present in the courtroom when in fact this is not true. there were barely 12 students. Such a small courtroom, how can it accomodate so many people, together with all the journalists, barristers and police officers. I think this is a bit of common- sense. We respect the press. But, does freedom of the press mean crticizing people or coming up with information on unfounded grounds? I don't think so. As per her, the students from Mauritius are supporting the accused people. How can she confirm that? On what proof?. She has not even left any stone in critisizing the prosecutions counsels, who are trying their level best in trying to help an aggrieved get justice. It is clear unprofessionalism on her part and it feels great pain in reading all what she has written when the truth is actually not that. She is simply giving a false picture of what is actually happening. I rely on you people to take this into considerations and to take the neccessary measures as soon as possible. Thanks in advance for your comprehension.

I, as one of those who attend to the sessions of the case of Michaela McAreavey can definitely say that what Natasha Sayee has been saying is completely unfounded. Acocording to her, the Court is taking too much time to render justice. But keeping in mind the sensitiveness of this issue and considering the fact that people's lives are in questioned, i believe that the Mauritian Court is doing a marvellous job. I find it very irritating, seeing her critisizing Mauritius like this, especially the prosecutions. concerning the remarks made to the students, this is unfounded. how can she she know that most of them were students from the University of Mauritius, and 50, this is very exaggerating on her part. Not even once did she questioned the student, so how can she knows they from the accused side. In my opinion, instead of relating to true facts, she is simply giving her own misleading views. If this is as such, then HATS OFF TO UNPROFESSIONALISM. This is entirely unacceptable and i insist that she should apologize for writing false information. I hereby hope my comment will be considered and justice will be rendered to those poor student. Equally, the reputation of Mauritius is at stake, and hence, this is highly untolerable.

IT MAKES NO DOUBT THAT FIVE OR SIX SILLY MAURITIAN LAW STUDENTS WENT ON COMMENTING SO-CALLED UNPROFESSIONAL JOURNSLISM FROM THE BBC WITHOUT EVEN LISTENING TO THE REPORTS THAT SHE POSTED ON THE BBC WEBSITE. PLEASE DO NOT LET FOREIGNERS MAKE FOOLS OF YOU DEAR STUDENTS. AND WE KNOW TOO WELL WHO THOSE STUDENTS ARE NOW THAT THE FORMER FRENCH DEGREE OF LAW WAS SUPPRESSED BY THE UOM !!!

Correct me If I am wrong but we are talking about this very article here

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-18225404

Unless I am blind, deaf or dumb which would really surprise me, there are no reports that can be seen or heard on that Article.

So Mr Andrew please remain in the very topic we are discussing here unless there are reports connected to that very article, you have no right to call people silly or whatever.

On A final note, Mr Andrew believe me, my friends and I watched all the BBC reports on this Harte case.

Let me clarify a few issues worthy of being understood.

First of all, let me enlighten you to the fact that our prompt response follows a detailed consultation of the following website : http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-18225404; whereby the turmoil began.

So dear Andrew, we have indeed read the reports she posted on the BBC website prior to our reaction here (though we have not listened to the reports because it was meant to be read and not listened- refer to your comment)

I further acknowledge your arithmetic problem and wonder if it is a common problem among reporters (if you are a reporter too). While the BBC reporter mistook 10 students for 50 or more students, you are mistaking the concern of only 4 law students for being 'five or six silly mauritian law students who went on commenting...'

For your reassurance, we are not letting foreigners make a fool of ourselves. But we are rather being patriotic and we feel concerned to defend the reputation of our tiny island from unprofessional reporters who are displaying desperate acts of ignorance and judgement in reputable institutions such as the BBC!

And dear Mr Harvey, I hereby see no relevance to your reference to the former french degree of law formerly suppressed by the UOM in your comment. Anyways, I hope that you will be more diplomatic and tactful next time you react to a comment since i find your unfounded description of us as 'SILLY MAURITIAN LAW STUDENTS' as being absolutely unfounded and inappropriate.

the problem with this mauritius is that there are too too much mauritians. This island would better off without mauritians.

Ranne nou Diego matelot. Do they criticise all those unsolved crimes in the UK at times or do they let the law take it's course and wait till the end?

Dear Mr. Andrew - If the former french law degree has been suppressed by the University of Mauritius ( which is your view anyway - none of us has been made aware if this) , it might be because to study law in Mauritius you need to know both English and French Law - and if you manage to get your information right and check the results of the students who get a seat for an LLB degree - at the University of Mauritius maybe you would take back your comment of us being "silly mauritian law students."

If the journalist could talk only about the people she met, she could have been right but interviewing a few and talking about all is absolutely wrong. By the way, there is nothing like quality assurance (eg ISO) when it comes to information so some can profit from this by broadcasting wrong infos with their personal agenda!

To be noted that our legal system/parliament are copied from the British, our lawyers/judges/magistrates were educated in Britain and if one is not satisfies here, he/she goes to Privy Council in Britain. Thus if anything is here here then the givers of examples and their supporters are not neutral.

We also have had our people going to the west to spend money to learn but were murdered. Yet we did not give the same approach. We must start thinking as from this and not care for the anti Mauritians specially our nationals living in their adoptive lands and ready to mud sling their motherland as soon as they get the least chance. Many people are considering ours to be the culprits while the case is neither over nor has the DNA of anyone accused been found at the scene of murder.

Dear Mr. Andrew, please verify your facts before stating something. I am still puzzled about your "...THE FORMER FRENCH DEGREE OF LAW WAS SUPPRESSED BY THE UOM.."
what is the meaning of this?

And please before treating law students as silly or idiots, please have a look in the mirror and analyse your own actions!

As for the BBC articles by Ms Sayee, a big LOL for all the readers who are actually believing such biased and unprofessional display of journalism.

"Dear Prithika,

Thank you for your comments about our reporting of the Michaela McAreavey murder trial. I'm the editor who approved the headline and copy contained in the story about which you have complained.

We do not accept any allegation of bias in our reporting. The views of people gathered by our reporter, Natasha Sayee, are an accurate reflection of her conversations with Mauritians and the support expressed for Sandip Moonea was also witnessed by Natasha and falls within the scope of fair comment.

It is in the interests of justice that we adequately convey both the prosecution and defence arguments. A failure to do so amounts to a contempt of proceedings even if the trial is not taking place in a UK or Irish jurisdiction. We have not been guilty of holding the Mauritian legal system in contempt, nor of criticising the administration of justice on the island. We also recognise that approaches to justice may differ between cultures, although such cultural misunderstandings can lead to distress for those taking part.

Our reporting has been consistent with coverage provided by other UK and Irish media, so the BBC has not been alone in reporting events in this way.

At the beginning of the trial there was huge pressure on space inside the courtroom. Reporters who were attempting to cover the trial had to compete with members of the public and law students for a seat, even having to run into the courtroom in an effort to secure a place. Natasha Sayee estimated that fifty or so law students were in attendance. We stand over that estimate which highlights how crowded the courtroom was during the first few days. Since then the police have successfully made efforts to reduce the number of observers. That has led to less crowding and a more restrained atmosphere.

Whether or not the cultural differences extend to permitting laughter and giggling in court, our reporter was correct to reflect the impact of that behaviour on the victims family. Natasha Sayee reported John McAreavey's sister Claire turned around in her seat and looked at those laughing directly behind her. Mark Harte shook his head and then lowered his eyes, hardly lifting his head for most of the afternoon's hearing. The judge himself, Mr Justice Prithviraj Fecknah, recognised that the reaction to the proceedings was causing distress to the victims family and urged legal representatives to show restraint.

The standards by which we report are established by the BBCs editorial guidelines which we have met in full in our coverage of this case. We approach every court case in exactly the same way, regardless of who is accused, who is the victim or where the case is being heard. We have fairly and accurately reported the evidence provided to the court, the scrutiny of that evidence and the scenes which have taken place inside and outside the courtroom.

Adam Smyth
Editor Radio News // News Online "

AND THIS WOULD BE MY REPLY :
"Freedom of the press belongs only to those who own one" - Thomas Jefferson

"the problem with this mauritius is that there are too too much mauritians. This island would better off without Mauritians."

Ahh I simply love this comment, it has just proven everything that Law students have been trying to prove. Thank you so much Blea TARD!

The comment of Bleatarn Shall remain just to see how racist some people can get.

I wonder whether we should follow the example of the "professionals" journalists of BBC... should we also term all Irish people as unprofessionals n biased people just because some Irish journalists are so? Just like the latter are doing by interviewing a few Mauritians and terming their reactions as that of the population of Mauritius!
seriously, it's high time for some serious journalism!!!
N please stop targeting the law students... they are there as members of the public and want to learn.
i wonder from where the reporter got the nonsense about the students idolizing defence counsels...=.=