Detectives from the Police Service of Northern Ireland’s Legacy Investigation Branch are conducting a review of the 1973 murder of 10-year-old Brian McDermott, who disappeared in Belfast’s Ormeau Park. His remains were later recovered from the River Lagan near the Belfast Boat Club, about a week after he disappeared.

The investigation notes that McDermott left his home on Well Street in the lower Woodstock Road area around 12:30 p.m. and did not return for his Sunday dinner, with his last sighting described as him playing alone in a playground between 1 p.m. and 3 p.m. A police spokesperson said the case has never been closed and urged anyone with information, even if it seems small, to come forward to help the review. Anyone with information is asked to contact the Legacy Investigation Branch. The statement expressed sympathy for McDermott’s family and emphasized the ongoing effort to pursue all investigative opportunities.

Original Sources: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

Actionable information - The article asks readers with information to contact the Legacy Investigation Branch, but it does not give concrete, usable contact details (no phone number, email, or web link in the excerpt). So there is a nudge to act, but little immediate guidance to act on it. A reader would need to look up official PSNI channels to report information, which reduces how actionable it is on the spot.

Educational depth - It provides basic facts about the case timeline and the review, but it does not explain how legacy investigations work, why reviews are done, or what kinds of information typically helps investigators. There are no explanations, analyses, or context that would help a reader understand the bigger picture of cold-case reviews.

Personal relevance - For people connected to Belfast, the case itself may feel personally relevant (local history, potential information that could help a family). For the average reader, however, it has limited direct impact on daily life, spending, health, or safety. The article’s relevance is mainly to people who might have pertinent information or a local interest in the case.

Public service function - The piece serves a public-facing purpose by highlighting an ongoing investigation and inviting information from the public. It aims to facilitate tips that could aid a review, which is a legitimate public service function.

Practicality of advice - The practical advice is weak: the call to contact the Legacy Investigation Branch is vague without methods, and there are no actionable steps readers can follow immediately (e.g., how to report, what information is most helpful, or how to protect privacy). The guidance would be more useful if it included explicit reporting channels or tips on what kinds of information to gather.

Long-term impact - If readers act on the call for information, there could be a meaningful long-term benefit (potentially helping solve a decades-old case). As a standalone article, though, it does not outline a plan or provide tools that would help readers contribute in a sustained, clear way.

Emotional or psychological impact - The article expresses sympathy for the family and notes ongoing investigative effort, which may offer some comfort or hope to readers connected to the case. It does not, however, provide practical coping guidance or supportive resources for people feeling distressed by the case.

Clickbait or ad-driven language - The wording is relatively calm and factual; it does not rely on sensational or fear-inducing language or promise dramatic outcomes for clicks. There is no obvious attempt to manipulate emotions for views.

Missed chances to teach or guide - The article could have been more useful by: - Providing concrete reporting channels (official website links, a dedicated tip line, or how to contact the Legacy Investigation Branch). - Explaining what kinds of information are most helpful (dates, locations, descriptions of sightings, etc.) and how to submit it safely and anonymously if appropriate. - Adding a quick explainer about how legacy investigations work and what readers can expect after sharing information. - Linking to trusted resources (PSNI pages, CrimeStoppers) so readers can easily learn more or report safely.

Suggestions for better information or learning on your own - Look up the official PSNI website or CrimeStoppers for the Legacy Investigation Branch contact methods and guidance on reporting cold-case information. - If you have potential information, prepare a short, factual note with: when/where you saw something, who was involved, any distinguishing details, and how you can be contacted for follow-up. - Check reputable news sites or official police press releases for updated contact details and tips on what information is most useful in cold-case reviews.

Summary - What the article gives: A public call for information about a historical case, and a note that the case is still being reviewed; a sympathetic tone toward the family. - What it does not give: Concrete, actionable steps to report information; practical guidance on what helps investigators; deeper educational context about legacy investigations. - If you’re looking for real, usable guidance, you’ll need to visit official PSNI resources or CrimeStoppers to find precise reporting channels and tips on what information to gather.

The text tries to pull readers with feelings, not just facts. It mentions sympathy for McDermott’s family. This can push readers to care about the case more than the details. "The statement expressed sympathy for McDermott’s family." This shows an emotional appeal, a form of virtue signaling. It may bias readers toward supporting the review because of concern shown for the family.

The text leans on authority to urge action. It says the case "has never been closed" to signal ongoing concern. It also asks people to report information, even if it seems small. "A police spokesperson said the case has never been closed and urged anyone with information, even if it seems small, to come forward to help the review." This uses official authority to cue trust and prompt a response. It can shape readers to trust the official process and to act on it.

The text uses a formal label to frame the effort. The opening mentions "Legacy Investigation Branch," which sounds official and weighty. The phrase helps position the inquiry as serious and long-running. "Legacy Investigation Branch." This naming can bias readers toward seeing the case as a heavy, legitimate government process rather than a simple missing-person report.

The passage carries several clear and subtle emotions, aimed at making the reader feel something and to guide the response to this old murder case. Sadness and grief are the strongest feelings. They appear most directly in the facts about a 10-year-old boy who disappeared, and later had his remains found in a river about a week later. The details—his age, that he left home, and that he did not return for his Sunday dinner—pull the reader toward sorrow for a child lost and a family torn by this event. The language around “disappeared” and the careful, factual timing emphasize a real tragedy rather than a simple news note, which strengthens the sense of loss. This sadness serves to make the audience feel compassion for McDermott and his family and to acknowledge the seriousness of what happened.

Sympathy for McDermott’s family is a second clear emotion, made explicit in the text. The police spokesperson is quoted as expressing sympathy for the family, which signals care and humanity. This emotion appears directly in the phrase about sympathy and again in the tone that follows, showing that those involved are not coldly reporting events but recognizing the human pain behind them. The purpose of this sympathy is to build a bridge of trust and to remind readers that real people are affected, inviting readers to share in that concern and to treat the case with respect.

Concern and worry are also present, though more subdued than sadness. These feelings show up in the idea that the case has “never been closed” and in the appeal for information “even if it seems small.” The sense of worry comes from the possibility that important evidence may still be out there and from the idea that justice for a missing child remains unfinished. This emotion motivates readers to consider helping, to be vigilant, and to think about the possibility that new information could matter. The strength is medium to strong because it is backed by the ongoing investigation and by a public call to action.

Hope and determination are connected emotions that appear in the description of the ongoing review and the willingness “to pursue all investigative opportunities.” These feelings show a belief that new findings could emerge and that the search for truth will continue. They are expressed through phrases like an “ongoing effort” and a commitment to leave no investigative stone unturned. This hope is meant to reassure the public and the victim’s family and to encourage continued support and cooperation. The reader is invited to trust that the authorities are fixed on solving the case, even after many years.

Trust in the authorities is another important emotion conveyed, aided by the formal tone and the explicit mention of a named branch (Legacy Investigation Branch) and a police spokesperson. This emotion appears to reassure the reader that the investigation is serious, professional, and ongoing. It supports a calm and respectful mood, making the reader feel that the case is in capable hands and that the authorities will treat any information with care. The purpose is to establish credibility and so reduce cynicism or apathy, nudging readers to believe that their information could still help.

Urgency and a call to action are also present, mainly through the request for information and the invitation to contact the Legacy Investigation Branch. This emotion drives the reader to consider acting, to pick up the phone or pass along a small detail, knowing that even minor information might matter in a long-running review. The direct instruction to contact an official department anchors the appeal in tangible steps, increasing the chances that readers will respond.

Certain writing tools help push these emotions and their persuasive effect. The text uses pathos by explicitly appealing to sympathy for the family and by describing a child who disappeared and whose remains were found; this humanizes the case and makes the reader care. The language is concrete and specific—times, places, and names—adding realism that strengthens emotional impact and trust. There is a light repetition of focused phrases such as “investigative opportunities” and “the case has never been closed,” which helps reinforce perseverance and dedication and keeps the idea of ongoing effort in the reader’s mind. The tone remains dignified and restrained rather than sensational, which lends credibility (ethos) and keeps the appeal centered on justice and care rather than shock. Together, these tools guide the reader toward sympathy for the family, concern about the unresolved case, and a sense that taking action could still help, while reinforcing trust in the authorities to handle the pursuit of truth with respect and seriousness.