It strikes me that the allegations of obscurantism, or “not investigating the true facts about the Travellers,” could equally well apply to the mainstream media and to the uncritical Traveller supporters as to the (fairly moderate) posts on this thread.
The undeniable fact that some Irish Travellers (here and in Ireland) do not pursue lives of crime should not, ipso facto, preclude mention of the fact that a disproportionate (though admittedly less-than-entire) subset of them (as well as of conventional gypsies) do pursue such careers, to judge from all the statistical and anecdotal evidence.
For instance, the websites I’ve seen indicate that a total of a mere 7,000 Irish Travellers, approximately, live in the U.S. Murphy Village alone, to judge from the Dateline special, has hundreds and hundreds of high-end houses and pickup trucks, despite the fact that not a single one of the families interviewed appears to have regular employment (outside of construction scams). Is it then so unreasonable to postulate (really, just to point out) the link between this small and insular group and a large number of crimes? Isn’t Criminology 101 about determining who commits crimes, and when, and how?
The media in Ireland has been gripped in recent years by a paroxysm of political sensitivity that has led to endless articles about the root causes of Traveller poverty, etc., but has still not managed to obscure the facts, evident to the Irish populace, that the Traveller population has not assimilated, and would appear not to wish to assimilate, to the mainstream population. When this non-assimilation is viewed in terms of the free and easy, noncomformist nomadic lifestyle of the Travellers, it’s readily portrayed (by the media among others) as downright romantic, and as bespeaking a grandiose and free-roaming spirit on the Travellers’ part. It does not seem grossly unfair to suggest that mentioning the other, equally empirically demonstrable, ramifications of Traveller non-assimilation is merely apropriate in this context.
To get down to brass tacks, every initial indication is that Mrs. Toogood was a member of an at least loosely organized clan of Traveller con artists, specializing (as is not uncommon for them) in shoplifting or bogus refund scams against stores. Her possession of multiple differing state identifications at the time she was arrested hardly supports any contention that American Travellers’ stigma as disproportionately prone to fraudulent behavior is a slander as opposed to an elementary heuristicly-based inference.