[infotecht]

I have definitely noticed the perpetrator fixation; I always thought it was an attempt to respect the privacy of the families rather than obsession. But in this specific case -- and I'm not trying to be sarcastic here -- could the lack of contact to the victim be a result of there being no citation, instead? Not enough people knowing who the victim was, perhaps in combination with the bystander effect? I have no experience in the industry so I don't know if it'd be likely, but it seems plausible.

[throwanem]

In order to call it plagiarism in print without risk of libel, you have to be able to identify what was plagiarized. Unless it was published anonymously, that means you know from whom it was stolen.