optical follow-up was undertaken - in part due to the difficult proximity (within 50$^\circ$) of the Sun at the time the burst triggered [*Swift*]{}. Both the lack of an optical afterglow and analysis of the BAT spectrum suggested that the source might lie at high redshifts [@2008GCN..7748....1M; @2011ApJ...731..103X], but constraints on the X-ray spectrum precluded a high redshift fit to the data [@2008GCN..7742....1P]. Association with the known, bright optical source would suggest a lower redshift for the burst, but it was not clear whether this was the host galaxy or a star in chance alignment.

While the afterglow was not detected in the optical, the $\gamma$-ray and X-ray emission was also relatively weak, with an early time flux at 0.3-10keV of 2.52$^{+1.20}_{-0.75}\times10^{-10}$ergcm$^{-2}$s$^{-1}$, measured in a 10s exposure at a mean photon arrival time of T$_0$+133s [based on analysis from @2009MNRAS.397.1177E]. In the absence of a redshift for the host, the time-averaged X-ray analysis also suggested the presence of an excess neutral hydrogen column density of $3.0^{+2.1}_{-1.8} \times 10^{21}$ cm$^{-2}$ above the Galactic value of $1.09\times10^{21}$cm$^{-2}$ [where these are 90% confidence intervals in analysis from the UK Swift Science Data Centre, @2009MNRAS.397.1177E]. This represents an excess in the X-ray inferred hydrogen column at the $\sim$3$\sigma$ level. [*Swift*]{} observations ended approximately 20 hours after the initial trigger.

Initial observations for this source were therefore ambiguous, with different elements of the data either suggesting a high redshift solution (non-detection of the optical transient, BAT spectrum) or appearing to preclude it (optical source association, X-ray spectrum), and the excess extinction seen in the afterglow implying the presence of dust either in the host galaxy or along the line of sight. However the burst’s location, within 50$^\circ$ of the Sun at the time the burst went off, precluded further early time studies, and the burst has largely been