Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Severed leg

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by GUT View Post
    Unfortunately Jon, no I've seen matters that I am appearing in misreported in all three categories. In that...

    1. Actual statements made in the witnessbox being mis reported I'll give you one example that is a basic example but also true

    Q. So sir, was that on the Tuesday?
    A. Yes Tues...... no, no it was actually the Monday.

    Reported in the press as being on the Tuesday.

    I remember that one well, because a lot turned on the answer if it was Tuesday there should have been one result in the case, if Monday a totally different result.

    2. It's not really possible to say if the press got it wrong or not (unless you were there when the statement was made) but it is galling when you are the one being quoted and they still get it wrong.

    Q by press: Will your client plead guilty

    A. Until a complete psychological assessment can be carried out I can't say.

    Report: he said he was confident that his client would be found not guilty by reason of mental disability.

    3. Well opinion is opinion is opinion and provided they make it 110% clear that it is only opinion I have no problems, it's when they state opinion as unassailable fact that it becomes an issue.
    Thankyou GUT, that is interesting.
    In your first example you offered an instance where one? newspaper got it wrong, I assume. This demonstrates why collating a variety of press coverage of the same case (trial/inquest,etc.) is essential to help overcome mistakes of this kind.

    - (2) Certainly in the 19th century any statements to the press are invariably identical if they appear in a variety of newspapers in the same edition (morning, afternoon, or evening). So any mistake is also repeated, suggesting the witness was interviewed by an agency journalist, not a single newspaper reporter.

    - (3) In the W. M. cases most press opinion on the direction of a case is worded to look like their source was official without actually saying so. Most examples I see tend to avoid using 'fact', they just rely on assertive wording.

    The verbatim coverage of criminal cases is rare in my neck of the woods. I honestly can't say I have ever read one. We might see selective quotes, but nothing more. We never see any inquest coverage either.
    Regards, Jon S.

    Comment

    Working...
    X