- cross-posted to:
- pennsylvania
- cross-posted to:
- pennsylvania
You must log in or register to comment.
Mother fucker. Made my fucking skin crawl. Wtf.
I will never understand the need to name and shame suspects in a criminal case before they have been found guilty. Something like this is entirely unthinkable in most European countries, except in super high profile cases where the suspect is well known and trying to keep their identity hidden is entirely hopeless, or the interest of the public is too great.
What if a suspect is found innocent? They will forever have that stigma attached to themselves anyway, complete with photo and all. It implies an infalability of the executive and judicative systems that is a total illusion: if charged, they will be guilty, so here is their photo and home address.
We decided that transparency is extremely important. People obviously shouldn’t look at it as proof of guilt, but humans are fucky.
You never see the 25 public relations staff talking about this shit, just when they save ducks or whatever.
Keep watching, you’ll see a cute police dog or a cop skating or something very soon.
Jesus. Fucking. Christ.
Wtf
wut?
Eww…
Gdism I hate the passive voice here
How about::
Officer arrested for r*ping 13 month old child
I’m surprised it’s not MORE passive.
Child suffered injuries in possible officer involved….
Fsck this POS
He is innocent until proven otherwise. No matter what he did.
Yes.
Thank you; you are correct
I’m annoyed that news editors use the passive voice when ever there is anything involving an officer.
It is rarely “ suspect shot by police “ And usually “ officer involved shooting “
And to be certain. I do want him to have a truly fair trial.
