If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
That great land of freedom and democracy that is the USA...
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
Have broken the record jail term for keeping a journalist behind bars.
Story.
Good to see the US justice system isn't afraid to use legal technicalities to bend the law when it suits them, what a load of bollocks.
Story.
Good to see the US justice system isn't afraid to use legal technicalities to bend the law when it suits them, what a load of bollocks.
0
Comments
From a country that moans at China for imprisoning Jouranlists.
Atdimatley he is in the wrong. But does he really need that huge a sentence? He's a journo ffs - if they offered him some cash, I bet he'dforget his ethics immediatley and hand it over. That's the Journo's way!
To what ends though, should our intelligence services give up their informers?
Principle is the same.
No, the principle isnt the same at all, this isnt a 'source' this is a piece of video footage that he shot. If it was some high level mole in the Police Force who was gaining information on racism or corruption then your point would stand, but there is no source here.
I fully back the idea that journalists should be able to protect their sources but that isnt the case here. But, having said that I really dont think he should be going to jail for it, there must be some way of coming to an agreement.
Which really has nothing to do with this case at all.
Is he bollocks wrong.
He has taken a video which may have evidence in which some poor guy has had his fucking skull fractured! He could of been killed.
Why should not hand the tape over?
What if some kid was getting molested in the background, you'd all expect him to hand over then right......?
Still journos whatever there creed or politics stick together so you're unlikely to hear any criticism of him in the media.
And the prosecution is completely within it's powers in terms of the law written.
The journalist is trying to make a statement for personal reasons, that's what it looks like to me.
Journo is in the wrong, unless the film may incriminate him. If so then he is completely within his rights although he hasn't actually argued that point...
You really should read these things before commenting.
Mind on other things.