Quote: Nat Wicks @ October 4 2011, 9:58 AM BSTAbsolute disgace.
Oh dear. 'Sank into her chair sobbing uncontrollably' is a particular low point
I read the news today oh boy! Page 543
The whole story is just horrible and atleast there seems to be some sort of resoloution.
How the hell did the Italian police manage to use the script for Saw 7 to prosecute a murder case?
Why is an Italian prosecutor who served 16 months for abuse still in office.
How dare the prosecutors call her a witch? Frankly I'm beginning to think there are too many countries in the EU who shouldn't be there.
Quote: AJGO @ October 4 2011, 10:05 AM BSTOh dear. 'Sank into her chair sobbing uncontrollably' is a particular low point
Seriously there should be some sort of comeback for a lapse in professional standards that jaw-dropping.
As for the story itself, it did always have the feel of prosecutors who had read too much lurid detective fiction.
Quote: sootyj @ October 4 2011, 10:17 AM BST
How the hell did the Italian police manage to use the script for Saw 7 to prosecute a murder case?
Would make a great Newsjack App Sootyj
Quote: Nat Wicks @ October 4 2011, 9:58 AM BSTAbsolute disgace.
Wow.
Too be honest papers do that sort of rubbish all the time.
I mean obits are written years ahead of time, it's an industry like anyother.
The real problem is the Press Complaints Comission is run by news paper owners and editors. Roughly the equivalent of putting Gary Glitter in charge of the Sex Offenders registers or Nick Griffin the council for racial equality.
So this shit, plus hacking, harrasing, lying, doorstepping, bribing, inventing stories, twisting statistics, promoting racial hatred, destroying reputations on heresay, promoting gambling, undermining parliament, destroying politicians careers at the whim of unelected propeitors, creating moral panics, being responible for murders and assaults and all that other shite.
Is punishable by a fine most papers can pay without a wince.
How we tolerate this shit. Is the same reason cows walk into abatoirs.
It's not the fact they had a guilty page ready, that's to be expected. It's the outright making up shit about 'she broke down in tears' and making up quotes of what people said after hearing she was guilty! That's just utterly ridiculous. The twunts.
Papers make stuff up all the time, it's no surprise. Even the BBC does it; I remember they showed Arabs supposedly firing guns in the air celebrating some terrorist atrocity, but it was shown that the footage they used came from a wedding! The BBC didn't really apologise, AFAIR, which gave the impression that it's normal behaviour.
Quote: zooo @ October 2 2011, 11:04 AM BSTWhy is being a cheating bastard a requirement for all sportsmen?
A (somewhat) recent episode of South Park about Tiger Woods answered your question.
Quote: Nogget @ October 4 2011, 3:06 PM BSTPapers make stuff up all the time, it's no surprise.
Just 'cos it's no surprise doesn't mean we shouldn't be pissed off.
Quote: TopBanana @ October 3 2011, 8:48 PM BSTFoxy Knoxy: Non-murderer!
Yeah - right!
You just have to look into her eyes. There will be other scandals.
Quote: zooo @ October 4 2011, 3:01 PM BSTIt's not the fact they had a guilty page ready, that's to be expected. It's the outright making up shit about 'she broke down in tears' and making up quotes of what people said after hearing she was guilty! That's just utterly ridiculous. The twunts.
Assuming that the page was put online accidentally, there's always the chance that it would have been edited to reflect actual events. Placeholders for the general flow of the article, if you will.
Possible, but in this case, I believe they've admitted that they pressed publish the second the judge said guilty. Only it was the guilty of slander part, not the murder part, like they thought.
Quote: zooo @ October 4 2011, 3:11 PM BSTJust 'cos it's no surprise doesn't mean we shouldn't be pissed off.
Absolutely. People shouldn't buy papers which print such obvious fabrications, but still they do.
Quote: Nogget @ October 4 2011, 3:06 PM BSTPapers make stuff up all the time, it's no surprise. Even the BBC does it; I remember they showed Arabs supposedly firing guns in the air celebrating some terrorist atrocity, but it was shown that the footage they used came from a wedding! The BBC didn't really apologise, AFAIR, which gave the impression that it's normal behaviour.
I bet most of those Arabs approve of terrorist outrages.
The terrorist bastards