well, done passinthru....as you most assuredly know after brutally killing someone in full view of a number of innocent and unbiased witnesses, our system of law has been so perverted as to worry about every single moment of the questioning and interrogation of the obviously guilty party, whose comfort and feelings are of the greatest concern to everyone involved, and whose actions of course must be referred to in such terms as alleged and accused and reported and purported..
as to the victims, or usually their surviving family members, well they are most often muzzled and challenged..and the innocent victims are portrayed in usually as negative and as defamatory a way as possible....and if those victims or their families want their say in court they are usually forced to bear the full burden of those costs themselves with no public assistance...
I can only assume this is done so by their counsel or teams of counselors and representatives, paid for with public funds...to make the crimes somehow seem less horrific and barbaric and of course possibly lighten the punishment when it is finally agreed upon..
sigh....there was a time in this country that justice in such cases was meted out on the spot with the full support of everyone.....what HAS our world come to>???
I must be forgetting that part of those horrific videos in which these particular suspects were actually seen forcing the planes to crash into their respective targets, thus making their guilt obvious to all and legal niceties unnecessary. Although I guess it is true that "innocent until proven guilty" is not actually in the Constitution. As a general rule (meaning, including cases that seem particularly obvious and/or heinous), I'd rather the punishment come AFTER conviction (and yes, I think the punishment meted to those responsible for this tragedy should be as severe as possible).
Having said that, I do find these kind of stories to be fairly pointless and inflammatory. Of course, the point may actually BE to be inflammatory, in which case they are editorials masquerading as news, a conflation that is one of the most destructive trends in journalism.
I agree with Regional that it's a disgusting practice to demonize victims and their families, so that they are "portrayed in usually as negative and as defamatory a way as possible." I still can't believe the invective Ann Coulter spewed at the wives of some of the 9/11 victims -- "I've never seen people enjoying their husbands' deaths so much;" "By the way, how do we know their husbands weren't planning to divorce these harpies? Now that their shelf life is dwindling, they'd better hurry up and appear in Playboy."
Couldn’t agree more, Regional, and, although the blog was primarily intended to address what I see as the Herald continuing to print the intentionally misleading and illogical “reporting” that is the hallmark of the A.P., I have to go along with your comments regarding attempts to present the criminal as the victim.
I can only put this latter point down to the fact that far more money is to be made by lawyers defending the guilty than anyone representing the innocent.
Passin' I agree with your assessment of the AP article. The rest of your original post is drivel on a par with the AP article.