Excerpt:
Prosecutors highlighted “about $10,000 — $8,000 in U.S. dollars and then $2,000 in foreign currency that was found on his person,” CNN correspondent Danny Freeman said following the court hearing.
“Also they said that he had a Faraday bag,” which blocks cell signals, a move that prosecutors alleged marked “an indication of criminal sophistication and reason they should hold him on bail,” Freeman continued.
After prosecutors made the claims, Mangione said he would like to “correct two things.”
“I don’t know where any of that money came from — I’m not sure if it was planted. And also, that bag was waterproof, so I don’t know about criminal sophistication,” the suspect said in a statement that suggested police framed him.
From the article:
They should have said “the suspect’s movements” or “the shooter’s movements”. Not “Mangione’s movements”. They are already presuming guilt by saying it was Mangione who was recorded. Newspapers used to be careful about doing this. I think they can be sued for defamation for this, can’t they?
It’s an American newspaper, so it’s up to the victim. Canada and EU have much stricter rules.
Maybe Luigi can sue them with all the money people on GoFundMe are desperate to give him.
I mean, if they want to go and taint every potential juror in the country they can go for it.
It seems kinda grey because they’re not saying he committed a crime they are saying that he was in certain camera frames and the police were looking for him. If the police announced a name then the news would be reporting fact. The camera bit could be debatable I think. If they were speaking more about the actions of the crime they’d have to alledge, which they did alledge about his “type” of bookbag.
I could be wrong I just found your comment interesting.
Yeah but by stating as a fact that it was Mangione who was witnessed and recorded they are stating as a fact that he is the killer, which we don’t know yet. That is-- or used to be – a big no no in reporting. But times have changed. Here is a link I found explaining how they are probably opening themselves up to a libel charge with this kind of language.
I think they’re saying it definitely was Mangione who was recorded at the hotel, which if he was checking in/out is pretty easy to prove. From there they lost track of him because they didn’t know his route or he just didn’t show up on any other cameras.
I agree that the wording is likely intentional to imply guilt, but is loose enough that they could claim that isn’t what they were doing.
Was it an employee or a bystander/customer? I’m confused.
All the accounts I’ve read say it was an employee of the McDonald’s who called police. But who knows? Probably one source printed that and then all the others just copied it.