Quote:
Originally Posted by CliffFletcher
The latest article in the Athletic/NYT strikes a very different tone from anything I've read in the London Free Press.
Here's a heavily editorialized summary of the defense argument:
The words "orgiastic advances" were not used by the defense or anyone else, but seem intended to make the argument that E.M. was the aggressor seem absurd. And then the framing of "the naked 20-year-old woman they surrounded."
"Too bashful" seems intended to make Formenton's testimony that he was anxious seem ridiculous.
Other words could have been used to described the behaviour of the protestors towards the defendants, like shouting, yelling, or screaming. Using any of them would have evoked more sympathy towards the defendants than "taunting." Who feels threatened by a little taunting?
https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/642...rial-judgment/
It's all fair comment. And no doubt the stance of the reporters is shared by most readers. But I prefer the more thorough, detached approach of the London Free Press stories (at least the ones I've read) that let the testimony of witnesses and arguments of the defence and prosecution speak for themselves. Maybe because the LFP is the newspaper of record for the community they feel a greater obligation to meet certain standards. |
I also noticed in the CBC live posts, if there was an discrepancies pointing toward potential guilt, the writer would then go into more detail about it. When talking about the accuser's discrepancies, it would get mentioned in more vague detail and wouldn't back track to explain why they were discrepancies. The London Free Press didn't do it much for either side and just left it up to the reader for the most part. They were making mostly smaller posts quoting the testimony with less analysis.
But as I mentioned, even the London Free Press moderated and edited their live feed posts after the fact. In one of their live feeds, they quoted the accuser after she was questioned about egging them on for sex as saying, “The fact that I’m asking for it speaks to my level of intoxication,” she says. “They knew how much I was drinking that night. There were way more of them than there were of me. Nobody thought, ‘This isn’t a good situation.’ I feel like they really should have known.”
It was a direct copy and paste from this link and then deleted at some point later.
https://lfpress.com/sports/hockey/ju...rial-continues
I am on the fence on what the verdict will be because it's impossible to know exactly what was said and how it was said.