Unfortunately, a lot of that mistrust is based on inaccurate and biased reporting. Remember that, when these things get to trial, the only report the rest of us who weren't there at the courthouse get to see is that part of it that, as the NYT is fond of calling it, "is fit to print." That means that if the editor doesn't think that exculpatory evidence is "fit to print" because it doesn't fit with his preconceived notions, then neither you nor I get to read about it, and our opinion on the matter is accordingly misinformed - which of course is the editor's intention all along... ...to make sure that you are misinformed and buy into his agenda.RHZig wrote:As a police officer in one more month I can see why citizens don't trust us like they once did.
But I am sure there is more to the story.
I worked in the newspaper business for 9 years, and left it 9 years ago. I still feel dirty by association, and I wasn't even an editor. The cop may well be guilty. Or, he may not be. Or the woman may be the instigator. Or, maybe she's not. The truth is that neither 03Lightningrocks nor any of the rest of us really know what happened. We only know what we are reading or watching online about it. Heck, most all of us are more than 1,000 miles away from Oceanside, so we aren't even getting the benefit of the word on the street. The press is often and notoriously inaccurate when it comes to reporting on crime. Consequently, it seems premature to judge either the cop or the woman until we know more.03Lightningrocks wrote:Another side to the story????????????? Excuse me while I throw up!!! Shooting at an unarmed woman and her child???????? No other side to a story like this unless you are blinded by team spirit.
That's all I'm saying....