Possible Fatal Shooting in Long Beach? |
Possible Fatal Shooting in Long Beach? |
Dec 11 2012, 10:06 PM
Post
#1
|
|
Newbie Group: Members Posts: 5 Joined: 13-July 12 Member No.: 1,186 |
Anyone hear anything?
|
Sep 16 2019, 11:47 AM
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 55 Joined: 17-January 16 Member No.: 1,466 |
I went to the trial because I had read so much about the twists and turns of the case over the years and was interested in hearing the actual evidence. I have no "horse in the race", so to speak and was expecting to hear a lot of what has been printed. I have to say that I was amazed to see the reporter from the News Dispatch happily chatting with the defendant's family and friends during the breaks. After hearing the evidence, I can only conclude that the news reporting is HEAVILY biased, for whatever reason. The paper entirely ignores any of the evidence that was damaging to the defendant and to which he admitted during the police interview that they played, such as the fact that he had possession of the gun the entire time and said that his wife was "not getting out of the closet" or the bizarre recorded 911 call where the operator thinks he was the one shot (I think he actually chuckled at one point). I felt bad for his kids who testified on his behalf but the news coverage is what is very disturbing to me. A small community relies on the press for accurate reporting (particularly of local news) and this makes me think that everything I've read in the paper over the years has been written with an agenda in mind and is not the whole story. If anyone knows any of the jurors or an unbiased person who heard the evidence, I urge you to ask them about it and confirm everything I've written for yourself. It's really sad to see the state of journalism today. It's seems to be all about manipulating opinion. I agree with you. Good journalism is hard to find. Almost 100% of the stories that I have contributed a story to any newspaper, and I know exactly what the facts are in the submitted story, always come out with something that is either made up or incorrect. I think most of the time they do not do it on purpose, usually it is ignorance, or lack of experience. They need to learn to ask clarifying questions and/or repeat back what they just heard and/or ask the source to proof the article before publication. For example, I wrote into the N-D about that person getting stuck in the Franklin Street bridge about if they asked if the bridge has an e-stop that the attendant can hit to immediately stop the bridge in whatever position it is in and they never published my letter to the paper. As a citizen that travels that bridge frequently, I would like to know, because if it does not have one, that is extremely unsafe for the public, and if it does have one, why didn't the bridge attendant use it? I would think a good reporter would have asked that question as one of the top 3 questions. In regards to what you said about the trial, I noticed that the last three stories in the paper including the one that said Larkin was guilty used his "nice" picture. Wouldn't they use his mugshot for the article that said he was found guilty? They made it look like he was happy to serve 2-8 years. I also was interested in knowing the facts, but I did not have time to attend the trial. Thanks for sharing what you heard. |
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 25th April 2024 - 04:49 PM |
Skin Designed By: neo at www.neonetweb.com