When the reporter brings the bottle back, the bottle needs to be turned into the police. I would send the reporter down to the station to return it. This is a vital part in the investigation and now the reporter has gotten their fingerprints all over it.
For the photographer, there’s nothing that the paper can do with this picture yet because as the law said, you cannot incriminate a minor. Also, there has not been a final conviction so putting that picture in the paper would be incriminating.
The article can mention that the police have a main suspect and that the suspect is a minor.
With reporter number 3, the writer can incorporate all of the narrative with Bob. You can use the part about the fire and his wife and how she might not make it. I don’t think that the writer could use the part about the kid, because that is also incriminating. The writer can also use the quote from the Fire Marshall about how the fire is being investigating it as an arson.
As for ethics and legal dilemmas, the article can still not talk about the boy as a suspect yet because it is both incriminating and the kid is a minor. Beyond the obvious story stuff, the reporters should keep calling the police station for updated information and keep talking to everyone in the building and those in the hospital. Send photographers to the scene to keep taking pictures of the damage. It is very tempting to incorporate quotes from Bob Jacobson about the boy, they could be saved for a later story after the boy gets convicted. I still wouldn’t use the quote about pouring gasoline and lighting him on fire. That’s a little harsh and would paint the man in a bad light wile we’re focusing on the kid.
No comments:
Post a Comment