Watching a bit of the trial at the mo and OP's testimony regarding why he had his fathers ammunition in his safe (which is illegal), where he kept his ammunition when away from home and what he did on some boat trip a couple of years ago is so inconsistent and sketchy - this prosecutor is going to tear him to shreds when they get to the maim issue.
The whole thing has become like a very bad soap opera acted by a bunch of hams .. the prosecution would not get away with such antics in the UK, for that matter, neither would the defence
Didn't see it, but going by what's been said, it seems like sky had no control on what was shown. I'm sure they could have easily set up a time delay to prevent this though.
But this is Murdoch we're talking about, so even if they had a chance to edit it, they probably wouldn't. The Sky's the limit...............
Murder trials (real life murder) doesnt get shown on tv like it's a drama series. It stays professional, as in, someone has actually died, let's have a bit of respect.
Celebrity, sportsman, whatever, crimes that have a victim and leave behind a family doesnt have to turn into the business of the whole world.
Tradition etc is different I get that.
I for one, think Oscar pistorious is guilty of pre-meditated murder.
Spot on mate.
My girlfriend had "Life and Death Row" on the other night, a BBC 3 "documentary" on Death Row. I've seen a previous episode with her, which was about the court room procedures leading up to a verdict.
I began feeling a little uneasy about this particular episode though, especially as you heard the family of the executed prisoner cry as they left the "death house". Proper screams and crying, absolutely f*cking awful. I told her to change the channel as it seemed wrong - and truth be told, it made me feel pretty uneasy and shitty, it was essentially making cheap entertainment out of something very horrific. I didn't even like the overly dramatised shots of the bed where the injection would be delivered. I'm not debating the death penalty, I'm saying that some things don't need to be broadcast in an attempt at getting extra viewers.
Yet after I went out for a cigarette, I felt a bit guilty, so I told the girl to put the channel back on if she was actually watching it. Then I saw the media coverage of another death row trial in America, where so called reporters and journalists invite psychologists, criminologists and other quacks (allow me to explain.) on air just to whip up a frenzy. They'd be shouting at each other, gesturing frenetically at the camera and coming out with accusations and so on. They seemed to love the fact that someone had had their family massacred, and were now possibly facing death themselves. They seemed to absolutely love it, no dignity or solemn tone - just pure unadulterated excitement.
Stuff like that, quite rightly, would never be allowed over here. Hell news articles often forbid comments for ongoing legal trials for fear of legal complications, they wouldn't even consider having a panel of utter morons out to make some quick $$$$ inciting some peculiar form of excitement over someones death. It made me feel a little sad to be honest, it made me take note about just how deluded some people are to think that they're actually civilised, or that they live in a civilised society.
We have a long way to go until we get to the likes of that, but with the murder of Lee Rigby it did appear that we were capable of slipping closer to it. Suddenly it was acceptable to see a crazed nutter, covered in blood and holding a great big knife, on the front page of newspapers - just below the children's magazines in little corner shops all over the country. It was OK to have the same blood stained road on TV (with a body discreetly covered over), on a loop, for hours and hours on end. It was OK for people to claim all kinds of horrific things had happened to him, when they actually hadn't. At no point did anyone think "This is too much now. We've reported what happened, let's leave it for a bit.". Instead we went over the same details, the same imagery and the same videos.. why?
I'm not saying flashing a gruesome photo on screen is equatable to any of the above, I just feel it's a slippery slope when those scenes become acceptable. It also seems to be either a colossal feck-up or done on purpose as there must be a delay in transmission.
For the record, and just in case anyone is wondering, I'm generally against censorship - and pretty much feel people should be able to make their own decisions. In this instance it doesn't feel quite as simple though.
That's the problem with 24 hour news channels, in their desperation to fill their schedules, disasters and items that should never become "entertainment" run the risk of becoming exactly that, because of endless analysis, talking heads and re runs of footage. It's people's tragedies filling up air time and it's wrong. It is also so easy to get drawn into the titillation and amateur sleuth nature of so much of our news now and I am no exception to being pulled in by this sort of stuff. I just try and watch the news once a day now, but I still find myself checking the BBC news website a good few times a day. I even use Charlie Life here for news updates and views. News junkie, not good...
Didn't see it, but going by what's been said, it seems like sky had no control on what was shown. I'm sure they could have easily set up a time delay to prevent this though.
But this is Murdoch we're talking about, so even if they had a chance to edit it, they probably wouldn't. The Sky's the limit...............
I think Murdoch himself was in the gallery producing the news that day, cackling like a maniac as the image came up.
Comments
The text message part was just compelling
OP is so non committal in his answers so not to condemn himself to a guilty verdict is very noticeable
But this is Murdoch we're talking about, so even if they had a chance to edit it, they probably wouldn't. The Sky's the limit...............
My girlfriend had "Life and Death Row" on the other night, a BBC 3 "documentary" on Death Row. I've seen a previous episode with her, which was about the court room procedures leading up to a verdict.
I began feeling a little uneasy about this particular episode though, especially as you heard the family of the executed prisoner cry as they left the "death house". Proper screams and crying, absolutely f*cking awful. I told her to change the channel as it seemed wrong - and truth be told, it made me feel pretty uneasy and shitty, it was essentially making cheap entertainment out of something very horrific. I didn't even like the overly dramatised shots of the bed where the injection would be delivered. I'm not debating the death penalty, I'm saying that some things don't need to be broadcast in an attempt at getting extra viewers.
Yet after I went out for a cigarette, I felt a bit guilty, so I told the girl to put the channel back on if she was actually watching it. Then I saw the media coverage of another death row trial in America, where so called reporters and journalists invite psychologists, criminologists and other quacks (allow me to explain.) on air just to whip up a frenzy. They'd be shouting at each other, gesturing frenetically at the camera and coming out with accusations and so on. They seemed to love the fact that someone had had their family massacred, and were now possibly facing death themselves. They seemed to absolutely love it, no dignity or solemn tone - just pure unadulterated excitement.
Stuff like that, quite rightly, would never be allowed over here. Hell news articles often forbid comments for ongoing legal trials for fear of legal complications, they wouldn't even consider having a panel of utter morons out to make some quick $$$$ inciting some peculiar form of excitement over someones death. It made me feel a little sad to be honest, it made me take note about just how deluded some people are to think that they're actually civilised, or that they live in a civilised society.
We have a long way to go until we get to the likes of that, but with the murder of Lee Rigby it did appear that we were capable of slipping closer to it. Suddenly it was acceptable to see a crazed nutter, covered in blood and holding a great big knife, on the front page of newspapers - just below the children's magazines in little corner shops all over the country. It was OK to have the same blood stained road on TV (with a body discreetly covered over), on a loop, for hours and hours on end. It was OK for people to claim all kinds of horrific things had happened to him, when they actually hadn't. At no point did anyone think "This is too much now. We've reported what happened, let's leave it for a bit.". Instead we went over the same details, the same imagery and the same videos.. why?
I'm not saying flashing a gruesome photo on screen is equatable to any of the above, I just feel it's a slippery slope when those scenes become acceptable. It also seems to be either a colossal feck-up or done on purpose as there must be a delay in transmission.
For the record, and just in case anyone is wondering, I'm generally against censorship - and pretty much feel people should be able to make their own decisions. In this instance it doesn't feel quite as simple though.
It is also so easy to get drawn into the titillation and amateur sleuth nature of so much of our news now and I am no exception to being pulled in by this sort of stuff.
I just try and watch the news once a day now, but I still find myself checking the BBC news website a good few times a day.
I even use Charlie Life here for news updates and views.
News junkie, not good...