Found Deceased Canada - Nick Lush, 32, Calgary, 29 March 2015 *Arrests*

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

news.talk said:
They still would have had to get the records by submitting a request at the courthouse. We used to have that information online until the Privacy Act forced them to take them down. They aren't 'public records' as in open for all to see.
Click to expand...
I'm 99.999% sure you don't require a criminal's consent to access the court documents.
 
Although this is ending predictably, I am baffled by the burnt Charger. The coincidental timing... left field.
 
On Nov. 2013 NL posts about his success at trial that day...one trial down, he had 5 charges dropped.
 
I wonder if a few of his charges were from when he and his brother caught up with some lads that broke into their father's garage back in 2013.

ETA... Those were the 5 charges dropped.
 
LoisLane said:
I wonder if a few of his charges were from when he and his brother caught up with some lads that broke into their father's garage back in 2013.

ETA... Those were the 5 charges dropped.
Click to expand...
He couldn't have done much time if any. He doesn't make mention of time served and his social-media has no large gaps.
 
news.talk said:
He couldn't have done much time if any. He doesn't make mention of time served and his social-media has no large gaps.
Click to expand...

If that is what CBC was referencing (dropped charges) and they are "shaming" a victim could they be sued?

ETA... It can't be referencing the dropped charges... CBC responded to me that he was convicted (see comments upthread).
 
LoisLane said:
If that is what CBC was referencing (dropped charges) and they are "shaming" a victim could they be sued?
Click to expand...
They are simply stating public record. That would be a Pandora's box if allowed. Imagine reaching a point of not being allowed to know if someone was charged with a crime.
 
LoisLane said:
If that is what CBC was referencing (dropped charges) and they are "shaming" a victim could they be sued?
Click to expand...
It is not unheard of to sue media, but for victims shaming? No. Many reporters are guilty of doing that. Ironically, I haven't seen it mentioned on other publications yet. Whether they don't have the information or just don't feel it is appropriate at this time is curious.
 
ETA... It can't be referencing the dropped charges... CBC responded to me that he was convicted (see comments upthread).
 
OutOfTheDarkness said:
They are simply stating public record. That would be a Pandora's box if allowed. Imagine reaching a point of not being allowed to know if someone was charged with a crime.
Click to expand...
If the charges were dropped or he was given a lesser or suspended sentence, it is in poor taste and even poorer journalistic integrity, to not put the charges in context. Were these charges related to his murder? Does the fact that he had these charges mean he was deserving of what happened or was in some way to blame? That is the inference when laid out the way it was in the story.
 
news.talk said:
If the charges were dropped or he was given a lesser or suspended sentence, it is in poor taste and even poorer journalistic integrity, to not put the charges in context. Were these charges related to his murder? Does the fact that he had these charges mean he was deserving of what happened or was in some way to blame? That is the inference when laid out the way it was in the story.
Click to expand...
You can read that into it if you want... or you can recognize it has history. Lord help us all if one was only allowed to report the histories told by family and friends.

Did the fact he had a wife and three kids lead to the murder? Same ethical standard then. Can't report it.

The world needs less fluff and fundraising.
 
OutOfTheDarkness said:
You can read that into it if you want... or you can recognize it has history. Lord help us all if one was only allowed to report the histories told by family and friends.

Did the fact he had a wife and three kids lead to the murder? Same ethical standard then. Can't report it.

The world needs less fluff and fundraising.
Click to expand...
The question a Reporter needs to ask is - "Is this relevant?" If it does not pertain to the story, then it is not relevant.

Is it relevant that he leaves behind a wife and three kids? Yes. Is it relevant that he had a criminal history? No.
 
news.talk said:
The question a Reporter needs to ask is - "Is this relevant?" If it does not pertain to the story, then it is not relevant.

Is it relevant that he leaves behind a wife and three kids? Yes. Is it relevant that he had a criminal history? No.
Click to expand...

Could the criminal history pertain to motive and the unfolding of events the night of his disappearance?
 
LoisLane said:
Could the criminal history pertain to motive and the unfolding of events the night of his disappearance?
Click to expand...
I suspect that is why they pulled his history. The problem I have, is with the context. If no motive has been suggested, it is not a Reporter's job to make one up from supposition. Here on this forum, we can lack the ethical and journalistic standards because the context of what we do here, is to sleuth. A Reporter is *supposed* to abide by standards that include relevance, context and facts. While this type of reporting has become standard in the U.S. we are fortunate enough to be somewhat free from the sensationalistic driven stories. Notice that other MSM outlets didn't report these 'facts' - There is a fine line that shouldn't be crossed.... Demonizing a victim the day the family have been apprised of the news of the man's murder, is sensationalism and tacky.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 121 more.
Total: 337 (members: 122, guests: 215)

Online statistics

Members online
122
Guests online
215
Total visitors
337
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
608,723
Messages
18,244,610
Members
234,435
Latest member
ProfKim
Back
Top