Hypothetical question to better understand the word alleged.
Can WS with more knowledge than I, please confirm the following:
Let's say a crime is committed in front of 5 police officers. The crime is clearly recorded on x5 body cams from x5 different angles, capturing the perp committing the crime on video. The perpetrator is immediately apprehended.
The evidence is irrefutable, cannot be legally challenged wrt who committed the crime and what crime was committed. But it's not yet deemed proof right? That's up to the jury/judge to decide.
The media often use the word allegedly wrt the crimes committed by the apprehended perps, to avoid libel and contempt of court.
Is Police bound by the same principles?
If so, then until the courts have found the defendant guilty of the crime, the charges against them remain allegations only, no matter how watertight the evidence appears to be.
Often I read police media statements don't use the word allegedly/alleged when declaring a perp has been charged with a crime.
Can WS with more knowledge than I, please confirm the following:
Let's say a crime is committed in front of 5 police officers. The crime is clearly recorded on x5 body cams from x5 different angles, capturing the perp committing the crime on video. The perpetrator is immediately apprehended.
The evidence is irrefutable, cannot be legally challenged wrt who committed the crime and what crime was committed. But it's not yet deemed proof right? That's up to the jury/judge to decide.
The media often use the word allegedly wrt the crimes committed by the apprehended perps, to avoid libel and contempt of court.
Is Police bound by the same principles?
If so, then until the courts have found the defendant guilty of the crime, the charges against them remain allegations only, no matter how watertight the evidence appears to be.
Often I read police media statements don't use the word allegedly/alleged when declaring a perp has been charged with a crime.