ASK A QUESTION
RECENT RESPONSES
CONCEPT CLOUD
- About the site
- Site diary
- AskPhilosophers Group
- AskPhilosophers Fund
- AskPhilosophers Books
- AskPhilosophers Mobile
- All (4615)
- Abortion (56)
- Animals (93)
- Art (85)
- Beauty (59)
- Biology (85)
- Business (59)
- Children (92)
- Color (40)
- Consciousness (42)
- Death (61)
- Education (184)
- Emotion (60)
- Environment (27)
- Ethics (1034)
- Euthanasia (2)
- Existence (99)
- Feminism (59)
- Freedom (118)
- Gender (24)
- Happiness (61)
- History (15)
- Identity (66)
- Justice (199)
- Knowledge (215)
- Language (216)
- Law (61)
- Literature (33)
- Logic (277)
- Love (109)
- Mathematics (159)
- Medicine (50)
- Mind (230)
- Music (29)
- Perception (61)
- Philosophers (301)
- Philosophy (457)
- Physics (63)
- Probability (33)
- Profession (99)
- Punishment (44)
- Race (31)
- Rationality (90)
- Religion (299)
- Science (161)
- Sex (126)
- Space (26)
- Sport (29)
- Suicide (20)
- Time (81)
- Truth (48)
- Value (158)
- War (40)
- Panelist Login
| SEE ANOTHER QUESTION |
| in Business in Law |
When someone is indicted for a crime, it's standard for newspaper reports to state that he only "allegedly" did whatever he is accused of doing. But suppose that the guilt of the defendant is extremely well confirmed (a thousand witnesses saw him, and we have an HD-quality recording of the incident). If the trial has yet to arrive at a verdict, should reporters still insist upon use of the "alleged" qualification? In other words, should standards of assertion in journalism be tied to standards of assertion in judicial proceedings?
July 3, 2011
 PRINT |
 E-MAIL
E-MAIL THIS ENTRY
|
 TRACK
TRACK THIS ENTRY
If you provide your e-mail address, you will be automatically notified whenever this question receives a response. Your e-mail address will not be used for any other purpose, and it will not be given or sold to anyone. |
SHARE
SHARE THIS ENTRY
PERMALINK
Use the following permanent link to refer to this entry: |
RELATED SITES
| Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy | |
| Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy | |
| Early Modern Texts | |
| Some classics of early modern philosophy |
|
| THINK | |
| A periodical of the Royal Institute of Philosophy | |
| Philosophy Now | |
| A magazine of ideas | |
| The Philosophers' Magazine Online | |
| Philosophy from The Philosophers' Magazine | |
| Philosophy Talk | |
| Radio show, audio archives, blog |
|
| Public Ethics Radio | |
| Engages ethicists in discussion of pressing practical dilemmas. |
|
| High-Phi | |
| Supporting philosophical inquiry in American high schools | |
| Teaching Children Philosophy | |
| How to conduct philosophical discussions with elementary school children |
|
It is often not precisely what someone did that is significant in the case of the law, but how it is classified. However many people saw him do it, the issue is often what it is that they saw
Right now I am banging away at the keys of my computer, but I could be blackmailing someone, sending a love letter, slandering a politician, or responding to a question for askphilosophers. A thousand people may be watching, and not just my cat, but in criminal law what the court will want to know is what precisely happened, not just the actions of the individuals concerned. So we should hang on to the "allegedly" term at least if the plea is a not guilty one.