The Salt Lake Tribune, Oct. 8: “Ruling on fatal shooting by police outrages anti-brutality groups.” “Family of black man who was killed is ‘shell-shocked’ by determination that body cam video proves officers were justified.” “You can’t watch that video and not realize it is a clear case of murder. It is one of the clearest cases of murder we’ve ever seen.” These were bolded and standout headings in an article written by reporter Lindsay Whitehurst with assistance by Janie Har.
Let’s change those headlines to see if we can get more people to read the article. Ruling on fatal shooting by police supported by physical evidence and body cam footage. Family of officer who was forced to shoot relieved he will be able to return to work. You can’t watch that video and not be thankful for the technology available to support split second life and death decisions law enforcement have to make on a daily basis.
Moving to The Salt Lake Tribune, Oct. 9: “Protesters say shooting unjustified.” “Participants say body camera footage shows SLC officer shooting Patrick Harmon as he ran away.”
Again, let’s change those bolded stand out headings to comments made by someone else. District Attorney investigation concurs with independent investigation that evidence supports justified use of deadly force. Police, city officials, district attorney say body camera footage shows SLC officer shooting Patrick Harmon as he turned to stab officers with his open knife.
Why, after the investigations (plural) are complete, the media choose to print quotes and or paraphrase comments that have been proven false? Both articles do print the truth later in the articles and that is good. Why not lead with the truth, in bold, and print the unsubstantiated, erroneous comments made by those that choose not to believe the physical and forensic evidence at the end?
Just a thought.
BL Smith, Riverton