Investigation and pressing charges
The photographs published by the Spanish police of the seized items and valuables could be considered admissible. The picture of the two suspects handcuffed should however have been avoided. The photos of the arrested and handcuffed men may project a humiliating and disgraceful image of them and give the impression of guilt. The rest of the disseminated photos related to the crime, may further strengthen this perception if displayed as a unit along with the pictures of the suspects.
The article displays pictures disseminated by the Spanish police showing seized items and valuables subject to crime as well as a full body photo of the two handcuffed men arrested, although their faces have been blurred.
The artist Axel was shot to death in Gothenburg and no one has been arrested yet. But according to information shared with Aftonbladet, the police is currently working on the basis of several theories – one of them consists of charting two persons who stood close to the rapper.
The article indicates that sources within the investigation have shared information regarding potential suspects according to one of the investigation tracks. This should be avoided since it may harm the investigation, as well as expose the lives of the two persons who may prove not to be related to the crime.
Within the pre-trial phase, you will most probably have no access to documents related to the case. You may, however, obtain such documents from other than official sources like the suspected people themselves, their lawyers, related ones or other witnesses. When deciding to publish or cite them, make sure the information you present contributes to a public debate or is important to explain the case. You should not publish such information as a background to contextualise your story as it might prejudice the public and the authorities towards believing one is innocent or guilty.
The article exposes classified information from the preliminary autopsy statement as well as testimonies made by witnesses. The presented information may prejudice the public towards believing in the guilt of the suspects by using expressions such as “allowed witnesses to see who handed out the fatal kick” as well as by linking the revelations from the autopsy report to the testimonies of the witnesses.
Yesterday, the three 16-year-olds were remanded in custody. The police have questioned almost 150 witnesses from the fatal assault on Östermalm. A large number of them now point out the three detained 16-year-olds as guilty of the brutal assault two weeks ago. Several of the testimonies are very strong. The boys’ distinct clothing items have allowed witnesses to see who handed out the fatal kick to 16-year-old Kevin.
– It is about certain specific details on shirts and such, says a source.
Even the preliminary autopsy statement, which Expressen could reveal last week, stated that Kevin died from blunt violence to the head. Today it is quite clear that he died from external blunt violence to the head caused by several kicks. In addition, the 16-year-old received kicks to the neck and forehead.
The interrogation of witnesses has strengthened the suspicions against the 16-year-old who was previously pointed out as the main suspect. Witnesses call him the “leader” – the one who kicks the most during the beating.
Investigative journalists are allowed to use hidden cameras to record interviews with non-public figures only under certain conditions. Using hidden cameras is allowed when a) the matter contributes to the public debate, b) the reporting does not focus on the person personally but on one of his or her professional aspects, c) the person’s face and voice is disguised and d) the interview is not conducted at usual business premises.
It has been two weeks since three children and their mother died in Biskopsgården in Gothenburg. The day before the father of the family was arrested as a probable suspect in case, GT published an interview with an anonymous friend who speculated that the man could be guilty of the crime. The father was later released because, according to the prosecutor, there was no longer any evidence that he had committed the act.
The paper decided to publish the personal reflections by a supposed friend of a, subsequently, temporarily suspected man. The reflections poignantly imply guilt and the labeling of a source as a friend may add stronger credibility to the testimony.
The article discloses information, provided by a supposed friend, which may be regarded highly personal. This type of personal information could contribute to a reduced credibility of the suspect, as well as prejudice the readers regarding their guilt.
The friend claims that the 22-year-old was kind but that he could sometimes get very angry, and that he had recently felt mentally unwell. He also describes an episode when he and another friend went home to the 22-year-old the same week as the act of violence took place. Then the suspected perpetrator was said to have behaved nervously and claimed that the social services observed him inside the apartment.