NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.
All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report
subconsciously, maybe there are helpful little gnomes running around
in the repository and fixing bugs while we sleep, I don't know..
-- Jarkko Hietaniemi
Stories, comments, journals, and other submissions on use Perl; are Copyright 1998-2006, their respective owners.
I can understand (Score:1)
If, for example, they were to say:
Then, they'd have a lot of apologizing to do if this was just some random person that observers believed to be the perpetrator who left the scene.
In any case, the person who left the scene was a suspect, at least by people who reported them as such.
They're just being careful.
Even in your example, the person who broke through the glass and sped away may only be gui
Re:I can understand (Score:1)
In the counter-example you gave, it is still wrong to say "the suspect was seen leaving...", unless Joe Bloe, the man police say committed the crime, was seen leaving.
It's not like we can only say "the suspect" or "the perpetrator". If witnesses say a man in blue jumper was seen doing something or other, then we (reporters) should be able to leave it at that, rather than be tempted to resort to what we think sounds like police talk.
But you're right, I should have given a more rigorous example.
Reply to This
Parent