A Tennessee man pardoned by Trump in January for his role in the Jan. 6, 2021, assault on the U.S. Capitol will nevertheless serve a life sentence for plotting to attack FBI agents and seeking to incite a “civil war,” according to prosecutors.
Edward Kelley, who was the fourth U.S. Capitol rioter to enter the building on Jan. 6, 2021, faced a separate prosecution for targeting federal agents while he was being investigated for his role in the Capitol attack.
The Justice Department argued Kelley created a “kill list” of FBI agents and others who investigated his role in the Jan. 6 siege. Prosecutors said Kelley “distributed this list — along with videos containing images of certain FBI employees identified on the list — to a co-conspirator as part of his ‘mission.’”
My point is that the part about the prosecutor only applies to the last part of the sentence. It’s the newspaper doing an “allegedly” thing. He was sentenced to life for these crimes that the prosecutor says he did. That way if it turns out he didn’t actually do it and later goes free, the newspaper will be less likely to get sued for libel.
The article later goes on to talk about how he was convicted by a jury and sentenced to life by a judge.
I don’t think you’re wrong, but I think we should stop to consider how fucking absurd that is on the newspaper’s part. The entire fucking point of a criminal conviction is supposed to be that it’s been proven beyond reasonable doubt that the perp did, in fact, do the thing he was convicted for. Libel is, by definition, no longer a valid consideration.
A reporter continuing to use “allgedly” or other reported speech after that point isn’t covering its ass; it’s editorializing in favor of the perp or even sowing doubt about the validity of the rule of law.
Sorry, I skimmed the article earlier and missed that, but now I see it.