General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhat the Hell Just Happened on MSNBC and CNN?
Last edited Sat Dec 5, 2015, 05:15 PM - Edit history (1)
"A baffling, surreal scene just played out on the two networks, where the landlord of the San Bernardino shooting suspects apparently allowed reporters into their apartment.
The result was disturbing. On live national television, reporters sifted through the remains of the lives of Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik. They picked over childrens toys. They held up photos, speculating about whether the woman depicted in one might be Malik. They displayed Social Security cards and drivers licenses with readily identifiable informationand not just for the deceased suspects.
As if the journalistic irresponsibility of baselessly speculating while holding up images of potentially innocent people on TV wasnt bad enough, it beggars belief the scene wasnt taped off and guarded. Reporters were given free rein to walk through an apartment that is an important part of the investigation, and they were allowed to handle what one would expect to be evidence. Police didnt appear to know the media tour was going on."
READ MORE: http://www.theatlantic.com/notes/2015/12/what-the-hell-just-happened-on-msnbc/418893/?utm_source=SFTwitter
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Talk about DISTURBING and DISGUSTING -- this is what our American Media has become. Tainting the criminal scene in the midst of an investigation to be first to put on camera the suspected mass murderers, personal items.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)They toured Jack Ruby's apartment after that guy murdered Lee Harvey Oswald.
It is not known what the journalists found but on 23rd April 1964, Bill Hunter was shot dead by Creighton Wiggins, a policeman in the pressroom of a Long Beach police station. Wiggins initially claimed that his gun fired when he dropped it and tried to pick it up. In court this was discovered that this was impossible and it was decided that Hunter had been murdered. Wiggins finally admitted he was playing a game of quick draw with his fellow officer. The other officer, Errol F. Greenleaf, testified he had his back turned when the shooting took place. In January 1965, both were convicted and sentenced to three years probation.
Jim Koethe decided to write a book about the assassination of John F. Kennedy. However, he died on 21st September, 1964. It seems that a man broke into his Dallas apartment and killed him by a karate chop to the throat. Tom Howard died of a heart-attack, aged 48, in March, 1965.
http://spartacus-educational.com/JFKkoethe.htm
For better history, better forensic science.
Proserpina
(2,352 posts)The poor cops. Their lives were ruined, ruined I say!
Octafish
(55,745 posts)lostnfound
(16,179 posts)Just sayin'.
...all I can say is, thanks for being there and doing what you do. You are one of the reasons I stay with DU.
Not to mention you are a D Brother. May you survive the holidays, good sir.
rury
(1,021 posts)truth about the JFK assassination.
TIME TO PANIC
(1,894 posts)ejbr
(5,856 posts)uppityperson
(115,677 posts)valerief
(53,235 posts)ChisolmTrailDem
(9,463 posts)...turned my stomach they were so disgusting. The epitome of dirty laundry sensationalism.
LovingA2andMI
(7,006 posts)And both should be fired by their respective employers. Sadly, it is likely they will be praised instead.
world wide wally
(21,743 posts)Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)Relax.
starroute
(12,977 posts)And showing photos of family members was disgusting.
Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)A CNN reporter who went in there was reporting that he, too, found it ghoulish and horrible. But he did it anyway.
Cal Carpenter
(4,959 posts)Even if 2 of the tenants are dead, the mother also lived there. The personal items that the reporters were handling belonged to someone. They didn't become public domain. They belong to the mother or other next of kin or the infant or something.
Even if the FBI was done with the place, I still don't grasp how/why this was allowed to happen. I think the landlord really fucked up.
Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)Cal Carpenter
(4,959 posts)As far as it being 'ghoulish' or whatever, well, that's just par for the course for cable news. I don't know why anyone would expect those networks to have restraint or ethics all of a sudden, LOL.
Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)LovingA2andMI
(7,006 posts)It's on the Landlord and ANYONE ELSE that entered the rental unit without permission of the Next of Kin or Guardian/Caretaker of the Next of Kin.
asjr
(10,479 posts)LovingA2andMI
(7,006 posts)He was paid $1000 by Inside Edition.
SoCalDem
(103,856 posts)he may have to turn that place into a storage unit.. who would want to live in a mass murderer's apartment
TexasProgresive
(12,157 posts)and my guess is he was well paid.
No Vested Interest
(5,166 posts)Inside Edition?) to go in first. Then the news media at large were permitted to enter.
Since the news media (MSNBC, CNN, etc.) were broadcasting live it would seem that the tv program didn't get the exclusive they had hoped for.
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)and weapons and ammo. It doesn't make sense.
snappyturtle
(14,656 posts)Quackers
(2,256 posts)I live in a duplex and the family that lived next door murdered their 3yo son. After the police found out, they came in with the forensics team and spent about 10 hours working the scene. They even cut and removed the carpet in the child's bedroom. They released the property back to the landlord that evening.
LovingA2andMI
(7,006 posts)For the Landlord or Next of Kin Access Only. Not the Media. Not without permission of the Next of Kin. Not before the Rental Unit Monthly Payment Period was complete. Not before the Landlord contacted the Next of Kin to grant media access to the personal property of the Next of Kin of the Mass Murderers. Not before the Landlord launched a civil action in a court of law -- if the Next of Kin refused to grant media access -- to do so before the end of the rental period.
The Landlord and Media entering that Rental Unit to Pillaging the Personal Property of the Next of Kin without the permission of the Next of Kin (or her guardians in this case) should be SUED.
Quackers
(2,256 posts)The previous poster suggested there might be an alterior motive that wanted the crime scene contaminated. But we agree, sue the landlord! I'm not sure you could sue the press since they can claim that they were acting in good faith based on the landlords word.
LovingA2andMI
(7,006 posts)To Check the Laws of the State of California as it relates to Interstate Succession Laws, just as well as the Landlord. Law Enforcement released the Property -- not its' contents -- back to the Landlord, so yes they would not be at fault in this case. But the Landlord and the Media, that is up for dispute.
Quackers
(2,256 posts)If any money changed hands between the press and the landlord.
LovingA2andMI
(7,006 posts)So take it with a grain of salt, that Inside Edition paid the Landlord $1000 to enter the unit.
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)with explosives and so forth
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)in this case.
The fact that the family of the alleged shooter hired a lawyer who is Sandy Hook truther is VERY odd.
LovingA2andMI
(7,006 posts)Also, the personal effects of the Mass Murderers are now their DAUGHTERS via whomever is now the guardian or caretaker of the daughter. Not the MSM, including entering the house to review personal effects. #FYI....
Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)It was no longer a crime scene.
MADem
(135,425 posts)property" given that they went on a trip that they likely didn't expect to come home from afterwards?
They took pains to destroy phones, hard drives, etc. They dumped the kid with a relative.
Bottom line, though, the renters are not coming back.
The physical building does belong to the landlord, and given that the renters are no longer 'renting,' since they are dead, he has the right to sashay anyone he wants through his property.
He has no duty to protect the possessions of the deceased, really, or their kid (who was probably NOT on the rental agreement).
If the relatives want that stuff, they need to come get it. I think they probably want to change their name, some of 'em.
Not the first time we've seen this kind of postmortem. They went through the FT HOOD shooter's house, too, with a fine-toothed comb, and they picked Osama Bin Ladin's hideout in Abbottabad clean before it was razed to the ground. That lunatic who shot up the theater? They went through HIS "booby trapped apartment" too. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/james-holmes-booby-trapped-apartment-article-1.2354863
People are fascinated with how "evil doers" live. It's just a thing with humans. They think they can see a "sign" in the detritus of their everyday lives that will provide a clue.
Response to MADem (Reply #55)
LovingA2andMI This message was self-deleted by its author.
LovingA2andMI
(7,006 posts)The San Bernardino Shooting happened on DECEMBER 2, 2015. There has been no information that the renters were in behind in the rent. If so, the landlord likely and would have been in his right to begin legal action to take possession of the PROPERTY, not its' contents, after 6 days pass the first of the month. Even then, legal action on possession of the PROPERTY in civil court would not began until after 14 days pass the first of the month AND the tenants (in this case the 6 month old daughter legal guardians) would have a 30 day notice to quit after judgement by a CIVIL Court of Law. The property in the unit would need to be removed by no later than December 31. 2015 in either case, after the signed tenant or tenants death.
Actually, YES he does until the possessions are REMOVED from his property and placed onto the corner or curve adjacent to the property. Which is why in ANY eviction case, the former tenants property is placed on the CORNER or CURVE adjacent to the property -- as the Landlord is not liable to what happens to said property AFTER it is placed off the physical property of the landlord/owner.
The Property Via California Succession Laws are possessions of the NEXT OF KIN -- in this case, the 6 month old daughter. Random relatives cannot come up and "claim ownership" to the possessions. Since the 6 month old daughter can't physically remove the property, then her Guardian ad litem appointed by a Probate Court if necessary or Guardian as appointed by the Probate Court.
Bin Laden's "Hangout" was not in the United States of America were the U.S. Constitution guarantees a certain level of a right to privacy -- or were individual states have interstate laws of succession. As for the James Holmes, did you read the article you posted?
Also, all over the pictures it cites: COLORADO DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
Law Enforcement has rights to enter the scene of a CRIME either with a warrant or if they believe a threat to life of others immediately exist:
And to take pictures of evidence at a crime scene. The MEDIA has a right to FOIA those pictures taken at a crime scene, thus is why the article you posted is dated for: Friday, September 11, 2015, 12:21 PM or a month and at least 10+ days AFTER police entered the home, not three days after as in the case of San Bernardino.....
As for the Fort Hood Shooter, there was no news stories to be found allowing Media Resources to Pillar his home three days after the incident. Law enforcement, yes, immediately as that is their right in a situation were human life is threaten. Media, NO!
SOME HUMANS -- as displayed some of the other comments above, not ALL HUMANS prefer to have the personal contents of Mass Murderers displayed like a auction sell on National TV. Especially if doing so steps on the Right to Privacy of a 6 month old child who cannot speak for herself.
MADem
(135,425 posts)Who, save YOU, said that the landlord "took" anything, never mind MEDIA. Be kind of hard to steal anything, given all the cameras in there.
The renters--who abandoned the property to the Great Unknown via death--are not coming back. They're DEAD.
What's a "curve?" Do you mean CURB? Kind of hard to take your guidance as be-all or end-all because it sounds like you're making it up as you go along. If it's "at the CURVE" (cough) the city will come and take it--because the OWNERS of the stuff are DEAD.
That's beside the point, anyway--because no one TOOK anything.
The landlord can let anyone walk through HIS property if he'd like. It's not fit for habitation--the police trashed it pretty effectively. Leases don't "pass down" like family jewels. When you're dead, that pretty much indicates you've abandoned the home.
Most landlords are polite and let survivors get the stuff left behind, but they're not going to seal the joint off and not do what they need to do to get ready for the next occupant--to include making a few dollars to pay for repairs. Let us not compare this lease between a dead couple and a landlord to a mortgage or anything else. He has no obligation to anyone but himself--the cops trashed his propperty, he's not going to be making money off that mess for awhile, now--might as well cover some costs until he can persuade the police to maybe help him with the damages.
Sorry that you're so upset about these two. Quite frankly, I'm not. I'm more "upset" that they killed fourteen and wounded twenty, and made it harder for people fleeing persecution to find shelter here in USA. Heckuvajob, though!
As for the FT HOOD shooter, you need to do your homework before you make pronouncements--TIME did a photo essay on his apartment.
http://content.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1938378_1988320,00.html
Are you trying to insist that the photographer credit "Erin Trieb for TIME" really means "some cop took these pics?" SMH!!!!!
No matter how much you protest, people ARE interested in the way murderers live. They always have been. It's why reporters seek out these kinds of images--because, like I said the first time, people looking at them want to try to understand how people lived, and if the way they lived gives any insight into their nature.
As for Holmes, the place was full of weaponry and booby traps--it wasn't safe. But if you think reporters weren't trying to psychoanalyze him via those pictures, I have a bridge to sell you:
http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/05/us/james-holmes-theater-shooting-trial/
http://www.businessinsider.com/disturbing-photos-of-aurora-shooter-james-holmes-apartment-2015-9
http://www.mtv.com/news/1690092/james-holmes-shooter-apartment-dark-knight-rises/
Not sure what you think you're "proving" there--if reporters could have safely gotten in there, they sure as hell would have. That's what being a reporter is all about.
And not sure why you're waving the Constitution around, either--this is a human compulsion, not one that stops at the water's edge.
And if you think that "six month old child" a) Gives a shit, or b) Will be known by the same name by the time she hits pre-school; I have a bridge to sell you. She'll disappear into the larger family and get a name change, so her parents' assholishness and murderous ways don't taint her life. Again, no one is "stealing her shit." The landlord is making money to repair some of those holes in his walls and ceiling. I don't think you'll donate to the "Re-sheetrock the terrorists' apartment building" GoFundMe account, after all--he has to get his money from somewhere.
Once a crime scene is cleared, it is CLEARED. There isn't any requirement that it be made a shrine to the murderers. Not sure why you think that should be the case.
Fuck them. They're dead. They murdered good, decent people who had been nothing but kind to them.
"SOME HUMANS" care about the people who are the VICTIMS of murderous shitheads, too.
right back atcha.
Priorities....!! SMH!
LovingA2andMI
(7,006 posts)Those Priorities and All.
The point was proven above and it does NOT matter if the 6 month old CHILD -- can't determine in any since of the word, the magnitude of her parents murderess actions -- she STILL has California Interstate Succession rights to the property, and HER rights to privacy of and TO hat property was BREACHED. Period!
As for the Ft. Hood Shooter, first WHEN was the photos taken (and the Time Slideshow did not cite this), was in three days after the event and it does not appear EVEN if those pictures -- the media touch or where in many pictures and videos pillaging though the items displayed. Interesting, indeed -- i.e. Respecting those Property Rights along with whomever the successor was and All.
Lastly, who cares what SOME HUMAN want, desire or claim to need -- to fulfill fr voygerism purposes. It does NOT come before the LAW, PROBATE, ESTATE and SUCCESSION rights.
Hopefully, the family having guardianship of the 6 month old child, is speaking to a lawyer to pursue legal actions against the Landlord and ALL Media Companies that participated in pillaging the Property in the unit.
MADem
(135,425 posts)the victims' families are done. They'll get awarded every penny of the sixty lousy grand in his bank account and then some.
She will get, to put it bluntly, Jack Shit. And then some.
You might want to look up the meaning of the word "pillaging." Strolling through and having a look is not a synonym for the term. Did you get that word from your "curve" dictionary? And you might want to do a correction on "voygerism" too--what the hey?
smh.
LovingA2andMI
(7,006 posts)Again....the life insurance proceeds and estates are not subject to a CIVIL SUIT due to the murderess actions of the CHILD's parents, unless the 6 month of child was a part of the crimes committed. Clearly at 6 months old, she was not.
As for the rest....well, it appears your feelings are hurt after being called out by the FACTS.
That is for YOU to deal with so, deal with it and we are moving on --- it is appears YOU and YOU alone are the only ones defending for dear life, the media and landlord actions in this thread, against a successor that cannot speak for herself.
Yes, indeed. Deal with that.
MADem
(135,425 posts)and you keep making shit up as you go along. Those weren't "life insurance proceeds." You don't even have a grasp of the facts here, and you presume to lecture?
He had a bank account full of cash, much of it obtained by suspicious wire transfers. It wasn't "life insurance." Good grief, you should at least try to keep up.
So 'deal with that.' Or don't. I don't care.
You're the only one defending two dead terrorists who killed fourteen innocents and wounded twenty more, here. Not sure why you like being a contrarian, but you're on the wrong side of this action, by a long shot.
LovingA2andMI
(7,006 posts)Out of a thread...WE CREATED? Scrolling up is good for the soul.
MADem
(135,425 posts)You are making claims that people are "pillaging" without proof.
So link or slink, there. Or we'll know ya got nothing.
wheniwasincongress
(1,307 posts)for the landlord to not keep the apartment sealed for the next of kin. Definitely morally wrong
lostnfound
(16,179 posts)Seems like it would have taken more time to investigate fully.
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)I would think the belonging would legally belong to the child of the couple and only her guardians have the right to go through those things. (after the cops are done with it)
Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)TexasProgresive
(12,157 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)into a bomb making factory. I don't think you're supposed to be doing illegal things in your rental unit.
LovingA2andMI
(7,006 posts)READ UP on Estate Law. The personal effects at a crime scene after or during an investigation are the property of Next of Kin. In this case, the Daughter or whomever is her caretaker. That includes entering the home of residence.
Only the NEXT OF KIN can give permission to enter the home or apartment UNTIL the end of the monthly rental cycle -- which would be the time frame allowed for the NEXT OF KIN to move the personal effects from the rental unit. If the Next of Kin did not remove the effects from the rental unit prior to the end of the monthly rent, then and ONLY THEN do those personal effects are the possessions of the Property Owner to auction, sell, or depose.
Even then, the NEXT OF KIN would have to be given notice LEGALLY -- via a court of law-- the Property Owner would proceed to pursue the action above.
The Media had NO RIGHTS to enter the rental unit UNLESS the Next of Kin or Caretaker/Guardian of the Next of Kin gave permission. The Property Owner had NO RIGHTS to allow anyone else to enter the unit, until pursuing the LEGAL RECOURSE to do so.
B2G
(9,766 posts)I strongly question the FBI's decision to turn over the crime scene a mere 2 days after the crime.
LovingA2andMI
(7,006 posts)Under intestate succession, who gets what depends on who your closest relatives are when you die. Heres a quick overview:
If you die with: heres what happens:
children but no spouse, parents, or siblings -- children inherit everything
spouse but no children, parents, or siblings --- spouse inherits everything
parents but no children, spouse, or siblings ---parents inherit everything
siblings but no children, spouse, or parents --- siblings inherit everything
a spouse and children --- spouse inherits all of your community property and 1/2 or 1/3 of your separate property
children inherit 1/2 or 2/3 of your separate property
a spouse and parents --- spouse inherits all of your community property and 1/2 of your separate property
parents inherit 1/2 of your separate property -- a spouse and siblings, but no parents
spouse inherits all of your community property and 1/2 of your separate property --- siblings inherit 1/2 of your separate property
READ MORE: http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/intestate-succession-california.html
This includes the right to VIEW said estate property, unless the property has not been claimed in a rental unit. The Landlord cannot make that "decision" unless:
1). The Monthly Rental Period has completed.
2). The Landlord has filed actions with the Civil Court to take possession of and auction, sell or otherwise dispose the property AFTER #1.
B2G
(9,766 posts)What does all of that have to do with anything?
LovingA2andMI
(7,006 posts)If so, how can you personally asset personal effects belonging to the Next of Kin via the Interstate Property Laws of the State of California -- was NOT REMOVED from the rental unit?
MADem
(135,425 posts)try to steal their crappy shit.
The value was in the images taken out of the place. Not the "stuff," such as it was.
And I think you're looking for "assert" not "asset."
LovingA2andMI
(7,006 posts)So upset you felt the need to comment on a thread between two posters that did not include you. Like A + B and you Zed yourself in.
At least the ORIGINAL replied poster to THIS THREAD does not believe that a 6 month of child's future thoughts about Media and a Landlord pillaging though the items seceded to her in the FUTURE, should not be a matter of any type of thought NOW because SOME HUMANS believe -- when she's old enough to care -- she would not give a (SCROLL DOWN THE ENTIRE THREAD).....as this post will not take one moment to repeat that....word.
Oh and if this poster was in San Bernardino, the poster would have NEVER entered that home without the implied permission of the Guardians of the 6 month of child.
So, no....was not there but, it is assumed you would have liked (loved maybe) to be?
MADem
(135,425 posts)saying things that just are not supported by ANY evidence. None. You can't show a link that shows a reporter prancing off with their "stuff" or anyone pocketing any goodies. If you could have, you surely would have, and you did not.
I think you're the one who is upset and pot stirring, to boot.
No one "took" any "stuff." And the point made by another poster that by turning that joint into a bomb making factory and armory, they likely voided their lease, leaves them with very few "rights" as (dead) tenants. They abandoned the property they left behind.
See, this kind of shit:
So, no....was not there but, it is assumed you would have liked (loved maybe) to be?
makes my pot-stirring thesis look more valid by the minute.
I don't need to be there. I have two eyes, I can watch the images of the reporters NOT Stealing Anything....
LovingA2andMI
(7,006 posts)So why would we NOT chime in on a thread WE created.
MADem
(135,425 posts)You should be embarrassed, not proud, of it.
You're whining about a bunch of bomb-makers' and terrorists'--these are dead people with no right to privacy, they're dead now--'rights' while inventing scenarios where their crappy stuff is being "pillaged" (it's not) by reporters who are (NOT) taking their stuff. There are cameras all over that place--no one is "taking" anything but pictures.
It's just a pot stirring fantasy you have, here.
These people are assholes. Murderous assholes. The police released the scene, and the landlord opened the door.
Deal with it. Have some concern for the victims, why doncha? Or is that too difficult?
branford
(4,462 posts)Last edited Sat Dec 5, 2015, 05:08 PM - Edit history (1)
although I don't need my law degree to assume a bomb factory and storage of related materials and illegal firearms are breaches of their lease agreement. Note also that absent specific regulation (e.g., NYC rent regulations), children don't inherit lease agreements.
With respect to any damages personal belongings, the family is free to commence a legal action in civil court. However, I doubt their actual damages to their property is significant, and local judges and jurors are unlikely to be particularly sympathetic.
TorchTheWitch
(11,065 posts)And I doubt the lease said anything about illegal items on the premises. No lease I ever had required that I not have specific illegal items on the premises... that's a criminal matter having nothing to do with the lease. However, even if it WAS a breach of the lease it doesn't forfeit the rights of the tenants' next of kin who upon the death of the tenants inherited all their belongings.
Every state has a specific process concerning the removal of a tenant and the removal of the tenant's property from the premises once the specified time limit for the tenant to remove their items has expired. None of them allow the landlord access to the property immediately nor to the tenant's belongings in the premises. There is no question that the landlord allowing access to the media to not only the premises but the tenants' personal items broke the law, and it doesn't MATTER that they were heinous criminals and deceased.
Part of what is so outrageous about what the media did is that they should have known that they themselves were breaking the law by illegally entering the premises as well as illegally riffling through the belongings of the deceased tenants that upon their demise then immediately became the property of their next of kin, and they absolutely should have known they were contaminating a crime scene that may have yielded much information about the killers, why they committed such an atrocity and most importantly whether or not anyone else had any involvement... they didn't acquire the bomb materials without help nor did they acquire the weapons and ammo without other involvement. Now anything in that apartment that could have been used by prosecutors against any others that may have committed crimes in helping this barbarous couple to achieve their ends might not be admissible.
As for why the police didn't immediately secure the apartment and have officers standing guard, I can give them a pass on that since at the time many departments were in the throws of hunting down a suspected third killer, disposing safely of bombs, investigation and ensuring the safety of the community. I can forgive them this lapse particularly since the REASON it is necessary for the police to rope off and guard a crime scene that by law should have ALREADY been locked up and secure is because of the media and others wanting access for their own selfish reasons and to hell with contamination of a crime scene or the fact that those property items inside that dwelling was the legal property of someone. And SHAME on the media after what they did framing this outrageous incident THEY caused as the bigger fault laying with the police - who were up to their eyeballs over a mass murder incident - for not roping off the crime scene and posting guard on a property that by law should have been locked and secure from anyone - including the owner of the premises - in the first place.
branford
(4,462 posts)Second, whether we agree or not, law enforcement released the premises. It was no longer an active crime scene.
Third, I already indicated that the landlord may have indeed violated lease provisions or laws, and the family is free to sue in civil court. However, as a practical matter, the family's damages would be mostly limited to destroyed or damaged personal articles, and thus minimal, and a legal case would be costly, subject them to further public scrutiny and abuse, and given local attitudes, probably not well received by local judges or jurors.
Moreover, every lease I've entered into had provisions concerning repercussions for illegal and non-conforming uses, which would certainly apply to the building bombs and storing and attempting to alter illegal weaponry.
TorchTheWitch
(11,065 posts)The landlord THEMSELVES had no legal right to enter the premises and go through any of the personal belongings of the next of kin - who is a BABY and entirely innocent of anything. There is a legal process that EVERY state in the union has concerning the security and removal from the premises the personal affects of the tenant ESPECIALLY when that tenant/s is deceased. The ONLY legal reason a property owner is permitted into a rented dwelling is in the case of an emergency such as a broken water pipe, and the only people that are permitted into the dwelling is whatever professionals are required to deal with whatever the emergency is, and NO ONE save law enforcement is permitted to go through or use or whatever any of the personal property of the deceased tenant/s as that personal property IMMEDIATELY becomes the personal property of someone ELSE. Breaching the lease - even absolute breach such as non-payment of rent - NEVER permits the property owner to do what the hell they like with the personal items in the dwelling that became the legal property of someone else immediately upon the demise of the tenants. No, the landlord's actions were not just stupid, they were ILLEGAL, and the entrance and handling of the personal affects inside that apartment by the media or anyone else were also illegal.
If the police had already investigated the apartment and it's affects and released it then why on earth is the media complaining that the police didn't secure the apartment from THEM to keep THEM from doing exactly what they DID? I think you are mistaken that it was released as a crime scene. Or - once again - the media is blaming someone else for THEIR outrageous behavior. Breach of the lease or not, the landlord had no legal right to open that apartment and enter it THEMSELVES much less give unhindered access to the media and who knows who else to riffle through the personal affects inside that dwelling that was the legal property of the next of kin.
Seeing as I'm currently embroiled in a legal battle with a previous scumlord who thought she could do what the hell she liked with my personal possessions that she wouldn't permit me access to DESPITE what the law required, I have a chip on my shoulder about despicable landlords and the disgusting flouting of the law that they do that causes immense harm to tenants.
retrowire
(10,345 posts)treating everything like a TMZ scandal.
navarth
(5,927 posts)Sorry to say, if one watches the tv machine for their info....well, you know the rest.
Ron Green
(9,822 posts)any more than true facts come from modern police departments?
I dunno.
LovingA2andMI
(7,006 posts)And the Media must and should be called out for their breach of privacy to the surviving Daughter to her Interstate Inherited Personal Effects of those Parents. Regardless of the point the parents are mass murderers, the remaining property in the estate is HERS and/or her guardian caretakers to determine what is done with it when.
American Media is sinking further and further into the quicksand.
shadowmayor
(1,325 posts)The diptards are like buzzards hovering over a gut wagon. Such journalistic integrity and professionalism. The real question is why the OJ style coverage? One word for everybody to think about concerning a real crisis that demands more coverage - Fukushima!
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)American media is an embarrassment. A total embarrassment. RT is as good as any American media. And just as trustworthy.
tooeyeten
(1,074 posts)MSM today.
Volaris
(10,271 posts)Doesn't this nearly GUARANTEE a mistrial?
How the FUCK didn't the cops have this apartment sealed already?
This is all besides the point of
What JOURNALIST in their right professional mind thinks this National Enquierer-level stunt was a good idea???
What editor/producer didn't issue a professional BITCH-SLAP the moment this idea was floated???
cwydro
(51,308 posts)The FBI and the police said the two dead shooters were the perpetrators.
Renew Deal
(81,859 posts)Are you sure about a third suspect?
Volaris
(10,271 posts)I was under the impression there was a third shooter, who was in custody.
I haven't had the news on in a few days, and was misinformed.
Thanks though, for keeping me on the level=)
tooeyeten
(1,074 posts)Usually a reliable smart reporter looked really stupid for the 1st time. What were the producers trying to prove, I wonder.
chervilant
(8,267 posts)JEB
(4,748 posts)as propaganda. Sickening.
Renew Deal
(81,859 posts)I blame the cops and the landlord for letting them in. I think the media was right to go on, but wrong to show sensitive ID's directly on camera.
Babel_17
(5,400 posts)When the New York Times decided a serious retrospect on the invasion of Iraq wasn't called for, it became clear as crystal as to how low the bar for journalistic standards had fallen in this country.
We have talented, very well paid, people who work at providing content. But we no longer have a large and relevant class of journalists providing "news" in the most profitable venues.
Investigative reporting has taken an equally large beating.
oldandhappy
(6,719 posts)Unknown Beatle
(2,672 posts)"they rushed".
Rex
(65,616 posts)I guess the 4A doesn't mean anything anymore. It was black friday for pundits.
SoCalDem
(103,856 posts)all he had to do was to call the police and they would have all been told to leave.
Landlord wanted his "15 minutes"..
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)While the media should report on the shooting, they need to back off. Also throwing a bunch of speculation out in news stories without facts does nothing to help find out why this happened.
redstateblues
(10,565 posts)was violated by the fact that they turned the property into a bomb factory. It's gonna be hard to lease that unit out for a long time.
tenderfoot
(8,434 posts)truly disgusting
Response to LovingA2andMI (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed