If I’m right about your intentions, you’re attempting to portray the author and paper as minimizing what happened to the kid. That doesn’t seem valid at all, given that a) the entire article is about what happened to the victim and outlining the case, and not disputing her claims b) it’s literally in the article as a quote, just read the thing already.
Why can’t the author say she was raped? Adding quotes means it is no longer a statement of fact, it becomes a report about someone’s account of what happened.
Because in the unlikely event that this isn’t what happened and the court finds them not guilty, the paper would be liable for damages that came from making that statement. Libel law exists, so they can’t just state it.
Hence running a quote, plus using the industry standard in the article, “alleged”. After the conviction it’s a matter of legal fact.
If I’m right about your intentions, you’re attempting to portray the author and paper as minimizing what happened to the kid. That doesn’t seem valid at all, given that a) the entire article is about what happened to the victim and outlining the case, and not disputing her claims b) it’s literally in the article as a quote, just read the thing already.
Why can’t the author say she was raped? Adding quotes means it is no longer a statement of fact, it becomes a report about someone’s account of what happened.
Because in the unlikely event that this isn’t what happened and the court finds them not guilty, the paper would be liable for damages that came from making that statement. Libel law exists, so they can’t just state it.
Hence running a quote, plus using the industry standard in the article, “alleged”. After the conviction it’s a matter of legal fact.