Legalistics (UNCLASSIFIED)

[Dave Wilton]

That's too tentative, casting doubt on facts that have been clearly
established. (And yes, I realize that the original was done in fun.) The
point being that you can clearly lay out the facts without being excessively
tentative. This would be better (and you can even avoid "alleged bomber" if
that phrasing is objectionable to you for whatever reason):

"Law enforcement officials state that Mr. Shahzad has confessed his
involvement in the Times Square bombing plot. They have also tentatively
identified him in surveillance videos of the bombing attempt. Mr. Shahzad is
under arrest, and his interrogation has resulted in raids at several
locations and the arrests of several individuals who may have been involved,
perhaps unwittingly, in the transfer of funds used to carry out the
attempted attack."

-----Original Message-----
From: American Dialect Society [mailto:ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of
Victor Steinbok
Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2010 10:51 AM
To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: Legalistics (UNCLASSIFIED)

If published accounts of unverified leaks from officials who may or may
not be involved in the investigation are to be believed, Mr. Shahzad is
the alleged non-suicidal New York would-be bomber who supposedly has
confessed to his involvement in the reputed plot. He has been
tentatively identified by law enforcement personnel as one of the fuzzy
images in surveillance videos from location. There can be no doubt,
however, that Mr. Shahzad--if that is indeed his name--is under arrest
and that his interrogation has resulted in a number of raids at several
locations and other arrests of several individuals on unrelated, at this
time, charges, but who might have been involved, perhaps unwittingly, in
the transfer of funds that may have been used to carry out the plan of
the purported attack.

Did I miss anything?

     VS-)

On 5/20/2010 12:03 PM, Mullins, Bill AMRDEC wrote:
>> I don't understand it either.  Because he confessed, he's not a suspect
>>
>> nor the "alleged" bomber.  He's the bomber.  Enough with the
>> legalistics.
>>
>>
> But the only way we know that he confessed is by leaks from people with
> an agenda. I've never seen or heard Faisal Shahzad say he did anything.
> Trusting statements like this was how the media got into trouble with
> Hatfield and Jewell.  Thus the equivocation.

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org