Slut shaming in the Buffalo News?

"I don't know who it was, but I saw a black teenager making purple drank an hour before Trayvon Martin was shot."

Relevant? OK to print?

 

Right. I don't, either. Assuming the scenario where she didn't actually say "no," but didn't give affirmative consent, either, we have to determine whether his objective assessment of whether he had consent or not was reasonable. Her actions are relevant in that case.

 

Or maybe what he saw isn't relative.

"No, officer, he didn't look drunk to me. He crashed his car and killed six people after leaving here? Weird."

 

Why would I assume that's the scenario?

 

That's a really poor example of irrelevant information.

 

Then print-shame the Buffalo News, and don't interview-shame the bartender, who described what he saw in a place where you go to drink and be social and then said who knows what happened after they left.

This is all on the Buffalo News, which is the point of this thread.

 

You wouldn't. But I'm pondering different possibilities. That's one.

 

It's also why you don't go to bartenders for expert testimony.

 

Short of a camera showing that what the bartender said isn't true about the woman "hanging all over" Kane, the bartender has little to worry about in that regard.

 

It's more about his liability if Kane was in fact very drunk and went on to injure someone.

 

I don't mind quoting subjects with a possible agenda. I mind quoting anonymous sources with a possible agenda.