What 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 children’s toys. They held up photos, speculating about whether the woman depicted in one might be Malik. They displayed Social Security cards and driver’s licenses with readily identifiable information—and not just for the deceased suspects.
As if the journalistic irresponsibility of baselessly speculating while holding up images of potentially innocent people on TV wasn’t bad enough, it beggars belief the scene wasn’t 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 didn’t 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. 
= new reply since forum marked as read
And both should be fired by their respective employers. Sadly, it is likely they will be praised instead. 
A CNN reporter who went in there was reporting that he, too, found it ghoulish and horrible. But he did it anyway.
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.
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.
He was paid $1000 by Inside Edition.
he may have to turn that place into a storage unit.. who would want to live in a mass murderer's apartment
So take it with a grain of salt, that Inside Edition paid the Landlord $1000 to enter the unit.
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.
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!
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.
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.
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.
Out of a thread...WE CREATED? Scrolling up is good for the soul. 
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?
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?
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....
So why would we NOT chime in on a thread WE created.
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.
Usually a reliable smart reporter looked really stupid for the 1st time. What were the producers trying to prove, I wonder.
I guess the 4A doesn't mean anything anymore. It was black friday for pundits.
Response to LovingA2andMI (Original post)
