4 ms·

Intent is often used to interpret how a law should be applied. The protesters intent was to protest, and the reporters intent was to publish journalism on the

Intent is often used to interpret how a law should be applied. The protesters intent was to protest, and the reporters intent was to publish journalism on the protest, on a matter of significant public interest too. Many people have no problem seeing the difference. In my opinion, neither group should be charged in this case, but certainly not the journalist.

renlo 9y ago
> The journalist, who now works in Halifax for the Aboriginal Peoples Television Network It's possible that his intent was to protest AND to publish journalism. What's the dividing line between protester and journalist? For example, imagine an embedded journalist with a group of guerrillas that perform war crimes. At what point is the 'journalist' culpable for the crimes of the group? If the 'journalist's' intent is the making propaganda pieces for the group, is he still a journalist? If he takes up arms with the guerrillas, is he still a journalist? I'm not saying this guy is a criminal, just stating that it may be a bit of a grey area depending on how much he is affiliated with the group.