Press agencies have a duty not to brand people as murderers, at least before an official investigation is complete. Will it matter in this case, who knows, but what happens if the post mortem was wrong or they were both murdered by someone else? What it the point of rushing the a conclusion and branding people before all the facts are in. If its get decided that he, was in fact a murderer then by all means call him that, just not sure what you think is gained by a media house labelling him that so before anything official has been release.
You really are all over the place, where ever did I say I sympathised with him? My comment was about journalistic integrity and making statements of fact before they have been confirmed,.
And how the hell do you know what the evidence is, have you seen any of it first hand? Do you have some kind of inside track on the investigation that the rest of us don't have?
