The Alleged Motorcycle

"Court sees gruesome images of alleged biker slaughter"

Are these guys "alleged bikers"? Or is it an "alleged slaughter"? Since there were no bikes involved, but there was most definitely a slaughter, it would be more correct to say "Alleged bikers have been slaughtered." Being a biker is not a crime, so you would be allowed to write "Court sees gruesome images of biker slaughter" and just drop then word alleged completely. The word alleged should be used together with a word for a crime, and "alleged biker" definitely gives the idea that being a biker is something that you can be accused of and found guilty.

I used to be concerned, back in the eighties, with the use of the word "alleged" in the newspapers on on TV news broadcasts. Technically, if a suspect is in custody even if charged with murder, the news media were not allowed to call them "murderers" until they had been found guilty in court. The acceptable way was to refer to them as "the alleged murderer". This is not just a proper use of the English language, it is also a foundation of our entire legal system where you are innocent until proved guilty.

I noticed back in the 70's, up until the OJ Simpson trial, that crime reporters often forgot to use the word "alleged". Today I almost never see a reporter fail to include the alleged. Although often in the wrong place, as above.

The funniest example I have of this was back in 1999, there was a string of railway murders. Nobody knew who did it, but the hunt was on for a serial killer. Meanwhile the press took up the name "Railway Killer" to refer to the person who was doing it. It was silly enough during this period when the occasional reporter would refer to "another corpse left behind by the alleged railway killer". The word alleged is not really needed here, because whoever is doing the killings is the "railway killer" by definition. By using the word alleged wrongly again and again in the media, you are actually changing the meaning of the word from "accused but not proven" to "he did it but not proven yet".

A certain Rafael Resendez-Ramirez was finally arrested and charged with a number of the railway murders. The way I heard it on the TV was something like this "The alleged murderer is Rafael Resendez-Ramirez, an illegal immigrant, charged with 12 deaths. Ramirez is also know by the name "The Railway Killer""

You cannot attach this particular nickname to a real person until the verdict is in! Not in a country where you are "Innocent until proven guilty." Is there still any question why there were so many lynchings years ago, and that now we need to abolish the death penalty? People just do not get it when it comes to a fair trial. If the TV gets it wrong, then who will ever get it right (except me and you and the Judge of course).