When you are a journalist and someone (victim) tell their story about their suffering, you can’t go to your desk and just write whatever the victim says. For every word in your article must be verifiable, with many sources #supportarmiehammer

For instance, the victim says the crime committed against them. In that case the journalist need to check if there is a formal case in an oficial instance, example, the police. So, if the police allow give some information, the journalist can write an article

Sometimes any information that is leaked to the media can harm the entire case, even agar the victim. So is not rare that you can read on the media just a little information about, because the process in the court is not finished.

the journalist need to show the other side, not just stay with what the victim says. It is necessary to show the other part, ask them what they have to say, bc the accused remains innocent till the court say that they are guilty after show verifiable proofs

While the investigation it’s in development, the media never can say that the accused is guilty. Always ther will be the “alleged” criminal and not sentence them showing the accused immediately guilty just because the version of the victim

Why if there’s no official version? If the journalist asks for oficial information and there’s nothing, it’s necessary to ask why? Why the victim didn’t say to the authorities? Or why the authorities are not listening to the victim?

Someone can’t go for the life saying that someone is a criminal and not tell to the police, lawyer, someone to make something. The journalist can’t take just one version, it is necessary to show the whole picture to the audience think about

The journalist is not a judge, jury or punisher, there’s legal instances for it. What is sad to read is, you have tons of alleged messages from many sources saying that Armie Hammer is the worst criminal. Before to post it on media, it needs verification

Not because the journalist doesn’t believe in the victim, but to be sure that tomorrow someone will not change the story and say the opposite. That is the reason why the testimony of the victim showed on media usually is the one that is in the court

To avoid contradictions that can affect the entire process. Also, as journalist, it’s important to respect the victim and avoid to ask them over and over again about the damage. Can you imagine the hell of reliving the suffering?

What I see on the social media is many people repeating the story of the suffering, changing details, speaking daily about, replying answers, when in a legal process it needs a psychological assistance to avoid create more damage to the victim

The journalist can’t just go to the victim and ask details because that is not ethical. There’s legal sources to have information and no cause more damage.

To sum up, what I see in the media about Armie Hammer is unfair. The media automatically believed in no verified sources and the actor is being condemned every day. I believe in justice and a fair process.

Now Armie Hammer is being condemned on social media for people who don’t know him and also don’t know the “victims” either. Imagine your loved one being destroyed like that #supportarmiehammer