[Newsbot]

Title: Lawyer admits Foerster caused injuries leading to teenager�s death
Category: Law & Order
Posted By: Robair
Date: 2014-03-25 13:19:36
Canadian

[Robair]

Case closed.
He can go keep Paul Bernardo company.

[Zipperfish]

Not much news on this one. Some chick winds up dead. Nobody knows how are why. Guy arresteds. Nobody told why. Fucking news organziations are lazy these days.

[Robair]

Taylor Van Diest was murdered in Kelowna, walking home on Halloween last year. Or maybe two years ago now? She was 18.

It's a local story here, so maybe nationally it's not as well known...

[Zipperfish]

Robair Robair:

Taylor Van Diest was murdered in Kelowna, walking home on Halloween last year. Or maybe two years ago now? She was 18.

It's a local story here, so maybe nationally it's not as well known...

Why was she murdered? Who is the guy? Did he know her? I assume that she was left raped and dying next to some railroad tracks, and I'm assuming that the masses are considered too sensitive these days to be subject to that kind of nastiness. Or maybe it's to spare the family from having everyone read teh gruesome details. But the reports end up saying nothing, so of course you just fill in the blanks anyway, whether they're right or wrong.

It's just lazy news reporting if you ask me.

[Robair]

Those details are two years old... the news is his lawyer stood up in court and said "he did it".

[xerxes]

Yeah it's news sound here Zip. He admitted it under questioning by the RCMP.

[andyt]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

Robair Robair:

Taylor Van Diest was murdered in Kelowna, walking home on Halloween last year. Or maybe two years ago now? She was 18.

It's a local story here, so maybe nationally it's not as well known...

Why was she murdered? Who is the guy? Did he know her? I assume that she was left raped and dying next to some railroad tracks, and I'm assuming that the masses are considered too sensitive these days to be subject to that kind of nastiness. Or maybe it's to spare the family from having everyone read teh gruesome details. But the reports end up saying nothing, so of course you just fill in the blanks anyway, whether they're right or wrong.

It's just lazy news reporting if you ask me.

Jeez, Zip, don't you keep up with the news. Certainly we heard about it down here as well. All the questions you're asking have been reported.

Doubt he'll be convicted of first degree - nothing to indicate he was planning to kill her. I'm surprised this hasn't already been pled to second degree or manslaughter unless there are facts that haven't been reported yet.

[Zipperfish]

andyt andyt:

Jeez, Zip, don't you keep up with the news. Certainly we heard about it down here as well. All the questions you're asking have been reported.

Doubt he'll be convicted of first degree - nothing to indicate he was planning to kill her. I'm surprised this hasn't already been pled to second degree or manslaughter unless there are facts that haven't been reported yet.

No I don't keep up with the news.

[andyt]

Then don't bitch when they don't regurgitate them for you at every opportunity.

[DrCaleb]

andyt andyt:

Then don't bitch when they don't regurgitate them for you at every opportunity.

Heaven forbid Zip should ask the media to do their job and add a paragraph or two of background to the story so it made a little sense for those of us who don't live around there.

I took but failed prognostication and mind reading in University too.

[andyt]

Did you fail reading as well? The second para tells us she was attacked and killed near railroad tracks and that the guy on trial admits he caused her death. Also we're told that he tried to have sex with her and that "the situation worsened when she tried to fight him off." Actually that last part was reported in Vancouver media as that he killed her because she fought back.

I have followed this story in Vancouver media, and this article about summarizes what happened. I don't really know more about it even tho I read several reports. I'm not sure more has been publicized. So what exactly do you think this piece should have told you that it didn't?

[Robair]

andyt andyt:

Doubt he'll be convicted of first degree - nothing to indicate he was planning to kill her. I'm surprised this hasn't already been pled to second degree or manslaughter unless there are facts that haven't been reported yet.

I could be wrong, but isn't first degree when it's pre-meditated OR during a sexual assault?

He needs to never see daylight again.

[Zipperfish]

andyt andyt:

Then don't bitch when they don't regurgitate them for you at every opportunity.

Well aren't we Mr. Grumpypants.

andyt andyt:

Did you fail reading as well? The second para tells us she was attacked and killed near railroad tracks and that the guy on trial admits he caused her death. Also we're told that he tried to have sex with her and that "the situation worsened when she tried to fight him off." Actually that last part was reported in Vancouver media as that he killed her because she fought back.

I have followed this story in Vancouver media, and this article about summarizes what happened. I don't really know more about it even tho I read several reports. I'm not sure more has been publicized. So what exactly do you think this piece should have told you that it didn't?

The story has been substantially expanded on the link since yesterday. Maybe the editor drew the same conclusions I did.

[andyt]

Well, maybe I should have opened the link before making my first comment.