To this, criminal counsel for the defence Ms. Jill Brisbois east is opposite Liu Jiang Reuter expresses: Article and fact not agree with, liu Jiang Dongxian is born to did not violate any law.
Review this to report full text can discover, reuter interviewed the one party in the case merely, namely the woman's viewpoint, and intended or undesigned oversight another viewpoint. To this, ms. Jill Brisbois expresses, because value judicatory order, so, do not want to interfere judicatory program, she cannot be made public to media immediately in that way like someone else relevant " evidence " . But she expresses, the evidence with real hope, be made public when the case ends.
In fact, small letter chatting record is forged extremely easily actually, for instance, PS is imitation perhaps small signal of the other side, before the case did not end, do sth without authorization was not affirmed publicly to cross the home remedy evidence of true bogus, it is can promiscuous seeing and hearing, the force with public opinion will violate legal order, be suspected of cloggy judicatory justice?
Jill Brisbois expresses further, reuter is in the panorama that did not acquire a business, and in the case have not end a case is censorial still be in when hearing law case, publish an article that contains one party viewpoint only, this is very inequitable.
Actually, in press, the action that reports one party viewpoint only is considered as not objective. Before this the report of Reuter is mixed outside intermediary is strong to Liu east the reportorial style be exactly the same of the case. Liu Jiang east the truth of the case is after all what kind of, not be or a few media reported to calculate, can give out the judicatory system that of an equitable solution is the United States.
