The Free Dictionary  
mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest Forum Search | Active Topics | Members

in view that Options
Koh Elaine
Posted: Thursday, July 12, 2018 8:43:59 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/4/2012
Posts: 4,515
Neurons: 18,409
Deputy public prosecutor Naidatul Athirah Azman prosecuted while the accused was represented by Sukhdev Singh. Naidatul Athirah applied to the court to disallow bail for the accused in view that both victims were his grandchildren. Sukhdev then appealed for bail on medical grounds and said both victims were not living with him. The judge then allowed bail to be set at RM10,000 for both charges with one surety. The judge also placed an additional condition, cautioning the accused to not have any contact with the victims in any manner. The case is up for mention on August 13.

Is "in view that" correct?

Thanks.
thar
Posted: Thursday, July 12, 2018 8:59:22 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/8/2010
Posts: 18,193
Neurons: 73,885
British English here! Whistle

No, it doesn't sound right to me.

I expect 'in view of the fact that both victims were....'
But even that doesn't feel quite right because this is not a something to be taken into consideration - it is the reason he is giving for his request.


So, much shorter and simpler
given that,
or
because


One other thing that stands is:
because both victims don't live with him.

both + negative sounds wrong. Usually that produces 'neither'.
Either you treat them as a single entity, together
because the grandchildren were not living with him

or you treat them separately, and say:
because neither grandchild was living with him

And on point of vocabulary choice:
If he is only accused, seeking bail, then he has not been convicted. That implies no crime has been proven. They are not victims of crime until a crime has been proven. Unless there is some other crime they are victims of, they are not technically victims, not to an impartial observer.
Ashwin Joshi
Posted: Thursday, July 12, 2018 12:24:47 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/3/2016
Posts: 1,428
Neurons: 74,702
Location: Jandiāla Guru, Punjab, India
I will write it as follows;

The deputy public prosecutor Naidatul Athirah Azman was the prosecutioner while the accused was represented by attorney Sukhdev Singh. Naidatul Athirah, opposing the bail plea of the accused, submitted to the court to deny bail to the accused in view of the fact that both victims were his grandchildren. Sukhdev Singh then appealed (as appeal is preferred in higher court, it seems the lower court rejected the bail plea of the accused) for bail on medical grounds and argued that none of the victims were living with him. The judge then allowed bail to be set at RM10, 000 for both charges with one surety. The judge also placed an additional condition, ordering the accused to not have any contact with the victims in any manner. The case was adjourned to August 13 for further hearing.

TFD: a victim is a person;

victim (ˈvɪktɪm)
n
1. a person or thing that suffers harm, death, etc, from another or from some adverse act, circumstance, etc: victims of tyranny.
2. a person who is tricked or swindled; dupe
3. a living person or animal sacrificed in a religious rite




Me Gathering Pebbles at The Seashore.-Aj
thar
Posted: Thursday, July 12, 2018 1:12:51 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/8/2010
Posts: 18,193
Neurons: 73,885
Ah, but from a legal standpoint, are they victims?
Say for example this person is accused of assaulting his grandchildren. It goes to court and he says he didn't assault them, they just fell over. And the jury believes him and he is found not guilty. Then, technically, there has been no crime, and no victim. When you report something, you can't say things that assume a crime has been committed or that a person is guilty.
Maybe he says they were assaulted but it wasn't him that did it. Maybe he admits he did it. Then they are victims. Maybe he claims they are lying and making it all up. But the point is, a report cannot make assumptions and label people with emotive terms.
Ashwin Joshi
Posted: Thursday, July 12, 2018 1:17:50 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/3/2016
Posts: 1,428
Neurons: 74,702
Location: Jandiāla Guru, Punjab, India
A guilty person is accused till convicted by a competent court of law, thar, sir.

Me Gathering Pebbles at The Seashore.-Aj
Romany
Posted: Thursday, July 12, 2018 3:08:49 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/14/2009
Posts: 14,761
Neurons: 46,147
Location: Brighton, England, United Kingdom
Ashwin,

However, under English Law, all persons are presumed innocent until PROVEN guilty.

Thus, the use of "Plaintiffs" rather than the "Victims".

(It used to be the same in Indian law, but I expect time changes things.)
Drag0nspeaker
Posted: Thursday, July 12, 2018 7:18:37 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/12/2011
Posts: 30,678
Neurons: 182,283
Location: Livingston, Scotland, United Kingdom
It also sounds 'odd' to me (as well as laying the newspaper open to a charge of libel or perversion of justice). For a news-site to say that there are victims would be seen as 'trial by media', which is illegal

There is no English word "prosecutioner". The word is 'prosecutor'.

The Deputy Public Prosecutor, Naidatul Athirah Azman, prosecuted while the accused was represented by Sukhdev Singh. Naidatul Athirah applied to the court to disallow bail for the accused as the alleged victims were his grandchildren. Sukhdev then appealed for bail on medical grounds and said the grandchildren were not living with him. The judge allowed bail to be set at RM10,000 for both charges with one surety. The judge also placed an additional condition that the accused not have any contact with his grandchildren in any manner. The case is up for mention on August 13.


I used "alleged victims" and "his grandchildren" rather than 'plaintiff' or the current legal term 'claimant' because this seems to be a criminal case. The Public Prosecutor would normally prosecute in cases brought by the Crown (or in India, I guess by "The People").
Also, even if it is a civil case, it's not likely that children would be suing him - more likely their parents.

In a civil case, one has "Claimant vs Accused". In a criminal case, one has "The Crown vs Accused" or "The People vs Accused" with no 'claimant'.

Wyrd bið ful aræd - bull!
leonAzul
Posted: Thursday, July 12, 2018 7:32:32 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/11/2011
Posts: 8,473
Neurons: 27,518
Location: Miami, Florida, United States
Koh Elaine wrote:
Deputy public prosecutor Naidatul Athirah Azman prosecuted while the accused was represented by Sukhdev Singh. Naidatul Athirah applied to the court to disallow bail for the accused in view that both victims were his grandchildren. Sukhdev then appealed for bail on medical grounds and said both victims were not living with him. The judge then allowed bail to be set at RM10,000 for both charges with one surety. The judge also placed an additional condition, cautioning the accused to not have any contact with the victims in any manner. The case is up for mention on August 13.

Is "in view that" correct?


It's not proper English, yet eminently cromulent for journalism, where impactful™ and and compressed column inches sell papers and attract eyeballs.


"Make it go away, Mrs Whatsit," he whispered. "Make it go away. It's evil."
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS
Forum Terms and Guidelines | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2008-2018 Farlex, Inc. All rights reserved.