Whilst I understand the whole idea of "never betraying a source" is it really the same thing? An adult could be charged fair enough but could anything really be done to the kid? They talk about national security and all nice to know a 10 year old girl with pig tails can bring the NSA to its knees.
shareI know I thought It was ridiculous what could they do about the little girl, its not like she would have known any difference! Pretty *beep* thing of the reporter to do anyway - despite my love of Kate - was it really worth it.
shareThe kid would have had no legal consequences, I have no doubt about that.
The way I see it, while in custody Kate refused to tell her source because of the principle of journalistic integrity. But after the murder of Erik V.D. she was protecting the daughter from finding out that her talking led to the death of her mother.
I would have loved to see the face of the prosecutor at the moment he realises the truth.
That's exactly right
shareI thought that as well.
shareWell legally no they couldn't do anything to her daughter but that nothing that she would do to herself if it came out that she caused the events that left to her mother death. Kids typically blame themselves for things they have no control over. Even if it wasn't a child, it went way beyond that.
shareBut after the murder of Erik V.D. she was protecting the daughter from finding out that her talking led to the death of her mother.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^