Birdwatch Note
2023-10-19 10:45:18 UTC - NOT_MISLEADING
NNN. The point about self ID is a personal opinion, and the opening statement is correct - the judge in this case said the following in summing up: “would an 11 year old girl have willingly entered your car had you presented as a man? The answer is that obviously she would not” https://judiciary.scot/home/sentences-judgments/sentences-and-opinions/2023/10/18/hma-v-andrew-miller
Written by F2AB551130DC41A87BF449B2CE70CC1CEB6F9C3F4DF3CB52BD788556DFBD8102
Participant Details
Original Tweet
Tweet embedding is no longer reliably available, due to the platform's instability (in terms of both technology and policy). If the Tweet still exists, you can view it here: https://twitter.com/foo_bar/status/1714591898260672677
Please note, though, that you may need to have your own Twitter account to access that page. I am currently exploring options for archiving Tweet data in a post-API context.
All Information
- ID - 1714955879642980400
- noteId - 1714955879642980400
- participantId -
- noteAuthorParticipantId - F2AB551130DC41A87BF449B2CE70CC1CEB6F9C3F4DF3CB52BD788556DFBD8102 Participant Details
- createdAtMillis - 1697712318702
- tweetId - 1714591898260672677
- classification - NOT_MISLEADING
- believable -
- harmful -
- validationDifficulty -
- misleadingOther - 0
- misleadingFactualError - 0
- misleadingManipulatedMedia - 0
- misleadingOutdatedInformation - 0
- misleadingMissingImportantContext - 0
- misleadingUnverifiedClaimAsFact - 0
- misleadingSatire - 0
- notMisleadingOther - 0
- notMisleadingFactuallyCorrect - 1
- notMisleadingOutdatedButNotWhenWritten - 0
- notMisleadingClearlySatire - 0
- notMisleadingPersonalOpinion - 1
- trustworthySources - 1
- summary
- NNN. The point about self ID is a personal opinion, and the opening statement is correct - the judge in this case said the following in summing up: “would an 11 year old girl have willingly entered your car had you presented as a man? The answer is that obviously she would not” https://judiciary.scot/home/sentences-judgments/sentences-and-opinions/2023/10/18/hma-v-andrew-miller
Note Status History
| createdAt | timestampMillisOfFirstNonNMRStatus | firstNonNMRStatus | timestampMillisOfCurrentStatus | currentStatus | timestampMillisOfLatestNonNMRStatus | mostRecentNonNMRStatus | participantId |
| 2023-10-19 10:45:18 UTC (1697712318702) |
1969-12-31 23:59:59 UTC (-1) |
2023-10-20 06:10:01 UTC (1697782201371) |
NEEDS_MORE_RATINGS | 1969-12-31 23:59:59 UTC (-1) |
Note Ratings
| rated at | rated by | |
| 2023-10-19 14:34:42 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-10-19 13:15:30 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-10-19 11:43:11 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-10-19 08:06:26 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-10-19 06:08:27 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-10-26 14:38:27 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-10-26 21:24:25 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-10-21 04:31:56 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-10-20 09:27:02 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-10-20 07:14:16 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-10-19 20:34:57 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-10-19 19:29:55 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-10-19 09:51:07 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-10-19 08:43:47 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-10-19 07:48:05 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-10-19 07:28:36 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-10-19 07:01:09 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-10-19 06:46:54 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-10-19 06:26:09 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2024-01-05 05:56:48 -0600 | Rating Details |