Editorial Standards

Camviction covers real cases involving real people — victims, families, defendants, and investigators. That reality sets the bar for how we work. This page explains the standards every case file on this site is written to, and what to do if we get something wrong.

Sourcing: records first

Our case files are built from the public record: court filings and transcripts, released body camera and interrogation footage, police reports and official statements, sworn testimony, and contemporaneous reporting by credentialed news organizations. When a fact comes from one side of a case — an affidavit, a defense motion, a prosecutor's press conference — we attribute it to that side rather than stating it as established truth.

We do not publish rumors, anonymous social media claims, or "sources say" speculation. If a detail can't be traced to a record or a credible report, it doesn't go in the file.

Presumption of innocence

Charges are reported as charges — never as verdicts. A person who has been accused, arrested, or indicted is described as "accused" or "alleged," and every case file involving pending proceedings carries a status note making clear the defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty. When a case ends in acquittal or dismissal, we say so plainly: an acquittal is reported as an acquittal, not as a technicality.

Victims and families

Victims are people, not plot devices. We use their names respectfully, avoid gratuitous detail that serves shock rather than understanding, and cover missing-persons cases with the family's search effort — not speculation about their fate — at the center.

Updates policy

Criminal cases move: verdicts land, dates slip, appeals resolve. Our case files carry a published date and an updated date, and time-sensitive pages — like our court dates tracker — are revised as the record changes. A status line at the end of each case file reflects where the case stood as of its last update.

Corrections

When we get a fact wrong, we fix the article and note the correction — we don't quietly rewrite history on contested points. If you believe something we've published is inaccurate, email [email protected] with the article link and the correction, ideally with a pointer to the record that supports it. Corrections requests are reviewed against primary sources and resolved as quickly as we can verify them.

Independence

Editorial decisions — which cases we cover and what the files say — are made independently of advertisers and sponsors. Advertising on this site is clearly distinguishable from editorial content and has no influence on it.