Skip to main content

PeakMetrics / Fact Checks

Crime & justice fact checks

Explore claims publishers have checked about crime & justice. Read their original ratings and follow the evidence.

6,854 published reviews in this topic

YouturnCrime & justice

அமெரிக்காவில் வீட்டில் தனியாக இருந்த இரண்டு சிறுமிகளை கற்பழிக்க முயன்ற முதியவர் ஒருவரின் ஆணுறுப்பை அந்த சிறுமிகள் வளர்க்கும் நாய் ஒன்று கடித்துக் குதறி அவர்களை காப்பாற்றியுள்ள சம்பவம் பெரும் பரபரப்பை ஏற்படுத்தியுள்ளது.

Publisher’s rating: Fake

NewtralCrime & justice

Vídeo de un MENA arrestado por atentado a los agentes de la autoridad

Publisher’s rating: Falso

The claim concerns a video said to show a MENA (an unaccompanied foreign minor) being arrested for an attack on law-enforcement officers. Newtral reports that the clip shows an arrest during events in El Masnou, Catalonia, but that the person arrested was a 35-year-old Spanish man, not a MENA. The Mossos d’Esquadra confirmed the video’s connection to the arrest to Newtral and said the man was arrested for an offense against authority. The review distinguishes this arrest from a separate incident that preceded the protests: a boy living at the minors’ center had been detained on suspicion of sexual offenses. Newtral says the video does not show that boy being arrested; it shows the Spanish man being detained during the protests. The review’s account therefore contradicts the claim’s identification of the person in the video, while confirming the stated reason for that man’s arrest.

Deutsche Presse-AgenturCrime & justice

In Leipzig soll es «nächtliche Überfälle mit Waffen auf 'Rechte'» gegeben haben, wird in einem in sozialen Netzwerken geteilten Beitrag behauptet. Zudem habe die Polizei «linke Waffenlager» ausgehoben, heißt es dort. Dies seien «aktuelle Infos».

Publisher’s rating: Der Polizei ist über die genannten Angriffe auf Rechte in Leipzig nichts bekannt. Die Ordnungshüter bestreiten, «linke Waffenlager» ausgehoben zu haben.

The post described alleged nighttime armed attacks on right-wing people in Leipzig and claimed police had uncovered left-wing weapons caches, presenting the claims as current information. The review reports that Saxony’s state police said the specifically named incidents were not known to them. Uwe Voigt, a Leipzig police spokesperson, also told dpa on July 18 that police still had no information about the alleged weapons caches or attacks. The account therefore provides no police confirmation for either allegation: the state police social-media team said the specified incidents were unknown, and the local spokesperson confirmed that police had no information about them. The excerpt does not describe independent evidence establishing that the alleged events occurred; its findings concern what police representatives said about the claims.

FACTLYCrime & justice

75-year-old Muslim man married his 15-year-old daughter.

Publisher’s rating: FALSE

FACTLY investigated a social-media post presenting a photo of a young girl and an older man as proof that a 75-year-old Muslim man had married his 15-year-old daughter. The review’s central finding is that the man in the photo was not the girl’s father, so the photo did not support the alleged father-daughter marriage. It describes the girl instead as a 16-year-old from Hyderabad and the man as a Muscat national. To check the photo’s provenance, FACTLY says it used Google Reverse Image Search and found news stories containing the same image. It cites an NDTV report describing the marriage of a 16-year-old Hyderabad girl to a 75-year-old Muscat national for Rs. 5 lakhs. The review says the case drew media attention in August 2017 after the girl’s mother approached police for help, following the girl’s complaint that her husband was ill-treating her in Muscat. The distinction is consequential: the review describes a troubling marriage involving a minor, but rejects the specific claim that the older man married his own daughter. Its account does not corroborate the post’s stated age of 15; it gives the girl’s age as 16. The supplied excerpt does not include the underlying news stories or further details about the image, so those cannot be independently assessed here.

DUBAWACrime & justice

A claim that the Federal Government is not responsible for El-zakzaky’s continued detention.

Publisher’s rating: False

The review addresses a July 19, 2019 statement by Garba Shehu, a presidential media aide, that the Federal Government no longer had a role in El-Zakzaky’s detention because the matter was outside the Justice Ministry’s domain. It tests that assertion against the detention’s history and the government’s conduct, rather than treating the statement about the Ministry’s jurisdiction as proof that the government had no responsibility. (S1: “The presidency through the Senior Special Assistant to President Muhammadu Buhari on Media and Publicity, Garba Shehu, on Friday, July 19, 2019 claimed that the Federal Government is not responsible for the continued detention”; “The Federal Government no more has hands in the matter and to that extent, the government at the centre can be said to be clear of any alleged violations of court orders”.) The central evidence is a December 2016 Federal High Court order directing the Department of State Services (DSS) to release El-Zakzaky and members of his family. The review says the DSS did not comply, asserting that it held him for his protection. It also reports that the court ordered N50 million in damages for El-Zakzaky and his wife, which was never paid. The review further notes that, a year later, the government described his confinement as voluntary, while he remained in custody. These details show why the review treated the government’s continued detention of him, despite a court order, as relevant to responsibility. (S1: “In December 2016, a Federal High Court sitting in Abuja ordered the Department of State Services (DSS) to free the leader of IMN and members of his family. However, the DSS refused”; “This was never perfected”; “The Government did not release him.”) The review also cites a July 10, 2019 House of Representatives call for his release and Femi Falana’s account that the court had directed the Federal Government to release the couple. It concludes that blaming the judiciary was not supported by the release order: the court had ordered release, but El-Zakzaky remained detained. The excerpt does not establish every operational detail of who controlled his custody at the time of Shehu’s statement; its stated reasoning rests on the court order and the government’s failure to secure his release. (S1: “Members of the House of Representatives on July 10, 2019 also called on the Nigerian government to release Mr El-Zakzaky”; “The presiding judge, Kolawole J. (as he then was) directed the Federal Government to release the couple from unlawful custody”; “It is WRONG for the presidency to blame the Judiciary for El-Zakzaky’s continued detention, since the court has already ordered his release!”)

NewtralCrime & justice

Una banda de magrebíes están llamando a casas para asaltarlas en Valencia

Publisher’s rating: Falso

The claim concerned a warning that at least 10 men described as Maghrebi were calling at homes to carry out burglaries in the Valencia-area city of Sagunto. The warning appeared in an image posted on July 10 by a Facebook account called “Ayuntamiento El Puerto,” which presented itself in a way that could suggest an official municipal source. The review checked the identity of that account and whether local authorities had information supporting the alleged burglaries. The account was not Sagunto’s municipal government page. Newtral reports that the city’s actual Facebook account was called “Ayuntamiento de Sagunto” and had posted no similar image or warning. The Sagunto council told Newtral the “Ayuntamiento El Puerto” account was private, and explained that Puerto is not an independent municipality. The review also reports that neither the local police nor the National Police had received a report or complaint about such home burglaries. Those checks address both the warning’s apparent official provenance and its central allegation: the purported municipal alert did not come from Sagunto’s council, and police had no reports corroborating the described burglaries. The supplied review does not identify a verified incident matching the warning; its account of the authorities’ responses is limited to the absence of reports or complaints.

Fact CrescendoCrime & justice

Claim: Youth stole parent's money for Naam Tamilar Party

Publisher’s rating: FALSE

The review investigated a Facebook post claiming that a young man had stolen ₹50,000 from his parents and sent it to Naam Tamilar Party. The post attributed a mocking statement to the young man and showed an image of party leader Seeman, making it appear that he was laughing about the alleged incident. The review says the post was shared on July 10, 2019, by a Facebook account named “ஆமைக்கறி சைமன் 3.0.” The account name and the use of Seeman’s image are part of the review’s account of the post, not evidence that Seeman made the statement or that the theft occurred. (S1: “ஆமைக்கறி சைமன் 3.0 என்ற ஃபேஸ்புக் ஐடி இந்த பதிவை ஜூலை 10, 2019 அன்று பகிர்ந்துள்ளது.”; “சீமான் இதைச் சொல்லி சிரிப்பது போல உள்ளது.”) To check whether the allegation had been reported elsewhere, the review says it searched Google and found no such news report. It then contacted a Naam Tamilar Party representative, who denied the allegation and described it as a rumor about the party. The review does not provide independent documentation of a theft or identify the person supposedly involved; its stated checks instead found no supporting report and recorded the party representative’s denial. (S1: “இவர்கள் குறிப்பிடுவது போல ஏதேனும் ஒரு செய்தி உண்மையில் வெளியாகியுள்ளதா என கூகுளில் தேடினோம். ஆனால், அப்படி எந்த ஒரு செய்தியும் கிடைக்கவே இல்லை.”; “நாம் தமிழர் கட்சி பிரதிநிதி ஒருவரிடம் பேசினோம்.”; “சமூக ஊடகங்களில் எங்கள் கட்சி பற்றி வதந்தி பரப்புவதையே பலரும் வழக்கமாக வைத்துள்ளனர்.”) The review characterizes the post as a fabricated claim shared as if it were true, rather than a substantiated account of a real theft. Its conclusion is based on the absence of a matching news report and the party representative’s denial; the excerpt does not describe additional corroborating checks. (S1: “ஆதாரமே இல்லாத வகையில் ஒரு செய்தியை தாங்களே தயாரித்து இவ்வாறு சிலர் பகிர்ந்து வருவதாக தெரியவருகிறது.”; “உரிய ஆதாரங்களின் அடிப்படையில் மேற்கண்ட ஃபேஸ்புக் பதிவு தவறான ஒன்று என நிரூபிக்கப்பட்டுள்ளது.”)

Deutsche Presse-AgenturCrime & justice

Das Video von dem Vorfall kursiert im Netz: Am 10. Juli 2019 randalierte ein Nigerianer auf dem Gelände des Ankerzentrums im bayrischen Donauwörth und beschädigte dabei zwölf Autos. Auf einem Sharepic heißt es, er sei nun «auf Gemeinschaftskosten» in einer Klinik untergebracht. Dort würde nach einer psychischen Störung gesucht, «die seinen Amoklauf entschuldigen könnte». Die Ermittlungsbehörden würden zwar hart durchgreifen - jedoch nicht gegen ihn, sondern gegen die Person, die die Beschädigung der Fahrzeuge gefilmt hatte, heißt es weiter.

Publisher’s rating: Der 19-jährige Westafrikaner sitzt in Untersuchungshaft. Gegen den Urheber des Videos wird nicht ermittelt.

The QuintCrime & justice

People throwing stones at BEST bus in Bandra Kurla Complex Mumbai

Publisher’s rating: FALSE

The claim concerns a viral video said to show auto-rickshaw and taxi drivers throwing stones at BEST buses in Mumbai’s Bandra Kurla Complex, supposedly in protest against lower bus fares. The Quint’s investigation found that the video showed a different place and different buses: an incident in Surat involving local Sitilink buses, not BEST buses in Mumbai. The article also notes that the video was circulated with an allegation about the people shown, but its central check was the clip’s location and the identity of the buses. To investigate, The Quint examined the video frame by frame and found a visible “Sitilink” imprint. It identified Sitilink as Surat’s bus rapid transit system, operated by the Surat Municipal Corporation. The review then searched YouTube using terms related to Surat and buses, finding a TV9 Gujarati video published on 5 July titled “Rally against mob lynching incidents turns violent in Surat, stones pelted on buses.” This connected the viral footage to a rally-related incident in Surat rather than to the claimed BKC dispute. The review says other Gujarati news channels reported the aftermath of a rally protesting mob-lynching incidents. It also cites reporting that the rally was held in Surat’s Nanpura area and that a local bus was damaged near the Take Off restaurant. These details provide a different event context for the footage; the evidence in the excerpt does not support the claim that the scene was in BKC or involved BEST buses.