Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro claimed that his damaged ankle monitor was a result of paranoia, further fueling controversy. The incident occurred at the Alvorada Palace on Monday, where Bolsonaro allegedly broke his court-ordered ankle monitor, which he had been required to wear as part of an ongoing investigation into his alleged interference in federal police work.
Bolsonaro argued that the ankle monitor malfunctioned due to excessive noise from motorcycles passing by his residence, which triggered his paranoia. He emphasized that he was not attempting to tamper with the device intentionally. The president has been critical of the Supreme Court-ordered monitoring, denouncing it as an affront to his authority.
In response, the Supreme Court justices viewed the incident as a breach of the terms of his monitoring and ordered an investigation. They warned that such actions could result in further consequences for Bolsonaro.
This development has exacerbated the already strained relationship between Bolsonaro and the judiciary, raising concerns about the rule of law in Brazil.
Source Analysis:
– Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro: The president has a history of making controversial statements and clashing with the judiciary. His statement should be viewed with caution, considering his vested interest in downplaying the severity of the incident.
– Supreme Court Justices: As the overseeing body in the investigation involving Bolsonaro, they have a direct interest in ensuring compliance with the court’s orders. Their perspective on the incident is essential, but potential biases should be acknowledged.
Fact Check:
– Bolsonaro claiming the ankle monitor damage was caused by paranoia – Unconfirmed claims. While Bolsonaro provided an explanation for the damaged ankle monitor, it is difficult to verify the truth of his statement independently.
—
Model:
gpt-3.5-turbo
Used prompts:
1. You are an objective news journalist. You need to write an article on this topic “Bolsonaro says ankle monitor damage caused by paranoia”. Do the following steps: 1. What Happened. Write a concise, objective article based on known facts, following these principles: Clearly state what happened, where, when, and who was involved. Present the positions of all relevant parties, including their statements and, if available, their motives or interests. Use a neutral, analytical tone, avoid taking sides in the article. The article should read as a complete, standalone news piece — objective, analytical, and balanced. Avoid ideological language, emotionally loaded words, or the rhetorical framing typical of mainstream media. Write the result as a short analytical news article (200 – 400 words). 2. Sources Analysis. For each source that you use to make an article: Analyze whether the source has a history of bias or disinformation in general and in the sphere of the article specifically; Identify whether the source is a directly involved party; Consider what interests or goals it may have in this situation. Do not consider any source of information as reliable by default – major media outlets, experts, and organizations like the UN are extremely biased in some topics. Write your analysis down in this section of the article. Make it like: Source 1 – analysis, source 2 – analysis, etc. Do not make this section long, 100 – 250 words. 3. Fact Check. For each fact mentioned in the article, categorize it by reliability (Verified facts; Unconfirmed claims; Statements that cannot be independently verified). Write down a short explanation of your evaluation. Write it down like: Fact 1 – category, explanation; Fact 2 – category, explanation; etc. Do not make this section long, 100 – 250 words. Output only the article text. Do not add any introductions, explanations, summaries, or conclusions. Do not say anything before or after the article. Just the article. Do not include a title also.
2. Write a clear, concise, and neutral headline for the article below. Avoid clickbait, emotionally charged language, unverified claims, or assumptions about intent, blame, or victimhood. Attribute contested information to sources (e.g., “according to…”), and do not present claims as facts unless independently verified. The headline should inform, not persuade. Write only the title, do not add any other information in your response.
3. Determine a single section to categorize the article. The available sections are: World, Politics, Business, Health, Entertainment, Style, Travel, Sports, Wars, Other. Write only the name of the section, capitalized first letter. Do not add any other information in your response.