We will see in due course if the vehicle is ever identified officially by brand, make, model and year.
Yes, we will. But more importantly, we will see whether the final report says the vehicle was a diesel ICE vehicle. In fact, I am very confident it will say that. I do wonder, however, how you will react to the report when it says there was no lithium battery in the initial vehicle that caught fire.
I would disagree the press report things accurately. For example, a press release saying 'X could be back after Easter' is invariably transformed into, 'X back after Easter'. Or 'Could this be the end of the triple lock' becomes, 'Triple Lock to end!' and anything that could be controversial is put in quotation marks and attributed to 'sources'. I shouldn't trust how news is reported in the tabloids if I were you.
This is utterly irrelevant. I've seen many sites that explicitly quoted the press briefing, including the "pending verification" caveat.
The website doesn't have an author so it is not official as is Hopkinson's press release.
What utter nonsense. The press release was released by the fire department. It is prominently displayed on the fire department website and classified as a press release. It is obviously an official press release of the Bedfordshire Fire and Rescue Service.
You are just making **** up.
It simply reiterates what he said but gets rid of the conditional tense.
The "pending verification" caveat is not a "conditional tense", but let's ignore that.
By stating the conclusion that the vehicle is a diesel without "pending verification", the press release shows that the confidence in this conclusion has grown since October 11; that is, it shows that the verification has been found.
Moreover, you forget that it eliminates any question of whether the vehicle was a hybrid. This was something you thought was very plausible back on Mar. 17 and now you sort of, kind of know better. Except when you don't.