1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

78-year-old mayor dukes it out with publisher

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Evil ... Thy name is Orville Redenbacher!!, Jul 20, 2010.

  1. Saw this on Foxnews.com and it got my attention ...

    I had to find out about the alleged rape ...
    Here is a link to that story ... There is no smoking gun.
    I'm not sure I would have run it. I can see why the mayor filed the lawsuit.

  2. Armchair_QB

    Armchair_QB Well-Known Member

    Wow. Thin doesn't begin to describe that.
  3. CR19

    CR19 Member

    Reviving a 62-year old case? Seems a litte bit of a stretch to bring that story back to life.
  4. ucacm

    ucacm Active Member

    If I lived in Gallup, I'd let the other guy beat me to death.
  5. dooley_womack1

    dooley_womack1 Well-Known Member

    Wonder if that paper runs a lot of polls.
  6. HanSenSE

    HanSenSE Well-Known Member

    Slow news day. But aren't they all in Gallup?
  7. Sounds like the dredged it up twice. In 96 when the guy ran for commission and again recently.
  8. 93Devil

    93Devil Well-Known Member

    Written by a correspondent?

    You cannot fault the paper for trying to find the truth, but there is an expiration date on stuff like this, right? Or this is almost like media double jeopardy?
  9. CR19

    CR19 Member

    You can go back to stuff that relates directly to the story. If a member of a Board of Health lost their medical license, there isn't a time limit on reporting that. The problem with this story is that it seems to only be a revival of an old story with no present consequences. One quote from the story is the most telling thing:

    "These are not new allegations."
  10. 93Devil

    93Devil Well-Known Member

    That's what I mean. You can retry a case with new information or evidence, just like to can rewrite the story if something new has been dug up.

    But just to reprint it with nothing new? That seems wrong.
  11. Armchair_QB

    Armchair_QB Well-Known Member

  12. murphyc

    murphyc Well-Known Member

    Ha, just what I was thinking.
    The story makes a number of references to court records no longer being available, yet they were reported on in 1996. So did the paper get rid of those notes used for the 1996 story?
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page