A bad day leads to a serious question
This has been a grim day in our newsroom. And it has nothing to do with maybe-layoffs, downsizing or revenue declines. I’ll describe it then ask a few questions that I think all news organizations must now consider. But first you will have to suffer through some background.
Those who read the post below about our use of Twitter in a major capital trial have some slight inkling of the horrific, unexplainable evil perpetrated on a community and on two innocent children by convicted murderer Joseph Duncan.
The original crime, the bludgeoning murder of three people and the kidnapping of two young children, was the biggest local story of the year at the time. For weeks after the kidnapping authorities searched for the two children. Duncan eventually was arrested at a Denny’s in Coeur d’Alene Idaho when a waitress recognized his child companion as 6-year-old Shasta Groene, one of the kidnapped children. The story ballooned into a horrific crime saga when the burned remains of 9-year-old Dylan Groene were found at a remote campsite in the Lolo National Forest in Montana.
As the case against Duncan mounted, it became clear that the young boy was subjected to the worst kind of sexual abuse and torture before Duncan blew him to pieces with a sawed-off-shotgun at point blank range.
Duncan may be tried in Idaho courts someday for the first three murders. But the kidnapping, torture and killing of Dylan Groene happened on federal land so the feds got the first crack at the killer. Law enforcement authorities agreed Duncan would be more likely to receive the death suffer quick execution if he were tried first for the federal crimes.
Duncan subsequently pled guilty in federal court to all of the charges against him. Beginning last week, a jury sitting in Boise began to consider whether or not Duncan should be executed with life in prison the alternative.
This has been a very tough case for us to cover. Duncan chose to serve as his own defense attorney and his courtroom conduct has been bizarre, leading some to believe he wants death. Testimony over the last nine days has produced in escalating detail a picture of Duncan’s crime that truly cannot be described. In 36 years in the business, I’ve never seen anything like it.
But today was the worst. Duncan videotaped much of what happened at the Lolo campsite. Today, the jurors and courtroom observers, including our reporter, watched a 42-minute video showing Duncan torturing the boy. My hands are shaking even as I write these words. Because of the amazing work of SR reporter Betsy Russell, in combination with the Twitter reporting of Meghan Cuniff from a separate media room, outsiders were given a written glimpse, and just a glimpse, of the video’s contents. We were conservative in what we reported, posted and sent over Twitter. And still it was enough to nauseate even the most hardened journalists in our newsroom.
I was sick to my stomach when I appeared on our AM-radio talk show explaining how and why we chose to report even limited details.
Bear with me. I am working up to some important questions.
At various times early in the current proceedings and right up to today, motions were filed with the court asking that the courtroom be closed during any testimony by the surviving Groene child, a witness to everything that occurred at Lolo, and also closed during the showing of the horrific videotape.
My newspaper, joined by more than a dozen media outlets in the region, fought those motions on grounds that closing the courtroom would deprive citizens of the knowledge they would need to weigh the appropriateness of the final verdict. At one point the federal judge did the Solomon thing and ruled in favor of closing the courtroom for Shasta Groene’s testimony and subsequent cross-examination by her tortuerer but also ruling that the video should be shown in open court.
The closure ruling was appealed by us to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals which affirmed the judge’s decision.
Late yesterday, the children’s father, Steve Groene, speaking through an electronic voice box because of throat cancer, asked the judge once again to close the court during the showing of the video, or at least limit the showing to jurors only. Our newspaper filed a countermotion with the judge supporting his original decision. We prevailed.
Throughout all of this the backlash against the paper has been intense. Some demanded to know why we would victimize little Shasta, now nine, by reporting on her testimony and cross examination. That died down somewhat when all parties agreed that previously videotaped statements to police would eliminate the need for a personal appearance. But the fight to keep the court open for today’s video showing continued right up to the last minute. The pushback on that issue has been just as intense. We will lose some subscribers. And even though our critics accuse us of sensationalizing the story (if that were possible) to sell papers, editors know that stories like this depress readership.
So we tell ourselves we fought the court fight for larger principles, important principles that we know can be overshadowed by the intense emotions the case produces in all of us.
Pursuing the court fight was an easy decision for us. After all, we’re committed to those larger principles. But is there a point where common sense and compassion trump a news organization’s commitment to principle?
Would our trial coverage been less effective had we given in to the closed courtroom requests? In a case this open and shut, is the insight gained from today’s events really necessary to assess the quality of justice served?
I remain convinced we did the right thing. I am still fully committed to the principles. But it isn’t heresy to ask the question: In the contemporary, news-saturated world is consideration for the feelings of citizens more important than keeping them fully informed.
What do you think?
steve
Tags: editors, fair trial, Joseph Duncan, journalism, newspaper, newspaper ethics
August 21st, 2008 at 8:14 pm
Hi Steve, Overall you are doing a good job in difficult circumstances (industry changes, re-org, this story, etc)
Joseph Duncan appears to be using the media and the courtroom process to further his own twisted thoughts and agenda, whatever they may be.
If Duncan’s goal was to continue to torture, he succeeded.
I am not sure if the media is a victim too, or in Duncan’s mind, a co-conspirator in his games but this was probably not a good case on which to push the “we did it for principles” argument.
The “fully” informed argument too has problems since you and your staff make choices every day as to which stories to cover and which evidence to include in each story. Does fighting to keep us “fully informed” on this obscure and deranged lunatic help us be better citizens?
When you ask the question “But is there a point where common sense and compassion trump a news organization’s commitment to principle?” I think perhaps you have answered your own question here.
Thank you,
Ed
P.S. On a brighter note, I am looking forward to the new web site unveiling in 2 weeks!
August 21st, 2008 at 9:39 pm
Steve,
-
First things first;
1) You did the right thing. (although it feels dirty/wrong…it was right)
Although the griminess of this trial leads a decent and ethical man to question the journalistic duty to “inform the public”, there is a higher calling that your newspaper performs in this disgusting case. I would argue that the crimes committed here are so very heinous that it helps us to understand the devious mind of our societies’ miscreants, therefore causing us to be far more vigilant in protecting our children. Can you imagine how many people are now locking their backdoors after hearing Duncan mention he would have abhorted if the back door had been locked ?
-
I was not following this story closely until recently. When I read on the twitter page about the young boys head exploding in the campfire and some of the material splattered onto Shasta, his 5 year old sister. The horror of it is beyond the creativity of Stephen King. This story is so devastating and lurid, it is simply diabolical how enormously evil Duncan is. With so many moments of pure shock and awe, I am certain hollywood or some independent film maker will make a spectacle of this…..story ? Is it right to call this a story ? It feels dirty just writing about it.
-
The anguish of a father trying to protect the dignity of a dead 9 year old son from the leering eyes of those in the courtroom. Especially those who had no direct relation to the case. Those merely gawking at this entensely private and painful moment in a fathers public hell. It brings to mind a comparison between the biblical JOB and Mr Groehne. He has been put through years of soul rendering torture.
-
In scanning back through Betsy Russells coverage from 2 days ago, the psychic damage this case has brought to your staff is something that is more than unsettling. Betsy waking up, frozen in fear as sounds in the dark paralyze this grizzled reporter of 30 years. Couple that with Meaghan mentioning the juxtaposition of feeling her unborn baby kick while she is watching the death of another child. It baffles the mind when you attempt to make sense of this criminal. Yelling at God while raping a young child, as if to challenge God “See, I told you so, no GOD would allow me to do this evil….Stop Me”. I hope the Spokesman offers, and possibly encourages, recuperative therapy for both reporters. Maybe a week off to recharge their batteries if you will. PTSD does not only effect soldiers. A week on the Oregon coast to leave behind the sludge this trial has left on their collective memory. I know the budget is tight, but….just a thought.
-
On another topic. This case cries out for the death penalty. I would argue, however, the exact opposite. You might recall that Ted Bundy tried to lengthen his life by offering more death locations and insight into the diabolical mind of a rare specimen of evil. Death is too good for Duncan. We can-(maybe)-learn from Duncan how it is that he came to be so incredibly devilish. Reconciling that with my utter compassion for Steve Groehne is impossible. I know for a fact that if these crimes were committed against my children I would want the death penalty…and the opportunity to finalize justice with my own bare hands.
-
(Back on task…I digress)
-
Steve, you asked:
———————
“Would our trial coverage(have)been less effective had we given in to the closed courtroom requests” ? ~~YES~~
-
“In a case this open and shut, is the insight gained from today’s events really necessary to assess the quality of justice served” ? ~~YES~~
-
This case actually reminds me a little of the movie “SEVEN”, where Kevin Spacey portrays a similarly narcissistic gargoyle. Steve….it is clear that you are somewhat tortured by the decisions you have been forced to make. Your writing clearly displays the anguish of your predicament. In reading between the lines, I think you feel compassion for Steve Groehne. I believe this shows your decency as both a man and an editor. I certainly would not want to be the attorney arguing for open courts in a case where you know it will deepen the pain for the father of brutally murdered children.
-
Throughout this trial, I keep seing the sweaty war-painted face of Marlon Brandon…..chanting in a chilling whisper….
-
The horror…….The horror.
-
David Elton
August 22nd, 2008 at 11:39 am
Steve, No “thoughts” on this , but some feelings.. I have chosen not to participate in reading or following this case, in the same fashion as I choose to drive by automobile accidents IF there is adequate help present. So a choice is available.. when there is adequate “support” for any of the difficult process’s we face as humans.. the rest of us can step aside, or pass by without any concerns that the “right thing” (Spike Lee) is going to be done.
If there is no help at an accident scene, or no police at a dangerous interaction I WILL act… and have many times… but given that there is someone else on the scene that is competent, i will continue to drive on by….
So in that context perhaps your “pursuit” was not necessary. I trusted the courts to do the “right thing” without me feeling they needed me to offer my oversight, and thus subject myself and my already traumatized ( from prior instances) brain to more trauma.
I wrote a personal email to Ms Russell… and I would pray that the staff at the Review affords themselves of some sort of group counseling/therapy of the type that we made available on the King County Crisis line to victims of group trauma/suicides/public events.
Give it some thought/feeling… shalom Gus
August 23rd, 2008 at 7:50 am
Duncan was already tried for the three Idaho murders. He plead guilty before the trial started. Surely you should know this. The feds didn’t get first crack.
August 23rd, 2008 at 3:38 pm
Steve-
It is my belief that Mr. Groene’s wishes should have been honored. The only people to view that tape should have been those involved directly with the case. Not a single citizen should have remained. The jury and a few chosen from the media and that’s all. Betsy Russell did an outstanding job and I do believe that we are all now more informed about how an evil mind works. That we all needed to know about. It is my hope now that because of her excellent journalism the public and the justice system will change the way we handle these monster’s cases. I think now that the public knows and is informed, there will be more of a demand and outcry the put these monters out of their evil misery for good. They cannot be rehabilitated, they do not deserve to live.
August 24th, 2008 at 7:10 am
Good morning… I am on a list serve for “Word of the Day” and today’s “word” from the recently deceased Russian author resonates this morn:
The line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either — but right through every human heart — and through all human hearts. This line shifts. Inside us, it oscillates with the years. And even within hearts overwhelmed by evil, one small bridgehead of good is retained.
Alexander Solzhenitsyn
Gulag Archipelago
I choose to remain hopeful, that in all people there is a kernel of goodness…. without that hope, the world cannot go on. Gus
August 24th, 2008 at 9:13 am
Gus that was beautiful and touching-thanks for sharing it. The only good that came from that monster’s heart was sparing Shasta. I hope her life will be a good one-she deserves that more than anyone.
August 25th, 2008 at 5:19 pm
Thank you Laura. Sad to say, at age 64, with many years experience working with and being with abused and PTSD in our communities, Shasta may have a chance, only if there is adequate therapy, with a multifaceted approach. Some recent studies show that the “brain wiring” that is actually measurably altered by three or more instances of “trauma” can actually be “unwired” and re programed. More commonly it is “tamped down” for a lifetime that is a bit less than functional, and surfaces at age 45-50 when our neuro-hormonal balance shifts. An understanding and conversant family, and later partner/spouse can make a great deal of difference… but it does take deep understanding and facing the issues. Put your prayers for healing in place for this dear child. Gus
August 26th, 2008 at 4:07 pm
Jack,
The feds got first crack at charges for killing Dylan. The Kootenai County cased involved Brenda, Slade and Brenda’s fiance.
I think it would’ve been best for all concerned if it ended there. Duncan got three consecutive life sentences. He’s going to die in custody either way.
August 26th, 2008 at 9:57 pm
What Laura said: It is my belief that Mr. Groene’s wishes should have been honored. The only people to view that tape should have been those involved directly with the case.
I can understand the larger principles involved, but at the same time, the grief and trauma of the family must be weighed in this instance. Judgment call. I would have erred on the side of the family.
August 27th, 2008 at 5:49 am
[...] their editor, Steven A. Smith, has posted an account of how and why the newspaper fought to have a horrifying video (of the torture and murder of [...]
August 27th, 2008 at 11:20 am
David Elton (Spokane) writes: [Your comment is awaiting moderation.]
————————————————————————————–
Dear Mindy McAdams,
-
You stated:
“Smith wrote a great and moving blog post, but he talked too much about the horror of the crime”….Respectfully, I disagree with you. The whole point of the argument is the weight of the appropriateness for public consumption as well as the potential damage to an already immensely grieving father. Are you aware of the specifics ? Steve Smith was exactly right in his editorial choices, and if you looked at it more objectively you might just agree.
~Case in point below~
-
You stated:
“When we step out to explain to the public — or rather, when we pull back the curtain and show them the engine, the gears and pistons, of how journalism works, we need to remember that we have our own jargon, our own shortcuts and slang — our own odd culture. The public wasn’t brought up in our culture, and things that are as clear as clean window glass to us can be much murkier to almost everyone else.”
-
I would submit to you that you look at this issue without a sense of objectivity. You mention your jargon and slang and this so-called culture of yours(journalism)as if it is more important than right and wrong. There is nothing wrong with being a strident journalist seeking the truth. But you need a dose of humanity. Steve Smith, as you duly note, felt deeply about this, just as his reporters were having nightmares and sleeping problems. The visual horrors of this trial would make Stephen King blush. Steve Smith took that into consideration. I would ask you if there is nothing you would edit…no matter how horrific ? If your answer is no, I rest my case.
-
David Elton
Spokane, Washington
EltonResearch.com
———————————————
August 27, 2008 at 1:09 pm EST
[ http://mindymcadams.com/tojou/2008/behind-the-scenes-make-it-even-more-transparent/ ]
August 31st, 2008 at 7:33 pm
garyc, the feds get the only “crack” at Duncan for Dylan’s death because he took the kids across the state line. Idaho has no jurisdiction.