Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Legal News Blogs -> Lawbeat

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Legal News

: Lawbeat

Tyler "swingers" case reveals reporter-DA relationship

By Mark Obbie

ADVERTISEMENTS

Ah, life in a small-town courthouse. This Tyler Telegraph story by Kenneth Dean attempts to prove one thing, but actually proves the opposite. The story -- reporting that the judge hearing a child sex-abuse case has allowed reporters back in to cover the proceedings, even though they are subpoenaed to testify in a change-of-venue hearing -- quotes the paper's executive editor, Jim Giametta, in a First Amendment-flag-waving statement. A story yesterday, also by Dean, similarly quoted the paper's M.E., Dave Berry, on how fair and righteous the paper is in its coverage of the case, in which the defendant is charged with heinous crimes that have already sent co-defendants to prison for life. And why would reporters, as opposed to a circulation executive, have to testify? Dean doesn't get that from the defense attorney, or from his own colleague, but from the AP, whose Paul Weber had this tidbit on Monday: because Knaupp and the TV reporter previously dated the DA. Dean's first-day story barely mentions that aspect. Today's story gives Knaupp an open mic to put her spin on the messy details:

Responding to Davidson’s allegations, Ms. Knaupp said, “I am in the business of reporting the news, not making the news. I keep my personal and professional lives separate.” Ms. Knaupp and Murphy, two single adults, dated, but the relationship ended more than five months ago, long before the trials in the Mineola Swinger’s Club case began. “The allegations by Thad Davidson that my coverage of this case is biased are wholly unfounded,” Ms. Knaupp said. “I believe anyone who reads my articles will see that.”

Five months is "long before" the trials began? Was she the courts reporter then? Why is she now? We don't find that out in the stories, but are treated to a terrifically one-sided account of the change-of-venue battle and of the underlying charges, which sometimes are stated as fact rather than as allegation. The defense may be desperately over-reaching, and Knaupp may be a heck of a reporter. But she and the paper cover themselves in shame for their handling of blatant conflict-of-interest revelations. (Via Criminal Justice Journalists)

Full post as published by Lawbeat on June 25, 2008 (boomark / email).