Turns out I won't be on Freestyle this Friday after all. It's still going ahead, but it's looking like it will be Monday or Tuesday before you get to hear my lovely voice on air. I hope you can all handle the suspense.
Ever since the supposed sex ring story broke, the other thing I was curious about, other than how a git as large as Deering gets to be police chief, is what was the "Downtown fast food business" implicated in the story. I had my suspicions, but obviously it's a little difficult to figure that out from Iqaluit.
That's why I knew Blue Kaffee was going to be useful at some point. Several people on one of the boards are reporting that it is exactly the business I suspected it was. CBC also tipped it off earlier in the day when they ran a story about downtown businesses and if they had seen anything unusual. Funny how the manager of Dooley's was interviewed. Only a few fast food places near there, right?
I wonder how big and terrible this is going to be before it's all over...
Currently Playing
Lonely Runs Both Ways - Alison Krauss and Union Station
4 comments:
"a git as large as Deering."
Ok, he's a big man... for a photo of Deering, click to Craig's old paper, at http://www.theexpress.ca/index.cfm?iid=960
But a git? That seems harsh. What makes him a git?
That he shut your newspaper out of developing news stories because you gave the RNC a harsh editorial? So what. That just means he takes it personally, and may be petty.
That he was on an open line show, responding to a parent spilling the news about an ongoing RNC investigation? So what? It's his job to talk to the public about these things, mostly to tell us his force is on the ball and we can expect the results of the investigation to lead to facts that can be published at a later date.
That he has chastized media for leaking a story in a way that may harm his investigation? So what? If anything, it looks like the media has done a lot of rumour mongering which will likely result in a compromised police investigation.
None of these make him a git.
git - a person who is deemed to be despicable or contemptible; "only a rotter would do that"; "kill the rat"; "throw the bum out"; "you cowardly little pukes!"; "the British call a contemptible person a `git'" - from http://www.thefreedictionary.com/git
Are there details I'm missing?
Well, there's all the alledged sexual harrassment he was involved in as well. A few female members of the RNC have had problems with him and lawsuits were launched. What their current status is, I'm honestly not sure. I believe they were given up on, but I'm not sure.
Also, I just like the word git. I have a fondness for British obscenities.
Also, and here is one of the things about him yelling at the media about jeopardizing the investigation. He said by reporting wht they had, the criminals might flee or destroy information.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think he's also said that there was no danger from the ring because they had already seized computers, etc.
So wouldn't the folks being investigated kind of clued in at this point that the jig was up?
He's pissed at the media because he can't control them, doesn't understand its role and has a short temper.
He said by reporting wht they had, the criminals might flee or destroy information.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think he's also said that there was no danger from the ring because they had already seized computers, etc.
-------
Actually Craig, there is a way to reconcile the two statements, as I've been explaining all weekend. There are two crimes being committed here--the act of making the underage porn and the act of downloading/having it in your possession. Thus there are two possible groups of criminals. The way I read it, the RNC have executed search warrants and taken the computers of one group (the makers of the porn) and thus they are now out of the business. However, they have not tracked down all of the second group (the johns) and won't be able to until they go through the computers to see what's there. In the meantime, the second group have been tipped off and are likely deleting stuff like mad. There you go.
Brian Callahan's latest piece in Saturday's Telegram was the most incredibly unprofessional piece of innuendo-dropping crap I've ever read, worthy only of the Enquirer, not to mention being poorly written. Given that example, I'd suspect that Brian left out an important part of Deering's interview which alluded to exactly that in some way and conflated quotes and situations. I've had this discussion with you before but if there is one thing that the Telegram and the CBC and the Express could never do--it's report crime stories correctly. The reporters lack the basic knowledge of the court system and the investigation system for one.
(Sorry--it was Friday's Telegram and not Saturday's.) Also, to clarify--when writing a story from notes and things (I've done it too and it is sometimes hard to remember everything that went on), it is easy to forget the train of though that went on in an interview. So, yes, I can see how the confusion about (possibly) two separate groups of crooks can happen and seemingly contradictory statements get published. However, if there was a little more knowledge about the type of charges likely to arise from this situation, the statements could have been checked and possibly reconciled before publication.
Post a Comment