Agenda-driven journalism isn't a substitute for the real thing
The Chronicle seems to have let anti-death-penalty fervor trump solid journalism again with today's coverage of a report, commissioned by the Innocence Project, that contends an innocent man may have been executed in Texas because of erroneous assumptions about scientific evidence in an arson case.
In all honesty, the Innocence Project raises legitimate concerns with this case. In no way do I wish to minimize those concerns. However, the journalistic problem is that the Chronicle presents the Innocence Project's contentions as the only view. Readers are inevitably drawn to the conclusion that the state executed an innocent man based on faulty investigative techniques and assumptions about arson evidence.
The state's other major newspapers presented a more balanced story. Here is a competing view that appeared in the Austin American Statesman's story:
A spokesman for the Texas Department of Insurance, which includes the state fire marshal's office, disputed the report's conclusions.
"We're very confident in the investigations that we conduct," spokesman Jerry Hagins said. "It's a very professional organization. I can say with complete confidence that we can stand by that investigation that they're talking about even though I haven't seen that report."
That said, Hagins continued, the agency will examine the report "to make sure it's good science and not somebody with an opinion. If it makes valid points, of course we'll look at it and consider it because science changes and we're always learning more."
And here is a competing view that appeared in the Dallas Morning News' story (the best coverage I've seen -- not surprising, really, since the DMN is the best newspaper in the state):
John Howard Jackson, a state district judge in Navarro County who prosecuted Mr. Willingham in 1992, agreed that his investigators' techniques were flawed.
But Judge Jackson insisted there was strong evidence that pointed to Mr. Willingham's guilt, including his alleged confession to a jailhouse snitch who testified against him.
"This particular innocence project wants to adopt Todd Willingham as a poster child, when Todd Willingham was a psychopathic child-killer," Judge Jackson said Tuesday.
[snip]
Judge Jackson maintained Tuesday that burn patterns, since repudiated by fire experts, were useful to the investigation. The former prosecutor cited "a burn pattern that starts in the front of the house and makes a left turn into the room where the children were."
Judge Jackson said several other factors pointed to Mr. Willingham's guilt: The suspect didn't have any burns on his feet – the judge said he would have if the suspect had run through a burning house – and there was little carbon monoxide in his lungs.
"Armchair experts are, 15 years later, trying to overcome what everybody thought was a common sense approach at the time," he said.
Those competing views may not be compelling to readers, or they may. The important thing is that two newspapers included the contrary views, whereas the anti-death-penalty Chronicle seemingly let its agenda trump quality journalism.
Nobody should object to the request from Barry Sheck and Rodney Ellis for the Texas Forensic Science Commission to investigate the matter. It may well turn out that we do conclude an innocent man was executed based on faulty scientific evidence. Unfortunately, the Chronicle story seems to have presented that conclusion already -- prematurely.
Posted by Kevin Whited @ 05/03/06 10:32 PM | Print |
Previous Entry | Home | Next Entry
ADVERTISING
DISCLAIMER
All content © 2004-09, blogHOUSTON and the respective authors.
blogHOUSTON.net is powered by Nucleus.
Site design and Nucleus customization are by Kevin Whited.