This week I got my first email from a family member since we expanded our news coverage of courts. As I’ve said repeatedly, it’s an area I’ve wanted to expand since we started the paper, because I felt like we were lacking in follow through. People would see the arrests. They would see the indictments. But they didn’t see what happened next.
They didn’t see what charges were thrown out – either due to lack of evidence or as part of a plea agreement.
The didn’t see what the defendant was ultimately convicted of, or how they were sentenced.
Perhaps most importantly, at least for those who find themselves thrust into the news following an arrest, if a defendant was found not guilty, or charges were dismissed, that wasn’t reflected anywhere either.
I don’t enjoy covering courts. You have to look, objectively, at some of the worst aspects of human society. Not just the actions that those accused of a crime might have engaged in, but how those actions reverberate in the victims of their crimes. How they impact family and echo down through generations, for both the accuser and the accused.
Sometimes you have to look at the evil in the hearts of those who would make false allegations for their own petty reasons – or at least consider it.
And, way too often, you see the impacts of generational poverty, of how the bad decisions of the parents trickle down to bad decisions in the children. You see how the cycle is self-perpetuating. You see all this, and you’re powerless to change it.
It isn’t your job to change it. If you’re a journalist, it’s your job to document it. That’s it.
Sometimes that documentation can be used to elicit change. Sometimes it can inspire someone to try a different approach. If I’m being optimistic I’d say it can show people the patterns they need to avoid falling into so they can break the cycle.
Mostly, it’s just documentation though.
Despite buzzwords like “solutions journalism” flying around to describe stories and work that focus on those attempting to make positive changes, the job of the journalist is still just to document that story.
So, it’s hard when a family member – hurt and upset about the coverage of their beloved relative – reaches out to express the pain your story has caused them. It’s never our intent to hurt family members, and we understand it’s inevitable some will be upset by our coverage.
However, we can’t let that keep us from providing our readers access to the content of public records. The information we share is available to anyone who goes to the courthouse and requests it from the clerk, or takes the time to show up and sit in a courtroom. But knowing what specifically to ask for can be confusing. Understanding what you’re reading, and interpreting all the abbreviations and shorthand, is another hurdle. And sitting in a courtroom during proceedings requires time, which is in short supply for all of us.
This is why the newspaper is important. Because we can be there when you can’t. This is why it’s important to me that we take advantage of our new reporters to increase our coverage of courts. To show up when we can, and to spend the time reading through courtroom notes and documentation when we can’t.
Sometimes people aren’t going to be happy with that. Sometimes it’s going to make them angry. Or it’s going to make them sad. That isn’t our intention, but it would be naïve to believe the intention matters when it comes to these issues.
What we can – and do – promise to do is remain objective. To report only what happens in the courtroom, or what is reflected in the documentation and records we’ve seen. We promise to be fact based, because that’s the best we can do.
