Real Name: Chris Cobler Address: 311 E. Constitution St. Victoria, TX 77901 Gender: male Member Since: September 16, 2007 Last Signed In: October 11, 2008 Profile Views: 2299 Blog Views: 14340 Who's Got Spirit? We hope our readers are the ultimate winners Can you tell the election is only a month away? Where do you turn for listings about businesses? Crikey, why did we write about alligator hunting? Aggies, butterflies, Pandora radio, and keeping Victoria beautiful What turns regular people into monsters? What is it about stories involving dogs? What new technology will change the world? Be true to your school September 07 October 07 November 07 December 07 January 08 February 08 March 08 April 08 May 08 June 08 July 08 August 08 September 08 October 08 
RSS 2.0    |
|
|
What did you think of Tuesday's coverage?
Despite being a part of Tuesday's story, we tried hard to cover all sides of the indictments fairly, accurately and completely.
Of course, any work done under daily deadline pressure is far from perfect. Even so, I'm proud of the work the staff did, producing six stories, a chronology of events, two compelling photos, a dramatic front-page design, and video coverage that topped what you could see on the local TV station. This was a big story, and it required a journalistic effort to match. Most importantly, most of the online discussion has focused on the issues covered in the stories and not on the Advocate's news coverage. We'll keep trying our best to rise to this challenge, even though we can't avoid the fact that the Advocate is featured in the indictments. For a comparison, you might consider how the Associated Press summarized the story by clicking here. The Houston Chronicle and other media outlets around the state picked up the story today. Our editorial board takes a strong position on the case in Thursday's edition. We hope others with a differing view will write letters, guest columns and online comments in response. No one can say for sure how any of this will turn out. What I am sure of is the importance of tough, fair news coverage. 21 comments from 10 users
posted by
Luminary
on May 31, 2008 at 11:05 AM
& nbsp; Once again faulty memory, Archer Parr went to prison for perjury for telling the Grand Jury over and over that he could not remember. He answered all questions with "I don't have any recollection" or some variant of that. posted by
Luminary
on May 30, 2008 at 05:52 PM
George Parr went to prison for income tax evasion. His brother Archer went to prison for perjury. Sorry, for the faulty recollection. They were titans in south Texas politics. posted by
Luminary
on May 30, 2008 at 04:55 PM
& nbsp; This story may go down in Texas history to rival the fall from power of The Duke of Duval, George Parr. An unintentional IRS audit in Austin, Texas led to his demise and ultimate conviction on perjury charges for pleading the 5th Amendment during Grand Jury deliberations. posted by
ShureleeUJest
on May 30, 2008 at 04:04 PM
Here's my comment that I left on Gage's blog: "Here's a comment for you Gabe.... Approximately 187 reports rejected by Tyler and company but not provided to you are available at the VPD under the Open Records Act. Some of the nastier rejections are contained there-in. you blew it pal by "reviewing" only the sanitized records that Tyler gave you, because there were "too many". You started strong, but you ended with a whimper - no Pulitzer for you!" posted by
KittyKatz
on May 30, 2008 at 09:41 AM
Mr. Cobler & South Texas guy, I believe it was our DA Steve Tyler who said in an interview on KAVU that Mr. Smith pleaded the 5th during a GJ session. If I remember correctly, he comically mocked him pleading the 5th!! You might want to search the archives to verify. I wonder why it is alright for Mr. Tyler to release who said what to the Grand Jury but no one else??!! Keep up the good work VA!! posted by
ChrisCobler
on May 29, 2008 at 07:17 PM
Thank you for all of the feedback. I've been away from the computer most of the afternoon waiting at the sheriff's department and the police department, where officers and civilian police academy members were anticipating more indictments. We're now hearing those indictments will be forthcoming in the morning. We'll keep you posted and update the Web as soon as we hear.Thinksalot, I appreciate your tip about the former chief. I wasn't here then, but I'll talk with government reporter David Tewes and local editor Becky Cooper, who each have two decades' worth of community history stored in their brains. We'll be checking into this angle and many others as the story moves forward. While racing to keep up with the news, we're having trouble keeping up with all of the online comments. If you have a specific point you think bears investigating, please call or e-mail us directly. posted by
bighorn
on May 29, 2008 at 05:47 PM
Chris: Thanks for the paper's reporting. I just read the VicAd' opinion of these events, and I fail to agree with your view. Likely not a big surprise. Didn't want you to get the big head over Tuesdays coverage. I appear to be one of the few posters who understand the difference between "journalism" and "opinion". And I appreciate your understanding that difference. The past days reporting clearly show you do. Thanks. posted by
thinksalot
on May 29, 2008 at 01:19 PM
Chris, The Advocate is more than part of the story, it is a key protagonist. I'm not complaining, mind you. This is a traditional role of the media. What I am saying is that knowing your position, we readers must naturally be suspicious of the reporting as this story moves along. But you knew that. So, I question your judgement in showing your hand so soon. Was it to warn us not to trust the reporting? Unlikely. Perhaps it is an attempt to defend your involvement? Either way, I must admit that as the actual reporting goes, you are offering a pretty balanced picture so far. I would like to suggest that as part of your "investigation" you take another look at the circumstances surrounding the departure of former Chief Tim Braaten. The public discourse at the time between him and former city attorney Smith may give you insight into what's happening now. Braaten might even be willing to offer a comment or two. It's worth a try, eh? Thanks for listening. posted by
Luminary
on May 29, 2008 at 12:53 PM
JAPS BOMB PEARL HARBOR! Your banner headline of Tuesdays coverage rivaled that epic event .of the 20th Century. Maybe a lot of crimes are committed without criminal intent. I got a ticket for speeding once and I did not even realize I was going over the speed limit. posted by
thewaywardwind
on May 29, 2008 at 10:59 AM
Southtexasguy wrote that the opinion of the paper "is a slap in the face to the grand jurors who listened to all the evidence." The grand jurors didn't get to listen to ALL the evidence. The defense is not allowed to present evidence in grand jury proceedings, thus the old saw that the DA can get an indictment against a ham sandwich. Grand juries seldom return no bills when a district attorney asks for an indictment. This is the stunt that the former DA used so often in his vendettas against the fire department and other fire officials of Victoria County. He'd get an indictment, the newspaper and television news would carry the story and a person's reputation would be ruined. After the defendant spent thousands of dollars on legal fees, the DA would drop the charges, saying there wasn't enough evidence to convict at trial. Texas district attorneys have tremendous power and not all of them use that power wisely. posted by
ChrisCobler
on May 29, 2008 at 09:54 AM
South Texas Guy,I asked that very about grand jury testimony to our lawyer, and she said it almost never became public. The DA, though, has the power to release information from the hearing, as she explained the process. Chris posted by
southtexasguy
on May 29, 2008 at 09:34 AM
Mr. Cobler, The information about Mr. Smith supposedly pleading the 5th amendment may have just been a rumor. If it was just a rumor, and I repeated it here, I apologize. Do you know if GJ testmony is ever made public? If so, when? posted by
ChrisCobler
on May 29, 2008 at 09:22 AM
Goliad Chica and Texas Mom,Gracias. Our goal is to report without fear or favor. I know y'all will keep us straight if we fall off that razor's edge. Chris posted by
ChrisCobler
on May 29, 2008 at 09:18 AM
Dear South Texas Guy,We don't know whether Mr. Smith took the Fifth during grand jury testimony. Even if we did, we could be criminally prosecuted for reporting the testimony from a grand jury proceeding. I hope such facts come out in subsequent open court proceedings, and we'll be sure to report them if they do. In my mind, secrecy invites speculation. In terms of whether Mr. Smith should have been involved in the criminal investigation, that's clearly a central question in this story. Why was he? Do you believe him when he says he was concerned about the Ratcliff investigation and representing the interests of the city police department? We'll keep digging to try to learn the answers to these and other questions. Regarding the editorial board's opinion about "a reasonable person," I agree that's a point worthy of much debate. Is it too early to state this opinion? That's definitely a danger whenever commenting on court cases that aren't completed. However, our editorial board decided this public issue was too important to wait to comment. I suspect the board will need to comment again as the case moves forward. Hope that helps explain our thinking. Chris posted by
GoliadChica
on May 29, 2008 at 09:17 AM
I think y'all are doing a marvelous job of bringing the information for us while trying to walk a razor's edge. You have taken the "good ol' boys" on - what c*jones! Keep up the good work. |
