Tag Archives: #LexingtonHeraldLeader

Posted on by

And there they go again! The Lexington Herald-Leader publishes another photo of a white criminal suspect

It might not be quite as egregious as some others, because the man has some notoriety due to having been pardoned on a murder conviction, but there’s still the McClatchy Company’s policy on mugshots:

Publishing mugshots of arrestees has been shown to have lasting effects on both the people photographed and marginalized communities. The permanence of the internet can mean those arrested but not convicted of a crime have the photograph attached to their names forever. Beyond the personal impact, inappropriate publication of mugshots disproportionately harms people of color and those with mental illness. In fact, some police departments have started moving away from taking/releasing mugshots as a routine part of their procedures.

To address these concerns, McClatchy will not publish crime mugshots — online, or in print, from any newsroom or content-producing team — unless approved by an editor. To be clear, this means that in addition to photos accompanying text stories, McClatchy will not publish “Most wanted” or “Mugshot galleries” in slide-show, video or print.

Any exception to this policy must be approved by an editor. Editors considering an exception should ask:

  • Is there an urgent threat to the community?
  • Is this person a public official or the suspect in a hate crime?
  • Is this a serial killer suspect or a high-profile crime?

If an exception is made, editors will need to take an additional step with the Pub Center to confirm publication by making a note in the ‘package notes‘ field in Sluglife.

As I have previously stated, despite several Google searches, using various permutations, I have not been able to find this policy in written form. I found this tweet:

and a photograph I have previously used from another tweet, along with the Sacramento Bee’s precursor article.

So, here’s the story:

Kentucky man pardoned by Matt Bevin for 2014 homicide is back in jail, held for Feds

By John Cheves | May 31, 2021 | 12:33 PM | Updated 1:30 PM EDT

Patrick Baker, left, who was pardoned by Gov. Matt Bevin in 2019 after a reckless homicide conviction, was back in jail on Monday on an unspecified federal charge. Photo by Marcus Dorsey, Lexington Herald-Leader. Click to enlarge.

Federal authorities have jailed a Kentucky man who received one of former Gov. Matt Bevin’s controversial pardons in December 2019.

Patrick Brian Baker, 43, was convicted of reckless homicide in the death of Donald Mills during a Knox County home invasion in 2014. However, Baker maintained his innocence and blamed law enforcement for overlooking an alternative suspect in the case. In his pardon, Bevin described the evidence against Baker as “sketchy at best.”

Baker had served two years of a 19-year sentence when Bevin set him free.

Baker’s brother and sister-in-law held a political fundraiser in 2018 that raised $21,500 for Bevin, according to the Kentucky Registry for Election Finance. The couple donated $4,000 to Bevin.

Baker, who now has a Frankfort address, was held in the Laurel County Detention Center on Monday as a federal prisoner, according to the jail’s website. Jail officials would not identify the criminal charge that Baker faced; they referred media calls to the U.S. Marshal’s office. But federal offices were closed Monday for Memorial Day.

There’s more at the original, but Mr Baker, having been pardoned by former Governor Bevin, is not a convicted criminal. He is in jail right now, which means that he is not an “urgent threat to the community, nor is he a public official, nor the suspect in a hate crime, nor a suspected serial killer, nor the suspect in a high-profile crime.

So, why did the Herald-Leader choose to publish his photograph?

Remember: under the McClatchy policy, the article reporter does not have the discretion to publish a ‘mugshot,’ though it could be argued that this particular photo isn’t a police mugshot. Rather, an editor has to give his approval, and that means:

  • Peter Baniak, Executive Editor and General Manager;
  • Deedra Lawhead, Deputy Editor, Digital;
  • Brian Simms, Deputy Editor, Presentation:, or
  • John Stamper, Deputy Editor, Accountability

So, who approved the publication, and why? None of the listed reasons editors should consider in taking the decision to publish have been met. The only unusual circumstance is former Governor Bevin’s pardon of Mr Baker, but that isn’t among the criteria specified by McClatchy. Attempting to embarrass Mr Bevin is something that would be high on the list of the newspaper’s priorities, but that isn’t a reason to publish Mr Baker’s photo.

One of us suspects that the photo was published because Mr Baker is white, and that it would not have been published were he not white. Perhaps the Herald-Leader could give us a different reason?

Posted on by

Journolism: Newspapers don’t think their readers can handle the truth! Once again, the Lexington Herald-Leader gets racially selective in publishing mugshots

Have you ever heard of JournoList? It was an email list of 400 influential and politically liberal journalists, to facilitate communication between them across multiple newsrooms, the exposure of which called into question their objectivity. I use the term ‘journolism’ frequently when writing about media bias.

As we have previously noted, the McClatchy Company, which owns the Lexington Herald-Leader, has an explicit mugshot policy:

Publishing mugshots of arrestees has been shown to have lasting effects on both the people photographed and marginalized communities. The permanence of the internet can mean those arrested but not convicted of a crime have the photograph attached to their names forever. Beyond the personal impact, inappropriate publication of mugshots disproportionately harms people of color and those with mental illness. In fact, some police departments have started moving away from taking/releasing mugshots as a routine part of their procedures.

To address these concerns, McClatchy will not publish crime mugshots — online, or in print, from any newsroom or content-producing team — unless approved by an editor. To be clear, this means that in addition to photos accompanying text stories, McClatchy will not publish “Most wanted” or “Mugshot galleries” in slide-show, video or print.

Any exception to this policy must be approved by an editor. Editors considering an exception should ask:

  • Is there an urgent threat to the community?
  • Is this person a public official or the suspect in a hate crime?
  • Is this a serial killer suspect or a high-profile crime?

If an exception is made, editors will need to take an additional step with the Pub Center to confirm publication by making a note in the ‘package notes‘ field in Sluglife.

As I have previously stated, despite several Google searches, using various permutations, I have not been able to find this policy in written form. I found this tweet:

and a photograph I have previously used from another tweet, along with the Sacramento Bee’s precursor article. Assistant Managing Editor Ryan Lillis wrote:

The Sacramento Bee announced Wednesday it will limit the publication of police booking photos, surveillance photos and videos of alleged crimes, and composite sketches of suspects provided by law enforcement agencies.

Publishing these photographs and videos disproportionately harms people of color and those with mental illness, while also perpetuating stereotypes about who commits crime in our community.

McClatchy’s headquarters are located in the Sacramento Bee’s building.

And thus we return to the Herald-leader:

Eastern Kentucky man tries to run over a cop, flees police after being shot at

By Jeremy Chisenhall | May 28, 2021 | 8:13 AM

An Eastern Kentucky police officer shot at a suspect Thursday afternoon after the suspect allegedly tried to run the cop over, according to Kentucky State Police.

James Bussell, a 45-year-old from Owingsville, allegedly sped away from a Mount Sterling police officer during a traffic stop, made a U-turn and tried to run over the officer. The officer involved in the traffic stop fired his gun at Bussell, but didn’t hit him. The suspect made another U-turn and tried to run the cop over again, state police said.

After Bussell’s second attempt to run the officer over, his car got stuck, according to state police. He got out and fled on foot, state police said. The altercation didn’t result in any injuries, police said.

Clearly a bad dude. There’s more at the original, including this:

Well, how ’bout that? The Herald-Leader posted another photo, of a criminal suspect, this one coming from the Mt Starling, Kentucky, Police Department’s Facebook page.

Unlike the photos of Jessica Ahlbrand and Ronnie Helton,[1]The newspaper deleted Mr Helton’s mugshot from the article a couple of weeks after publication, by May 16. which the newspaper published, Mr Bussell is still on the loose. The text of the MSPD’s Facebook page and Jeremy Chisenhall’s newspaper article does not make clear that Mr Bussell fits as “an urgent threat to the community,” but he is charged with:

  1. Attempted Murder (Police Officer).
  2. Fleeing or Evading Police 1st Degree (Motor Vehicle).
  3. Wanton Endangerment 1st Degree (Police Officer).

Yeah, those are pretty serious, and I would not disagree with the assessment that Mr Bussell is a threat to the community. But so was Juanyah Jamal Clay, and the Herald-Leader declined to publish his mugshot when he was on the lam.

So, why did an editor approve of publishing Mr Bussell’s photos, but not Mr Clay’s? Mr Bussell is charged with attempted murder, while Mr Clay was wanted on an murder, not attempted murder, but actual murder charge. Why publish the mugshots of Miss Ahlbrand and Mr Helton, both of whom were in custody, but not Mr Clay, who was still on the loose?

Why? Despite my obviously brilliant mind, I am not a telepath, and cannot read the minds of Mr Chisenhall, or peter Baniak, Executive Editor and General Manager of the Herald-Leader, but, when I look at all of the photos of criminals and criminal suspects that the newspaper has published, it has been easy to notice one thing: all of the published mugshots I’ve seen have been of white suspects. Mr Lillis’ article noted that the Sacramento Bee was concerned about “perpetuating stereotypes about who commits crime in our community,” and that could fit in well with the pattern I have noticed in the Herald-Leader.

I am not the only person who has noticed!

We have noted previously Elizabeth Hughes, publisher of The Philadelphia Inquirer, and her determination to make her newspaper “an anti-racist news organization,” but has turned it into exactly that, a newspaper more concerned with racial identity and sorting out its news coverage that way than it has been about the “public’s right to know.”

The Society of Professional Journalists published their Code of Ethics; you should read it. It says, among other things, that “Journalists must be free of obligation to any interest other than the public’s right to know the truth.” This is exactly the opposite of McClatchy’s decision to suppress photographs of criminals and crime suspects because publication might cause “disproportionate harm” to one group or another, or what facially appears to be the Herald-Leader’s editorial decisions[2]Remember: an editor must approve all published mugshots. This is (supposedly) not left up to the various article authors. to skew the public’s perception by publishing only the photographs of white criminals and suspects.

It ought to be simple: just tell the truth, and be consistent in publication policies. If the editors are going to decide to publish photos of suspects who are still on the loose. publish photos of all suspects who are on the loose. Be journalists, and not journolists.

References

References
↑1 The newspaper deleted Mr Helton’s mugshot from the article a couple of weeks after publication, by May 16.
↑2 Remember: an editor must approve all published mugshots. This is (supposedly) not left up to the various article authors.
Posted on by

Journolism and the public’s “right to know”: let sleeping dogs lie! There are things investigative journalists do not want to investigate!

It’s sunny and 86º F outside, and Mochi is like the rest of the critters: sacked out. Click to enlarge.

OK, OK, it’s been a slow day at the farm, and I’ve been lazy. Mochi is on the couch on the screened in porch! And letting sleeping dogs lie is pretty much what today’s journolists,[1]The spelling ‘journolist’ comes from JournoList, an email list of 400 influential and politically liberal journalists, the exposure of which called into question their objectivity. I use … Continue reading er, journalists do.

Well, being lazy, and having seen an episode of Roku’s Murder House Flip, I wasn’t online when my good friend Robert Stacy McCain threw me a bone and published this!

Leif Halvorsen: The Only Kind of Mugshot the SJW Media Will Let You See

By Robert Stacy McCain | May 22, 2021 |

Say hello to Leif Halvorsen, who was convicted for killing of three people in Kentucky “in a drug-fueled shooting rampage” in 1983. In order to fight “systemic racism,” the Social Justice Warriors who run the McClatchy newspaper cartel have developed a policy against publishing mugshots of criminals, because of the negative impact the publication of such mugshots allegedly has on “marginalized communities.”

Our blog buddy Dana Pico of First Street Journal notes that the McClatchy-owned Lexington Herald-Leader is apparently not adhering to company protocols, because they published Halvorsen’s mugshot in a story about convicted murderers in Kentucky who may be eligible for parole under a new state policy. To illustrate that story, the Herald-Leader published the mugshots of Halvorsen and four other convicted murderers who, perhaps not coincidentally, shared a certain trait with him. Can you guess what that trait was? I think you can.

There’s much more at Mr McCain’s original, but he added something I hadn’t considered:

Obviously, not every local media outlet has surrendered to the kind of SJW (Social Justice Warrior) mentality that now controls the Lexington Herald-Leader, but as someone who spent more than 20 years in the newspaper business, I must ask this: What happened to “the public’s right to know”?

This was the phrase used by journalists for many decades to defend such controversial decisions as publication of the “Pentagon Papers,” and many other practices. Journalists demanded access to public records (so-called “sunshine laws”) because what government did, in the name of the people, and with taxpayer dollars, ought to be publicly known.

Certainly in matters of law enforcement, the identities of people arrested by police are a matter of public record, as are the mug shots of suspects. No ethical journalist would willingly become complicit in a deliberate effort to conceal such information from the public.

But of course, the unethical SJWs of the McClatchy cartel do not consistently apply their policy of suppressing facts about crime.

Mr McCain was an actual professional journalist, starting at a small Southern newspaper and eventually working for the Washington Times. That pretty much leaves my two years with the Kentucky Kernel in the dust! And his point is spot on: journalists have been using that phrase for as long as I can remember. Consider McClatchy’s statement of policy:

Publishing mugshots of arrestees has been shown to have lasting effects on both the people photographed and marginalized communities. The permanence of the internet can mean those arrested but not convicted of a crime have the photograph attached to their names forever. Beyond the personal impact, inappropriate publication of mugshots disproportionately harms people of color and those with mental illness.

There is a powerful meaning that the executives at McClatchy want to hide, but can’t quite: if “inappropriate publication of mugshots disproportionately harms people of color,” it must mean at least one of two things:

  1. Either ‘people of color’ are arrested for the crimes they commit in a far greater percentage than are white people; or
  2. ‘People of color’ actually commit crimes at a far greater rate than do white people.

Logically, either 1 or 2 can be true, or both 1 and 2 can be true. But the only way that neither can be true is if the publication of mugshots does not disproportionately harm ‘people of color.’ Regardless of which, or both, are true, either one being true is something which ought to generate a whole lot of investigative journalism to find out why it is true.

The problem is that, as far as the executives at McClatchy, and journalists in general, are concerned, the belief is that number 2 is true. Oh, they want to believe that number 1 is the correct answer, which is why you see so many stories about police stopping cars driven by black Americans, but somehow that doesn’t explain why those stops have so frequently led to the discovery of illegally-possessed firearms or drugs.

The executives at McClatchy were quite blatant about it: publishing mugshots would harm communities of color because there would be a disproportionate number of mugshots depicting people of color. Today’s journalists do not want to investigate any of that, because they are afraid, deathly afraid, of the answers they would find. I noted, last year, in This is what Social Justice law enforcement gets us:

Simply put, (Larry) Krasner, who hated the police from the beginning, installed a form of ‘social justice’ law enforcement; he was tougher on the police than he was on criminals. He was oh-so-concerned that “disproportionately high numbers of minority males” were charged, convicted and incarcerated, without ever thinking to consider that perhaps, just perhaps, “disproportionately high numbers of minority males” were the ones committing crimes.

There are two kinds of crimes: crimes of evidence and crimes of reporting. If a man rapes a woman on the streets of Philadelphia, as far as the police are concerned, if it wasn’t reported, it didn’t happen. It is commonly assumed that most rapes go unreported, with some guesstimates being as high as 90% not reported. Crimes like robbery might go unreported if the victims do not trust the police or think it will do any good, or are fearful of revenge by the criminals. When your city is stuck with a District Attorney like Mr Krasner, who doesn’t believe in prosecuting criminals, or sentencing them harshly when they are prosecuted and convicted, what reason is there to report that you were robbed?

But murder is different: it is a crime of evidence. It isn’t easy to dispose of a dead body in a way that it won’t be found, especially if you haven’t carefully planned things. You’re looking at 100 to 300 pounds of dead meat, bone and fat, and something which will put off a strong and nasty odor after very little time. The vast majority of dead bodies get found.

I noted, just two days ago, that in St Louis, a city that is 45.3% black and 44.1% white, 68 out of the then-current 73 homicide victims were black, 53 males and 15 females, only three of the victims were white, and of the two known suspects, both were white. Out of the 34 identified suspects, 2 were white, 2 were Hispanic, and 30 were black. All thirty of the identified black suspects were accused of killing black victims.

The Social Justice Warriors simply have no answer for those raw, very raw, numbers. But one thing is certain: the executives at McClatchy don’t want you to know them. The editors of the Sacramento Bee, the newspaper at McClatchy’s headquarters, and the precursor to the McClatchy policy, put it more directly:

Publishing these photographs and videos disproportionately harms people of color and those with mental illness, while also perpetuating stereotypes about who commits crime in our community.

Stereotypes exist for a reason; they exist because there is usually an element of truth behind them.

For McClatchy, for Peter Baniak, Editor and General Manager of the Herald-Leader, and for the newsroom at The Philadelphia Inquirer,[2]If I seem to harp on those two newspapers, it’s because I have paid for subscriptions to them, so I read them most often. any consideration of the “public’s right to know” has been overshadowed by their desire to manipulate public attitudes, by their desire that the public not hold stereotypes which just might be accurate. The last thing they want to do is the investigative journalism to determine why those stereotypes exist, and just how true they might be, because, deep down, they believe those stereotypes themselves. They are the ones who cannot handle the truth, and they are deathly fearful of what might happen if you knew the truth.

References

References
↑1 The spelling ‘journolist’ comes from JournoList, an email list of 400 influential and politically liberal journalists, the exposure of which called into question their objectivity. I use the term ‘journolism’ frequently when writing about media bias.
↑2 If I seem to harp on those two newspapers, it’s because I have paid for subscriptions to them, so I read them most often.
Posted on by

The Lexington Herald-Leader breaks policy and publishes a mugshot of a criminal suspect Could it be that because, once again, the accused is white rather than black?

We have previously noted the Lexington Herald-Leader’s double standards when it comes to posting the mugshots of criminal suspects. The Herald-Leader is supposed to follow McClatchy Company’s standards, as they are listed in the photo to the right.

THC snacks, sex acts: KY woman allegedly abused baby while video chatting with inmate

By Jeremy Chisenhall | May 20, 2021 | 8:15 AM EDT | Updated 12:55 PM EDT

A northern Kentucky woman is accused of letting her toddler eat marijuana snacks and performing sexual acts in front of the child while on video chat with her incarcerated boyfriend, according to the Boone County sheriff’s office.

Jessica Ahlbrand, 22, was arrested Wednesday after investigators reviewed multiple video chats between Ahlbrand and her boyfriend, who is an inmate at the Boone County Detention Center. During the video calls, Ahlbrand said she couldn’t find her marijuana “snacks” and allegedly suggested an 18-month-old child had eaten them.

She showed her boyfriend photos of the child who “appeared to be under the influence and incoherent,” according to the sheriff’s office. The two laughed at the photos.

During the same May 10 video call, Ahlbrand allegedly went into the baby’s room and performed sex acts on herself in front of the child, according to the sheriff’s office’s statement. Ahlbrand and her boyfriend had another video call on Saturday, during which she allegedly performed sex acts on herself in front of the child again.

Ahlbrand was charged with sexual abuse involving a victim under 12 and criminal abuse involving a victim under 12, according to jail records. She was taken to the Boone County Detention Center and held on a $250,000 bond.

Then, further down, the article has the following image from Facebook, complete with the mugshot of Miss Ahlbrand:[1]As of 9:57 PM EDT on Thursday, May 20, 2021, Miss Ahlbrand’s mugshot was still posted on the Herald-Leader’s website. Update! As of 7:05 AM EDT, on Friday, May 21, 2021, Miss … Continue reading

Now, I have to ask: under which of the three criteria listed in the McClatchy policy, was Miss Ahlbrand’s mugshot posted in the Herald-Leader:

  • Is there an urgent threat to the community?
  • Is this person a public official or the suspect in a hate crime?
  • Is this a serial killer suspect or a high-profile crime?

Miss Ahlbrand doesn’t appear to be an urgent threat to the community; her alleged crimes were of a personal nature, and there is nothing in either the Herald-Leader article or the BooneCounty Sheriff’s Department Facebook page to indicate that she has been released. The Sheriff’s Department stated that Miss Ahlbrand is “currently lodged at the Boone County Detention Center and is currently held on a $250,000 cash bond. That was posted at 7:18 PM on Wednesday, May 19th, so it is possible that she subsequently made bail.

Miss Ahlbrand is not a public official, nor charged with a hate crime.

Miss Ahlbrans is not a serial killer suspect, and, as far as a “high profile” crime is concerned, it sure doesn’t seem to be.

The McClatchy policy states that:

McClatchy will not publish crime mugshots — online or in print, from any newsroom or content-producing team — unless approved by an editor. To be clear, this means that in addition to photos accompanying text stories, McClatchy will not publish “Most wanted” or “Mugshot galleries” in slide-show, video or print.

Any exception to this policy must be approved by an editor.

I shall assume, therefore, that an editor approved it. According to the Herald-Leader, the article author, Jeremy Chisenhall, is a reporter, not an editor. That leaves:

  • Peter Baniak, Executive Editor and General Manager;
  • Deedra Lawhead, Deputy Editor, Digital;
  • Brian Simms, Deputy Editor, Presentation:, or
  • John Stamper, Deputy Editor, Accountability

to have approved the publication of Miss Ahlbrand’s mug shot.[2]I left out the two Sports Editors, whom, one would assume, wouldn’t be involved in this. Who did so, and why? Looking at the McClatchy criteria, I fail to see where Miss Ahlbrand fits.

Oh, but wait, I can see one way in which she fits.

Beyond the personal impact, inappropriate publication of mugshots disproportionately harms people of color and those with mental illness.

At least to judge by her photograph, Miss Ahlbrand is not a person of color, though it is at least arguable that the crime of which she is accused is indicative of mental illness.

Is that it? Is the Herald-Leader on some kind of crusade, conscious or otherwise, to publish the mugshots of white suspects, but not of non-whites? I do not know, because, brilliant as I am, I still cannot read other people’s minds. But make no mistake here: such is at least a reasonable conclusion based on the empirical evidence.

References

References
↑1 As of 9:57 PM EDT on Thursday, May 20, 2021, Miss Ahlbrand’s mugshot was still posted on the Herald-Leader’s website. Update! As of 7:05 AM EDT, on Friday, May 21, 2021, Miss Ahlbrand’s mugshot is still posted with the story. I had notified the Herald-Leader, the article author, Jeremy Chisenhall, and the Editor, Peter Baniak, via Twitter, of this inconsistency at 10:12 PM EDT on Thursday.
↑2 I left out the two Sports Editors, whom, one would assume, wouldn’t be involved in this.
Posted on by

Journolism: The Lexington Herald-Leader, which eschews publishing mugshots of black suspects, published five photos of white criminals

For some reason I have been unable to find the text version of McClatchy’s new mugshot policy online, but I was able to find this photo of it. The Kansas City Star, a McClatchy newspaper did mention it, as have several tweets, so I’m going to consider the image I found of it to be accurate.

This leads me to a couple of questions. Why did the Lexington Herald-Leader decline to publish the mugshot of Juanyah J Clay in its story on Mr Clay being sought on a murder charge and still being on the loose? Surely a man already out on bond, and then accused of murder, would fit the definition of being “an urgent threat to the community”. Publishing Mr Clay’s mugshot might have helped the Lexington Police Department locate and arrest Mr Clay, of a reader spotted him.

Was he dangerous? The Herald-Leader reported, after Mr Clay had been captured:

Juanyah Jamar Clay, 19, was arrested and booked at the Lexington-Fayette County Detention Center Tuesday evening after police said he was wanted for the alleged murder of 26-year-old Bryan D. Greene. Greene was found shot to death in January inside his residence at Eastridge Apartments, police said.

Clay was concealing three handguns on him at the time of his arrest, according to an arrest citation. He also had nearly 3.7 ounces of marijuana, more than 10 Percocet pills, cash and a digital scale with him. The officer who filled out Clay’s arrest citation said all the items were indicative of drug trafficking.

According to jail records, Clay faces eight charges: murder, carrying a concealed weapon, giving an officer false identifying information, receiving a stolen gun, tampering with a prison monitoring device, trafficking in less than 8 ounces of marijuana, trafficking in opiates, and violating conditions of release.

Doesn’t really sound like a very nice guy, does he?

McClatchy’s policy states:

To address these concerns, McClatchy will not publish crime mugshots — online or in print, from any newsroom or content-producing team — unless approved by an editor. To be clear, this means that in addition to photos accompanying text stories, McClatchy will not publish “Most wanted” or “Mugshot galleries” in slide-show, video or print.

Any exception to this policy must be approved by an editor.

Which raises the question: why did the Herald-Leader publish the mugshot of Ronnie Helton, leaving it up for at least several days, before taking it out of the article? An editor had to have approved publishing Mr Helton’s mugshot for publication on April 23, 2021, and an editor must have approved taking it back down again sometime before May 16th. Mr Helton was already in custody, so he could not have been “an urgent threat to the community,” he was not a “public official or the suspect in a hate crime,” nor a serial killer or high-profile case suspect? (Nothing in the small town of Corbin is high-profile!)

Of course, the McClatchy policy states that “inappropriate publication of mugshots disproportionately harms people of color and those with mental illness,” and Mr Helton is not a ‘person of color.’

Which brings me to this:

Dozens of convicted murderers to get a new chance at parole in KY after policy change

By Bill Estep | May 18, 2021 | 9:59 AM EST

Clawvern Jacobs kidnapped a college student, Judy Ann Howard, in Knott County in 1986 and beat her to death. Kentucky Department of Corrections. Click to enlarge.

Several convicted murderers who had been ordered to spend the rest of their lives behind bars will get another chance at leaving prison under a policy change by the Kentucky Parole Board.Under the old rule, the board sometimes issued a “serve out” order at the first parole hearing for people serving sentences of life or life without the possibility of parole for 25 years.

Inmates are eligible for a parole hearing after 20 years on a life sentence.

An order to serve out meant the person would never get another parole hearing, dying in prison absent a court decision changing his or her conviction or sentence, or a pardon or commutation.

Last month, the board changed the rule to say it would no longer issue serve out orders at the first parole hearing of inmates serving sentences of life or life without parole for at least 25 years, though it could still do so at their second hearing, according to the Department of Corrections.

Donald Bartley was convicted of taking part in the 1985 murder of a University of Kentucky student in Letcher County.

There’s much more at the link, in describing the policy change. The part that gets me? What my, sadly late, best friend used to call the Herald-Liberal published five mugshots provided by the Kentucky Department of Corrections of convicted murderers who might benefit from the change in policy, and like the published-and-then-gone mugshot of Ronnie Helton, all of the convicts pictured were white.

Jeffrey B. Coffey was convicted of shooting a young couple to death in Pulaski County in 1995.

I would not normally copy and publish all of these photos, but am doing so as documentary evidence; this is what the Herald-Leader has done.

The story noted that there are 22 convicted criminals who could benefit from the change in policy with parole hearings this year, and 23 others who will be now be eligible for parole hearings in the next several years. I’m pretty sure that I’m good enough at math to realize that’s a total of 45 inmates who may benefit, and the odds that all 45 are white would seem to be pretty small.

Now, there is a difference here: the photos published in the article are all of convicted criminals, not of suspects, and all of those convicts are murderers. But, in publishing these photos, was not the Herald-Leader compromising any chances that they would have of getting a job if any of them are released? Not all of them are of an age in which working again would be unlikely.

Stephanie Spitser strangled her 10-year-old stepson to death in Clay County. The crime happened in November 1992.

I have no sympathy for these killers, and believe that none of them should be released before the day that their victims come back to life. But what I see is what I have suspected before: the Herald-Leader is willing to publish mugshots of criminals who happen to be white.

The Sacramento Bee, the lead McClatchy newspaper, wrote of its policy — which was announced before McClatchy’s in general — that:

Publishing these photographs and videos disproportionately harms people of color and those with mental illness, while also perpetuating stereotypes about who commits crime in our community.

Let’s be blunt about this: the editors of the Bee were saying that such publication would show a ‘disproportionate’ number of suspected offenders would be “people of color,” and they did not want the photos of too many black or Hispanic offenders “perpetuating stereotypes” that blacks and/or Hispanics were more likely to commit crimes. It almost looks as though the editors of the Herald-Leader are trying to influence people into believing that murders are primarily committed by white people.

Leif Halvorsen was convicted in the murders of three people in Lexington, Ky., in January 1983.

If you read the entire article, you’ll see that there is a case to be made that the ‘serve out’ orders previously given by the Parole Board aren’t quite legal.

I have no sympathy for the Parole Board, none at all. Cody Alan Arnett was convicted for two robberies in Lexington, on August 7, 2015, and sentenced to five years in prison for each offense. As early as June 26, 2018 he was recommended for parole, and was scheduled to be released on August 1, 2018. This would mean that he served a week less than three years for his (supposedly) consecutive five year sentences. Within two months of his release, Mr Arnett was arrested for the forcible rape at knifepoint of a Georgetown College coed, at a time in which he could have and should have still been in prison. Mr Arnett had five violent felony offenses on his record. Mr Arnett, if he was indeed the rapist, was only able to rape his victim because the Parole Board let him out early. On September 18, 2018, the Herald-Leader published Mr Arnett’s mugshot, but, to be fair about it, that was before the Sacramento Bee article cited above. Then again, the Herald-Leader did publish the mugshot of a criminal suspect, another white guy, on July 21, 2020, more than two weeks after the Bee’s article, though before McClatchy announced its policy in August.

If the editors are truly committed to not ‘disproportionately’ harming ‘people of color,’ perhaps we should ask why the Herald Leader publishes the names of criminal suspects. Let’s be brutally honest again: just seeing the name of Juanyah J Clay, and then the next day as Juanyah Jamar Clay, I knew that the suspect was almost certainly a ‘person of color.’ More, it isn’t the mugshots which hurt, but the names themselves. If Mr Clay happens to be acquitted, and then goes looking for a legitimate job, any human resources department that is worth anything is going to do a Google search of his name, not his photograph, because his name is by far the easier search item.

If Ryan Dontese Jones, is acquitted of the several charges against him, charges reported by the Herald-Leader, when he goes to apply for a job after all is said and done, any company with a responsible human resources department is going to do a Google search for his name, and they’ll find that story, even though the newspaper declined to include Mr Jones’ mugshot.

“Thank you for your application, Mr Jones. We will be in touch with you.”

Journalism supposedly involves finding, and publishing, the truth for that media-outlet’s readers or viewers. But McClatchy in general, and the Herald-Leader specifically, want to obscure the truth, because in some cases, the truth is not politically correct, the truth is not what the bosses want to be the truth.

We had already noted, on May 10th, that the Lexington city government’s shooting investigations page listed 31 then current shooting investigations, in which 24 of the victims were listed as black, 3 as Hispanic, and 4 as white. That, in itself, ought to be news, in that the city is roughly 70.6% white and 14.5% black.

But rather than being news, rather than being something actual journalists would want to investigate, it is something that McClatchy and the Herald-Leader do not want reported, and do want to hide. That’s not journalism, that’s journolism, and yes, I will always call them out on it.

Posted on by

LOL! Journolism strikes again at the Lexington Herald-Leader!

And here I wondered if the Lexington Herald-Leader ever paid any attention to my articles!

I noted, on April 23rd, that the Lexington Herald-Leader does not like posting photographs of accused criminals, even when those suspects are still at large and publishing the photo might help the police capture him. But the paper surprised me when they did publish such a photograph:

Kentucky man allegedly tried to kidnap 3-year-old boy, offered $1,000 to buy him

By Bill Estep | April 23, 2021 | 9:41 AM EDT

Ronnie L. Helton was charged in April 2021 with attempting to kidnap a child. Whitley County Detention Center. Photo copied to my site from the Herald-Leader.

A Kentucky man who allegedly tried to kidnap a 3-year-old boy as he played in the yard has been charged in federal court.

A grand jury indicted Ronnie L. Helton, of Corbin, Thursday on one charged of attempted kidnapping.

Helton, 73, was arrested on state charges hours after an April 7 incident in Corbin in which a woman named Kristy Baker told police a man had tried to take her grandchild.

Baker said the boy was playing on a trailer sitting next to a fence around her yard when a man parked across the street and walked over to the child, according to the citation in the case.

The photo of the suspect was posted on the Herald-Leader’s website in the original article; I saved that photo to my computer and my website. I notified, via Twitter, the Herald-Leader of my article, and my point:

Peter Baniak, notified in the tweet as @pbaniak, is the Editor of the newspaper.

Well, I had reason to check on the newspaper’s original article again today, and shazamm!, at least as of 5:36 PM EDT on Sunday, May 16, 2021, the mugshot of the suspect has disappeared. I did a Google search, to see if perhaps the charges had been dropped against Mr Helton, but found nothing to indicate that. Many other media outlets still had the suspect’s mugshot on their websites, but the Herald-Leader took it off of their site, and had done so rather recently.

This leads to a few obvious questions:

  • Why did the Herald-Leader post the suspect’s mugshot in the first place, when they had been previously declining to post police mugshots, including one of a suspect at large, one which the publication just might have aided the Lexington Police Department in his apprehension?
  • Who took the decision to publish this one suspect’s mugshot, despite the fact that the paper apparently did not do so normally?
  • Is the Herald-Leader’s apparent policy the newspaper’s own, or was this dictated by McClatchy?
  • Why did the paper wait at least several days to remove the mugshot after being notified of the departure from normal procedure?
  • Why, since the mugshot was available for several days, did the paper decide lately to remove it?

We have previously noted the newspaper’s editorial positions, and just how out-of-touch the editors are with their readership in central and eastern Kentucky.

The Herald-Leader is not the only media source in central and eastern Kentucky. In my previous articles on the newspaper’s declining to publish mugshots, I was usually able to get the photos from the websites of other Lexington media outlets. Those outlets, normally television stations, which are visually oriented, more complete information to their viewers than the newspaper is to its readers.[1]My subscription is digital only; I live so far out in the sticks that physical delivery of the print newspaper is not available.

Perhaps the editors of the newspaper have no choice; perhaps this was dictated to them by McClatchy. But the newspaper has transformed journalism into journolism, withholding information from its readers, for whatever reasons it has. This is not a good look.

References

References
↑1 My subscription is digital only; I live so far out in the sticks that physical delivery of the print newspaper is not available.
Posted on by

Political correctness in the Lexington Herald-Leader and McClatchy

We have previously noted that the Lexington Herald-Leader apparently does not post photos of criminal suspects, — though an exception was recently made for a white suspect — even though the other city media do, and that McClatchy Company, which owns the Herald-Leader, apparently does not either. So, when I spotted the story below on the Herald-Leader’s website, I pretty much knew what I’d find:

Bartender attacked after woman complains drink wasn’t strong enough, Kentucky cops say

By Mike Stunson | May 11, 2021 | 12:58 PM | Updated May 11, 2021 | 6:48 PM

A bartender at a family-friendly Kentucky business needed extensive facial surgeries after being assaulted by a woman complaining about drinks, cops say.

The alleged assault happened April 2 outside Main Event, a popular entertainment center that features bowling and arcade games in Louisville, according to a citation.

Ciara Pardue, 24, ordered drinks from the business and later complained there was no alcohol in them, an arrest citation states. The bartender stated there was alcohol in the drinks and said a shot could be added for an additional price, police said.

Pardue angrily refused, and police said the bartender did not have more issues with the woman until later in the night.

The bartender went outside with two other employees for a smoke break around last call, and they were followed by Pardue and an accomplice, police say.

Ciara Pardue (Source: Louisville Metro Corrections)

The story continues to tell the reader that Miss Pardue’s “accomplice” repeatedly struck Rachel Hendricks, the bartender, and then Miss Pardue struck Miss Hendricks with an unspecified object. The Herald-Leader website reproduced Miss Hendricks Facebook posting, which shows her injuries, but, of course, did not post Miss Pardue’s mugshot. However, WDBR did, as did WAVE-TV. Judging from Miss Hendrick’s Facebook post on the incident, in which she wrote, “Hopefully these girls rot in jail for what they did,” the “accomplice” was also female.

Mike Stunson, who wrote the story, has a mcclatchy.com rather than a herald-leader.com email address.

So, why did the Lexington Herald-Leader put this story, out of Louisville, on its website? Louisville is out of the newspaper’s normal circulation area, though there are probably some kentucky.com subscribers in the Louisville area, because if there’s one thing the Herald-Leader does well, it’s cover University of Kentucky sports. Still, why cover the news if you aren’t going to cover the news?

The assault against Miss Henricks occurred at the beginning of April; the assault itself was no longer news. The news story was the arrest of Miss Pardue, but the Herald-Leader specifically, and, apparently, McClatchy in general, didn’t cover the entire thing, because censoring a mugshot is not covering the entire thing.

“The victim lost some eye sight in her right eye, which may never return, and numbness to her teeth and lip,” police said in the arrest citation.

Pardue was charged with first-degree assault Monday and was scheduled to be arraigned Tuesday.

“It’s just sad, sad that honestly my face will never be the same,” Hendricks wrote on Facebook a week after the incident. “I’ll have to get fillers in my face because fat won’t grow on top on the plates. I may never regain feeling in the front part of my mouth. And all this because of what? Because of a shot? because of a tip? Because someone was ‘too busy’ to come the first time they called for security? I want to place blame (and) I want answers to why this happened but I don’t think I’m going to get any. I’m just ready to put this behind me and get back to work and play with my kids like normal.”

Miss Pardue was charged with first degree assault, a Class B felony under KRS §508.010, which carries a sentence of “not less than ten (10) years nor more than twenty (20) years;” under KRS § 532.060. There’s no telling how much time she will stay in prison, or even if she will be convicted. If the evidence against her is strong enough, she’ll probably plead down to a lesser offense. But if the media publish her photo, wouldn’t that give Kentuckians a greater chance of recognizing her and maintaining their distance from her? Is not the McClatchy policy of not printing mugshots endangering the public?

Posted on by

Political correctness in the city of Lexington

We have previously noted that the Lexington Herald-Leader apparently does not post photos of criminal suspects, — though an exception was recently made for a white suspect — even though the other city media do, and that McClatchy Company, which owns the Herald-Leader, apparently does not either.

Lexington Police Department shooting investigations chart; screen capture from city website.

Well, it seems that the Lexington city government is just as eaten up with political correctness as its newspaper. The unreadably small chart to the right, which you can expand by clicking on the image, is a screen capture from the city government’s Shooting investigations page, taken at 4:02 PM EDT on Monday, May 10th. If you expand it, you will see that it lists the victims’ sex, race and age, along with the suspect, if known. Of 31 shooting investigations, 24 of the victims are listed as black, 3 as Hispanic, and 4 as white.

Lexington Police Department shooting investigations chart; screen capture from city website.

But when you come to the city’s Homicide investigations page, on a different page of the same website — the two pages are linked — shown on the left, you’ll notice, if you click on the screen capture and expand it, the victims’ sex and race are not included. The Shootings investigation page excludes homicide victims.

I wonder why that is.

Now, you can get that information on the website original, in some cases, by clicking on the crime scene location. Nevertheless, I find it an odd omission, considering that the information is posted on the shootings investigations page; why exclude information that the police clearly have?[1]Note that the investigation of the shooting on January 31, 2021, on the 100 block of West Vine Street, has both a surviving shooting victim and the murder of Lonnie Oxendine. Are we to somehow think … Continue reading Why do the Lexington Police and city government censor information they clearly have? Why, if they are going to make the information posted for plain public view in the first place, do they deliberately withhold statistical information?

Well, I think that I can tell you. Lexington is, according to 2019 Census Department guesstimates, 74.9% white, 14.6% black and 7.2% Hispanic (of any race). If the city puts out too much information, then an [insert slang term for the rectum here] like me might look at the numbers and ask something like, ‘If the city is only 14.6% black, why are 77.4% of the shooting victims black? If the Lexington Police Department told us the race of the homicide victims, would we find a similar racial disparity?[2]According to the Homicide investigations page, all 15 of the listed victims — the page had not been updated with the most recent homicide — were killed by gunfire.

Lexington isn’t Chicago or Philadelphia yet, though sometimes it seems as though the criminal element there is taking that as a personal challenge. But if the city’s violence problems are ever going to be solved, they have to be solved by addressing the problem properly, by recognizing what and where the problem lays, and that’s something the city, and its newspaper, just won’t do.

References

References
↑1 Note that the investigation of the shooting on January 31, 2021, on the 100 block of West Vine Street, has both a surviving shooting victim and the murder of Lonnie Oxendine. Are we to somehow think that the Lexington Police recorded the race, sex and age of the surviving shooting victim but not that of the man who perished?
↑2 According to the Homicide investigations page, all 15 of the listed victims — the page had not been updated with the most recent homicide — were killed by gunfire.
Posted on by

The Lexington Herald-Leader finally publishes a photo of a criminal suspect Could it be that because, this time, the accused is white rather than black?

We have previously noted that the Lexington Herald-Leader does not like posting photographs of accused criminals, even when those suspects are still at large and publishing the photo might help the police capture him.

So, we were somewhat surprised when the newspaper did publish such a photograph:

Kentucky man allegedly tried to kidnap 3-year-old boy, offered $1,000 to buy him

By Bill Estep | April 23, 2021 | 9:41 AM EDT

Ronnie L. Helton was charged in April 2021 with attempting to kidnap a child. Whitley County Detention Center

A Kentucky man who allegedly tried to kidnap a 3-year-old boy as he played in the yard has been charged in federal court.

A grand jury indicted Ronnie L. Helton, of Corbin, Thursday on one charged of attempted kidnapping.

Helton, 73, was arrested on state charges hours after an April 7 incident in Corbin in which a woman named Kristy Baker told police a man had tried to take her grandchild.

Baker said the boy was playing on a trailer sitting next to a fence around her yard when a man parked across the street and walked over to the child, according to the citation in the case.

There are more details of the case and the arrest at the Herald-Leader original.

This is one of the times I miss my late best friend, who grew up in Corbin. He would have turned 67 years old a month and a half ago, and, Corbin being the small town it is, might even have known the accused. He used to refer to the paper as the Lexington Herald-Liberal, and if it was true in the past, it is even more true today.

Mr Helton is, of course, presumed to be innocent until proven guilty, and perhaps the presumption of innocence could explain the Herald-Leader’s reluctance to publish photos of other suspects; after all, suspects’ photos will almost certainly lead to negative consequences for them locally in the event that some of them are acquitted or the charges are dropped! But such a consideration must not have been applied to Mr Helton, and in a much smaller town like Corbin, 2019 guesstimated population 7,202, he is likely to be far more widely known than in a city like Lexington, 2019 guesstimate population 323,152.

Mr Helton’s photograph was provided by the Whitley County Detention Center, and thus was freely available. But, as we noted in a previous story, the photo of then at-large suspect Juanyah Clay was published by all of the other Lexington media, and was available from both the Lexington city government and on the Lexington Police Department’s Facebook page. The Herald-Leader would not have had to pay for it, nor was bandwidth a problem, given that the newspaper’s website included stock photos of the police stringing up crime scene tape.

There was a stock photo in the story on the charges against Mr Helton as well, of two hands sticking through jail cell bars.

So, why not publish the photos of other suspects when they are freely available? As I speculated previously, I am guessing that it is because Juanyah Clay is black. The published photo of Mr Helton, who is obviously white, might not be proof that my speculation was correct, but it certainly provides evidence of it.