When a big, local story breaks, regional newspapers have the opportunity to own it. The killing of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in an Orlando suburb is nothing if not big. How has the Orlando Sentinel handled it?
Reporting on the shooting began with a print story on February 29th, three 28th, two days after the event, and that article went online the next day under the headline: “Boy, 17, shot to death in Sanford during ‘altercation,’ police say.” Like media outlets across the country, the Sentinel didn’t do another story until Martin’s father made a statement, which the paper covered on March 8th, with “Dad: arrest crime watch volunteer who killed my son.” The 171,000-circulation daily then raised the coverage level, and by March 15th, the Sentinel was publishing multiple stories a day. That quantity has since moved into double digits. On March 28th alone there were over ten stories written, and that’s not counting articles from The Associated Press or opinion columns.
In an interview, John Cutter, associate editor for the Sentinel, says one of the ways the paper has advanced the story is by getting the details of what the shooter—28-year-old George Zimmerman—had recounted about the incident to police. The story, “Police: Zimmerman says Trayvon decked him with one blow then began hammering his head,” was written by Rene Stutzman, the Sentinel’s crime reporter. She’s been covering the Trayvon story a lot for the paper, and was on Lawrence O’Donnell’s MSNBC program earlier this week, where O’Donnell brought up the above story, and accused her of reporting Zimmerman’s account to police as fact, “without attribution.” Stutzman never really gets a chance to respond—O’Donnell cuts her off multiple times—but she did say she “disagrees,” and says “I think the story is fair and accurate.” The Daily Kos, among others, had an item accusing Stutzman of helping “the Sanford Police do a Cover Up.”
Cutter says he was surprised at the negative buzz around this piece. He saw the first version, which was posted in the morning, and felt the sourcing was “very clear” in that it said “according to police” up high, and then went a few paragraphs before stating the attribution again. “That’s a long-standing thing we do when were trying not to use attribution in every graph,” he said. He says the paper expected to be challenged on this particular story. “We thought we’d possibly be asked, ‘why do you think this person is telling the truth,’” says Cutter. “I know the source, and I was confident that everyone would read this as what the police were saying they were told.”
Cutter says another contribution the paper has made in reporting this case is correcting misinformation that’s been spreading. Indeed, one of Stutzman’s posts, “Trayvon rumors abound, but here are the facts,” addresses false claims that have been circulating about the investigation. Stutzman sources police and a medical examiner in the piece, and though none of her sources are named, it’s the kind of local reporting that’s so necessary in a national, viral story like this one. Stutzman’s rumor’s piece addresses false accusations that the medical examiner refused to release Martin’s body for an unusual length of time; that police neglected to collect key evidence, namely Zimmerman’s clothing; and that Zimmerman wasn’t arrested because he’s related to someone on the police force. Each claim is deflated with reasons from official sources on why these perceptions are false, an important contribution in driving the story closer to the truth.

Lot of problems with this story first
"When a big, local story breaks, regional newspapers have the opportunity to own it. The killing of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in an Orlando suburb is nothing if not big."
At no point should this have been a big story... never. You have kids being killed in the street near daily by gangs and it never makes national news... yet what is clearly looking like a classic self defense case has been twist into an anti-"white"(because "now" hispanics are white). This is the media and race baiters spinning up a story to make money and names for themselves pushing a racist, anti-freedom, anti-truth agenda.
Next we have this joke
"Why was self-defense deemed a sufficient explanation in the shooting of an unarmed teenager? "
He clearly claimed that the "unarmed" teenager was attempting to arm himself with a gun and that he feared for his life... we live in a justice system where your SUPPOSED to be innocent until proving guilty AND a law enforcement system where law enforcement must JUSTIFY its actions.
The main reason why it was written in the stand your ground law that you can't arrest is because being arrested shows up on your record FOREVER. So police can push people who use the law based solely on race, gender, politics by arresting them and FOREVER staining their record.
Being that most employers for anything important would pass over someone who pops up with a murder, rape or any of a host of arrests even if the charges are dismissed... many times even if the true victim sues the police and wins.
Thats why that section of the law was put in and its working as its supposed to. The police shouldn't be wasting taxpayer money to jail someone who didn't do anything this is just victimizing the victim again... and costing the taxpayer and the person money, time and reputation.
The idea of "arrest everything and let the judge sort it out" is the idea of illegal searches, kidnapping and judgement of guilty without evidence.
#1 Posted by robotech master, CJR on Fri 30 Mar 2012 at 07:17 PM
Robothech, Another attack dog from the right spewing all sorts of disinformation.
Only Republicans can be both for victims rights and against them.
This case is so simple and straightforward that Republicanc can't help but try to find many reasons this kid was killed other than the killer. They even suggest the child "deserved to die" because he "looked like a thug."
This is the modern day Republican Party. Devoid of facts and eager to lay every possible whining complaint on the media and the president, they undermine years of claims to be the party of personal responsibility and victims rights.
They can blog their hate all they want, nobody but the hardest, most vile haters could possiby find anyone at fault for killing this kid than the man who pulled the trigger and, literally, walked away.
#2 Posted by Jason, CJR on Fri 30 Mar 2012 at 08:33 PM
thimbles my friend I'm the ones pointing out reality and that reality includes the right to self defense... you may think letting rapists rape at will and demand people call the police and submit to being raped until they show up(if they show up) but unlike stalinist russia or hilter's germany in the US you have the right to defend yourself be the person attacking you black, white, alien, purple, 5 years old, 80 years old, male, female, both....
You also have the right to a fair jury and due process... rights you refuse to give zimmerman.... but hey you'd rather live in russia or some other government controlled utopia.
#3 Posted by robotech master, CJR on Fri 30 Mar 2012 at 09:18 PM
Robotech, time to change your jammies.
#4 Posted by Paul Nelson, CJR on Fri 30 Mar 2012 at 10:06 PM
Hey Paul Nelson maybe you should call off the dogs and puts the torches and ropes away...history and all... just saying.
#5 Posted by robotech master, CJR on Fri 30 Mar 2012 at 10:21 PM
"thimbles my friend"
Don't drag me into this. This is my first post. I'm content to grab my popcorn and watch the carwreck-as-performance-art.
Keep sharing that wisdom from your well of single digit IQ's.
#6 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Fri 30 Mar 2012 at 11:40 PM
o sorry relax post based on logic of the post aka complete lack of logic...
#7 Posted by robotech master, CJR on Sat 31 Mar 2012 at 12:42 AM
I'm the associate editor of the Orlando Sentinel and need to point out an error in the article: Our first reporting on the case online on the night the shooting happened. It was too late for print deadlines for Monday's newspaper, Feb. 27, but a version ran in print on Tuesday, Feb. 28, not Feb. 29 as writer says.
Also, the writer criticizes our newspaper for not doing enough in one article about the Stand Your Ground law. We repeatedly have included information about it in articles and did a Sunday A1 piece on March 18 (posted online the night before). See it at http://tinyurl.com/7cxr7vu.
I also reject one other premise of the writer -- "A local paper like the Orlando Sentinel could shine in this area, but overall, in-depth interpretations and analysis take a back seat to incremental updates." A detailed reading of our coverage, as well as repeated points I made during the interview, would not lead to that conclusion. Space here is too short to list the numerous enterprise pieces we have done but they are all on this page: http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/trayvon-martin/
#8 Posted by John Cutter/OrlandoSentinel, CJR on Sat 31 Mar 2012 at 10:05 AM
For John Cutter: My sense is that the Sentinel has done a workmanlike job in covering this situation. So-called "trial by media" is never wise, but it sells papers and grabs page views, big time. Media simply does not have two things that are fundamental to fair trials: Sworn testimony and solid chain of custody on evidence. That said, it's too bad that the comments so far seem driven with agenda-laden folks who have missed the whole point of the article. Steady as she goes, John.
#9 Posted by David K. McClurkin, CJR on Sat 31 Mar 2012 at 10:51 AM
Tampa is an hour from Sanford, and the Tampa Bay Times (formerly St. Petersburg Times) has greater reach than the Orlando Sentinel. Any sense of how the Times has covered the killing?
#10 Posted by Justin Martin, CJR on Sat 31 Mar 2012 at 01:45 PM
This whole story is "driven with agenda-laden folks". A fight broke out and someone got shot, the shooter claimed self-defense, and on review of the evidence there were insufficient grounds to prosecute. It happens all the time. It is news but not national news. It is not a "big" story. If it were not for the agenda-laden folks who have driven this story, we would not be discussing it.
While the US news media has been concentrating on this story to the exclusion of everything else, Egypt declared war on Israel. al-Qaeda is taking over Yemen, Chechnya, and North Africa. The Republican Party's runner-up Rick Santorum is sounding like an American Christian version of the Taliban and is getting more popular the crazier he sounds. The US has troops ("trainers") on the ground in Yemen and is starting to actively engage al-Qaeda there. The US lifted sanctions against Iran. There was a coup d'etat in Mali. The Grand Mufti of Arabia called for the destruction of all Christian communities in Muslim lands, most of which pre-date Muhammed. The King of Qatar called for a holy war to conquer Jerusalem for Islam, and this call was endorsed by the US President's priest Jeremiah Wright. Pennsylvania's Republican-dominated legislature passed a law allowing drilling companies to claim private land. The Department of Justice is continuing to obstruct Congress's investigation into the sales of weapons to Mexican drug gangs.
Interesting things are happening in the world. News organizations should be covering these things, but instead we turn on the TV or go to news websites and there is nothing but Trayvon Martin all the time. The Martin case is what Project Censored calls "junk food news". There is little substance to it and like all the missing white women stories of last decade it is of no concern to anyone outside the affected family and community. The mania surrounding the Martin case is a bigger news story than the Martin case itself.
#11 Posted by Tang, CJR on Sat 31 Mar 2012 at 03:53 PM
trayvon martin was a mad bomber according to obama and thats why he got shot...
video of the hoodie mad bomber
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jAV1dbGPB4&feature=player_embedded#!
Thank god zimmerman a registered democrat listened to obama and shot that hoodie bomber trayvon martin...bahahaha
#12 Posted by robotech master, CJR on Sun 1 Apr 2012 at 04:34 PM
It's a measure of the laziness/bias here that the 'Stand Your Ground' law is being dragged in. If Zimmerman was stalking Martin, as one narrative has it, what's the relevance of 'Stand Your Ground'? And if Martin had knocked down Zimmerman and was abusing him physically, as the other narrative has it, 'Stand Your Ground' is also irrelevant, since if you are being beaten up you are - like a battered wife, say - also permitted to react with deadly force in any state, whether they have 'Stand Your Ground' laws or not.
The dreary, predictable coverage of events such as these uses them as a platform for discussion of issues that are frequently not relevant to the actual circumstances. Activists of a certain political stripe glom onto cases such as that of Zimmerman-Martin in order to stuff reality into a sort of NY Times editorial page box, and most of the rest of the press follows dutifully and mindlessly.
#13 Posted by Mark Richard, CJR on Mon 2 Apr 2012 at 12:32 PM
The relevance of any of this has little to do with the participants Zimmerman and Martin - if Martin was shot and Zimmerman was arrested, this would have been a tragic story with little national signifigance.
But individuals within the Sanford legal system used their interpretation of "Stand your ground" as justification to not arrest a man standing over a corpse with a gun in his hands. Individuals within the Sanford legal system leaked irrelevant details of Trayvon's life to the press to sully the story as it came out. Individuals within the Sanford legal system prevented Chris Serino from charging Zimmerman. And individuals within the Sanford Police force must have leaked the tape showing Zimmerman's ruse of assault from a kid he outweighed by 100 lbs was false.
It's not about the act. It's about the authorities who failed to act and te justifications they used to avoid acting.
Don't fall into the trap of making this about a shooting. It's not about the shooting, it's about who nearly got to walk away from it consequence free and why.
#14 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Mon 2 Apr 2012 at 01:03 PM
Individuals within the Sanford legal system prevented Chris Serino from charging Zimmerman.
Minor point, but its pretty indicative of your overall level of ignorance: a detective, as Chris Serino is, cannot “charge” anyone with anything. An LEO’s responsibility is to evaluate, detain and provide a detailed report to the prosecuting attorney who is responsible for filing charges.
And individuals within the Sanford Police force must have leaked the tape showing Zimmerman's ruse of assault from a kid he outweighed by 100 lbs was false.
The police report lists Martin at 6’, 160lbs and Zimmerman is now well under 200lbs …. looks like you added an extra zero there champ.
#15 Posted by Mike H, CJR on Mon 2 Apr 2012 at 03:25 PM
"Minor points"
At least you admit it. Jesus, you're being pedantic over some violent, fat guy's unjustified use of force.
Is there a reason the Zimmerman side of this case matters to you?
Would you prefer us just to avoid talking about the problems with the Sanford legal system which even the Sanford cops seem to have problems with?
I really don't get the conservative freak out here. I thought government corruption and lax criminal justice was something conservatives opposed. Give me some insight on this, what is the mentality here?
#16 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Mon 2 Apr 2012 at 04:20 PM
Liz Trotta is back:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42nTePUpJ9c
No seriously, what are conservatives getting out of defending the killer and the coverup of a black kid in the wrong gated neighborhood?
"Allegedly killed"? Really?
#17 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Tue 3 Apr 2012 at 05:42 PM