Elizabeth Smart Kidnapping - Daily News/Chat Thread

PING to Day 36 - Have a Great Wednesday!

BTW... I am not the same "Bridget" that may or may not be connected to the Smart Case that was mentioned in the Day 35 thread.

Have a great Wednesday! I am off to bed, and my neighbor so very kindly confined his electric guitar practicing to 9:30 PM to 10:30 Pm this evening...

Smarts Juggle Privacy, Need for Media Focus

Wednesday, July 10, 2002

Local and national news media line up to hear members of the Smart family at Tuesday's news conference. The family is working hard to keep Elizabeth in the media spotlight, despite a scarcity of new information in the case. (Al Hartmann/The Salt Lake Tribune)

BY GLEN WARCHOL
THE SALT LAKE TRIBUNE

   The Smart family daily news conference -- a fixture at their Federal Heights LDS ward house for a more than a month -- hit its lowest point Tuesday.
    With no new developments to announce in the investigation or search for kidnapped Elizabeth Smart, the exchange between a dwindling group of reporters and family members petered out in a record five minutes.
    For the broadcast media, the scarcity of information meant stretching for something newsworthy to put on the air. "I've got to figure out how to fill two minutes," complained one national television newsman.
    The news media's growing frustration may not find much public sympathy, but it portends a grave problem for the Smart family. Only by keeping Elizabeth's face in front of America can they nourish hope she will be found.
    The news media, particularly television, demand fresh infusions of information, interviews and angles, whether generated naturally from the investigation or artificially through increased access to the family and their heartbreak.
    Though most newspeople are circumspect in saying it, they know their editors will soon pull them off even the most compelling story if nothing new breaks.
    Smart family spokesman Chris Thomas anticipated the problem after Monday's news conference, where the only new information was a clarification of the rewards being offered. Thomas queried an informal gathering of television producers, bookers and reporters: "What can we do to make these press conferences more meaningful?"
    Later, in an interview with The Salt Lake Tribune, Thomas expanded on the Smarts' dilemma: to provide the news media with fresh material on Elizabeth without allowing exploitation that could further harm the family.
    "The main objective is to keep her picture out there and her story alive," Thomas said. "But we will not do certain things just to keep it alive."
    Ed and Lois Smart, for example, have refused all overtures to interview Elizabeth's siblings. They have also refused continuous requests to film the inside of their home where the kidnapping took place.
    "Ed and Lois have thought through this carefully; they are pretty black and white on what they will allow. They still have a family to take care of. Protecting the family is a priority equal to finding Elizabeth."
    Thomas, a Salt Lake public relations professional who is donating his time to the family, says the family has rejected direct requests from the likes of Geraldo Rivera, Connie Chung and Barbara Walters when their requests meant violating the few private areas they have maintained.
    "Even if it means the media's going away, we will not compromise certain things to keep them here," Thomas said.
    Though the family daily reiterates its confidence in the investigation, the news media, at least, has made clear its frustration with the absence of the police at news conferences.
    "Would it be nice to have someone here from the police to field questions about the investigation?" says Thomas. "Sure, it would be nice. There is only so much the family can say."
    Salt Lake Police spokesman Capt. Scott Atkinson said the department is trying to maintain a balance. "We do want the family to keep her picture out there. Yet on the other hand, we'd rather spend our time looking for Elizabeth and continuing the investigation," Atkinson said. "When we have new information, we'll be there."
    Until then, Thomas says the family may have to consider which of its last vestiges of privacy to surrender to the news media.
    "This is a fragile situation," Thomas says. "This is a family that has been through more than anyone can comprehend."

I was wondering when the news media would start to peter out. It has been an extraordinarily wrong time for the national media to be so attentive. Let's see what the grand jury brings today and tomorrow.

It has been an extraordinarily wrong time for the national media to be so attentive

long?

LOL, thanks for the catch. I'm trying to multi-task here and I'm not succeeding. :)

turn on the press conference

Ed Smart is on TV now talking about a letter he received, I was a 1 page letter (not handwritten) date July 3rd, he received it yesterday. The letter states that they wish to talk about the release of Elizabeth. It was addressed to; The Parents of Elizabeth. It was from a person who says they know the abductor and that they made the letter for the abductor.

He (Ed) is giving an awful lot of information about this letter, so I think this is a catch to keep the media around. Ed does say this letter is different than others he has received. It sounds like the police are not looking at this letter seriously.

His information is confusing and seemingly contradictory. First he said the letter was addressed "to the parents of Elizabeth Smart" and then he said the letter was addressed "to the family." He's also laughed aloud several times.

This makes no sense....he's addressing the kidnapper, yet he has the original letter...why not give it to the police for forensics....he seems to take it seriously!

I was shocked with the laughter...didn't seem to be nervous laughter?

All of you should be able to see what he was doing. He explained himself at the end of the conference. He said he came out today to let the abductor know that he can contact him if likes and that he is wanting the abductor to contact him. Then Ed brought up the letter I mentioned earlier, he used this as an example of how the abductor could contact him if he wanted to. He also stated that he wants contact and some information from the abductor so he that he knows that abductor's contact is not bogus. In otherwords the family is getting many bogus letters... but nothing that says or points to the letter writer really having Elizabeth. So if the letter was really from a friend of the abductor, Ed wants more contact and more information that this person really has Elizabeth. (for example the abductor could ask Elizabeth what she did on a certain day... with abductor knowing this information... this would prove that they really have her.)

I understood what Ed was doing, it just strikes me as odd that he hasn't turned over the original letter to the FBI, he apparently is taking this letter seriously...by now all forensic evidence is probably lost
He himself said that this letter is different from others he has received...MHO is that all letters should be treated as evidence.

His information is confusing and seemingly contradictory. First he said the letter was addressed "to the parents of Elizabeth Smart" and then he said the letter was addressed "to the family." He's also laughed aloud several times.

Yes, his demeanor seemed stranger than usual. The giggling was bizarre. He also seemed to contradict himself a few times and definitely didn't appear nearly as concerned about Elizabeth's safety as communicating with the person or persons she is with.

Can't help but wonder if the SLCPD is encouraging him to appear publicly just to see what he will say and how he will act and react. Couldn't help but think the PD is pulling back to let the family and their connections untangle this mess. Of course that is sheer speculation, but the new conference sure raised more questions than it answered.

Today Ed was trying to keep the medias interest. So he talked about a letter he received. He talked around reporters questions, but did give enough information that people & reporters should be able to understand what he was doing. In otherwords, he did not plainly come out and say that Police are considering this letter as real, but said he gave the police a "Copy" of it. (this tells us that the police are not taking the letter seriously) Plus Ed Smart gave quite a bit of information about the letter, way more than the police would ever allow if they considered it real. Also Ed laughed because of the reporters continue asking the same question over and over, they just rephrase it each time and Ed knows this and he laughed because of it and told the reporter he cannot answer the question, instead of saying your asking the same question but rephrasing it.

The media will look (even more) foolish and will catch on soon with these types of reports coming from the family. They want real information and the Smart family will not get away with doing these types of press conferences for very long. The police or the FBI need to come out at least once a week and randomly each week with something new on the case to keep the media around.

I understood what Ed was doing, it just strikes me as odd that he hasn't turned over the original letter to the FBI, he apparently is taking this letter seriously...by now all forensic evidence is probably lost He himself said that this letter is different from others he has received...MHO is that all letters should be treated as evidence.

Lets HOPE this is a COPY and NOT the original...hopefully the authorities are conducting tests on the letter, envelope, & stamp..and if not, wonder if they need someone living w/ them constantly instructing them how to handle any and all evidence, and not pass it along for everyone to handle to read..

This is wayyyy to freaky.

I saw his laugh as frustration at the Reporters asking and rephasing the same questions over and over again after he has already said he cannot talk about it when he was asked the same question in a different way before. How some of you are see it differently must not be listening to what the reporters are asking him and how the reporters are asking the same questions over and over but just rephasing the questions. Reporters are sneeky when they ask questions, they do the same to Bush and he laughs also when they do it.

	Day 31	Day 23
	Day 30	Day 22
	Day 29	Day 21
Day 35	Day 28	Day 20
Day 34	Day 26/27	Day 19
Day 33	Day 25	Day 18
Day 32	Day 24	Day 17