Replies

I agree that stylistically it makes for a clumsy read; however, it's not entirely inappropriate when somebody has made a permanent report, affirmation or filing:

There definitely are appropriate ways to use present tense rather than past, but the key here is consistent usage of either tense. In this case, the author states that the "12-year-old's mother called Upper Burrell Township police", then the next sentence says that "The woman tells police". There is simply no excuse for that kind of behavior by someone who claims to be a writer.

In this case you're right. I'm not sure if you've read my other posts on this thread, but my point is that a tense shift when referring to an historical record or document (in this case, an alluded to police report) can be proper if the information remains current and valid, even if it was recorded in the past:

"I was (past) in the courthouse looking through old records. I found (past) a document which states (present) the family no longer owns (present) the property."

In the article in question it's ambiguous and clumsy, and more appropriately it would be the woman's statement or affidavit that (present tense) 'tells' the police what the subject did, which was my point...the tense may not have been entirely wrong, but the way it was put together and presented was awkward.

The use of present tense in newspaper stories may be because headlines are conventionally written in present tense. Perhaps it filters down that way into the text.