Posted on 01/22/2003 12:13:24 PM PST by 1Old Pro
| Ritter case handling prompts questions |
By MARK McGUIRE, Staff writer
First published: Wednesday, January 22, 2003
Scott Ritter's legal problems will keep media pundits busy for months. The issues surrounding the case -- from separating private conduct and public policy to the fairness of leaking sealed court documents -- is ample fodder for dozens of columns.
An example: Alan Chartock thinks there is something unfair about the handling of the Ritter case, which centers on a 2001 arrest only now being revealed.
"Since we don't really know anything, under fair-play rules, a presumption of innocence until proven guilty ... it seems to me, to be unfair for any one of us to make remarks," the WAMC (90.3 FM) executive director and WNYT Ch. 13 commentator said on Tuesday.
Last weekend, it came to light that Ritter was arrested in 2001 after trying to arrange a meeting at a Menands Burger King with a 16-year-old he had met on the Internet. The supposed teenager was in fact an undercover investigator. In a sealed decision, Ritter was given an adjournment in contemplation of dismissal.
"There is also the inability to separate out what the guy's message is with his personal problem here," said Chartock, who also co-hosts WAMC's "The Media Project" with WNYT anchor Lydia Kulbida and Times Union editor Rex Smith. "I am every bit as impressed with the gravitas of his remarks (on the conflict with Iraq) as I ever was.
"Right-wing radio stations continue to beat him up and try to impugn the message based on his personal issues. And that is an old, demagogic, right-wing trick."
Chartock dismissed the notion that Ritter's very prominent involvement during a 2002 WAMC fund drive -- tapes of Chartock's interview with Ritter were given away as a contributor's gift -- plays a role in his defense of the embattled former weapons inspector.
Another example: Tuesday morning, Paul Conti's e-mail box was filling rapidly. Writers from around the country were upbraiding the WNYT Ch. 13 news director for withholding videotape of the 2001 arrest of Ritter.
Great story. If it were true.
Fueled by an error in an Internet report, at least two dozen people angrily wrote WNYT, believing it was shielding Ritter because the affiliate supported the Delmar man's denunciations of President Bush and a potential war with Iraq.
As if a station -- any station -- possessing such explosive footage would withhold it.
There is no tape. The station does have Ritter's mug shot from the arrest, and footage of the Burger King restaurant taken the night of his bust, but after he left the scene. The station aired the footage Monday: It does not have any footage of Ritter in cuffs.
The erroneous report that WNYT has such footage emanated from one conservative Web site, http://www.WorldNetDaily.com, and made its way to another message board, http://www.freerepublic.com.
" ... This radically left-wing peacenik affiliate 'forgot' they had this incredible tape and STILL will not release it!," one poster wrote.
That so many people would think a television outlet would sit on an explosive exclusive to protect an anti-war activist is a testament to the effectiveness of conservatives constantly screeching about the "left-wing media."
In 2001, the station did not identify the man arrested as the former weapons inspector. Ritter was charged with misdemeanor attempted endangerment of a child under his given name, William S. Ritter (Scott is his middle name). "At the time, we didn't make the connection," Conti said. "We didn't discover it until we searched the archives (on Monday)."
The story emerged locally Saturday in The Daily Gazette, then was fueled by more elements in the New York edition of The Daily News. TV has layered it.
Tuesday, The Associated Press picked it up, as did the Internet and talk radio in earnest. The cable nets have been dancing around the issue, but are starting to jump on it.
The local story -- how the district attorney's office and the cops handled the case -- will be around for a while. Ritter canceled a trip to Iraq Tuesday; until he makes some sort of public statement, the story will linger nationally.
Mark McGuire is the Times Union TV/radio writer. His column generally appears Sunday, Tuesday and Friday. Call him at 454-5467 or send e-mail to mmcguire@timesunion.com.
****************************************
My comments below:
The news director's OWN words suggested that there was a tape. It has nothing to do with spreading rumors.
The station has a mug shot of Ritter along with the footage, said News Director Paul Conti. "If it's not him, it's either his clone or a twin," said Conti. The news director said the 16-year-old girl had been lured by Ritter to meet him at the Burger King in Menands, N.Y., in order "to have her watch him have sex with himself." "Anyone who went to the Burger King that day could confirm the details of that event and report that a sting operation was underway that involved a decoy officer posing as a 16-year-old girl," Conti said. Conti told WorldNetDaily that WNYT plans to continue airing its information. Video footage of the arrest is being shown in the station's newscasts, because it was acquired prior to the sealing order, he said.
Perhaps Mr. McGuire, AN OBVIOUS LURKER, should look into Conti's misleading QUOTE which started all this....not right wing internet sites.
By MARK McGUIRE, Staff writer
First published: Wednesday, January 22, 2003
Yeah, you missed the part about it being ok to focus on a 30 year old drunk driving incident if the guy is a Republican Candidate for President.
Why be so defensive about it? After all, who knows the poster was a right winger? Ridiculous, it proves the left wing media does exist, is in denial, lies and power mode.
Obviously, they knew about the incident right after it happened and didn't cover it. Now they are putting up a strawman argument that they don't have video of Scott in handcuffs. So?? You mean they can only do a story on a famous arrest if they have photos of the person in handcuffs??
And separating his public message from this behavior? Excuse me, but trying to diddle a 14 year old makes you one sick _ _ _ _. And going back for more after getting caught makes you extremely sick, out of control, and stupid. My daughter is 11. Don't tell me that I should give any credence to a pervert who would like to molest her. Further, isn't it nice how our news outlets strive to prevent me from making such an informed judgment??
Just for conparison, I wonder how Mr. Chartock felt about the years old revelation of Dubya's DUI arrest.
Maybe we should put out a search request to see if anyone recorded it.
What do we know?
According to what's been reported, we know that
the first time he was caught, he was given 6 months probation
Ritter violated probation 3 months into it by soliciting the second minor
at some point in this process he was ordered to undergo sex offender counseling
the court records of these proceedings are sealed from public view, even as the court has been inexplicably lenient to a repeat offender like Ritter
the ADA who prosecuted Ritter for his crimes was fired by her boss for not handing off this "sensitive" case to him before taking it to court
Any reasonable person would conclude from all this that Ritter has been given preferential treatment by the court and by the prosecutor's office, that their motive is political and that they are willing to permit a known sexual predator to roam the community, exposing other children to the danger he presents -- all to protect their leftist agenda.
Oh, now we'll be accused of thinking logically, instead of emotionally......we're such cold-hearted beasts, lol. : )
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.