We've had a number of concerns raised by readers over our coverage of the investigation into Ashland resident James Auchincloss' alleged possession of child pornography. Auchincloss, the half-brother of the late Jackie Kennedy-Onassis, has not been charged, but several stories have been published based on information compiled by police after they served search warrants. Acquaintances of Auchincloss have complained that it's unfair to publish the information before he has even been charged. Some of that conversation has occurred in the Media Critics group of Rogue Current, our social networking site. Here's the comment I posted there in response to questions:
I would say the No. 1 reason we ran the Auchincloss story (or run any stories, for that matter) is that it was newsworthy. A guy who got arrested a week or so ago after allegedly robbing a bank was still legally innocent, but his picture ends up in the paper. Our job is not the same as prosecutors or defense attys -- our job is to get interesting, newsworthy information out to readers. Mr. Auchincloss' connection to the Kennedys does not make him guilty, but it does make him more newsworthy, thus the national coverage of this story.
Of course, each case has to be considered on its own merits. In this case, three things tipped the scale toward publishing the story:
1. The evidence was overwhelming -- it was almost impossible to read the eyewitness statements, as well as comments they made in interviews with our reporter, and review the evidence seized by police and not reach the conclusion that a crime had been committed. Mr. Auchincloss offered no protests that the accusations were false and, in fact, we have still not heard any denials from him. We have had a number of complaints from his friends, but none from him.
2. We were concerned, apparently moreso than the police, about reports that Mr. Auchincloss and another man being investigated had taken photos of local children. Those children were clothed and in public settings, but how should a parent feel about knowing the photos were taken at all, given the circumstances?
3. The evidence has been in police hands for 7-8 months and still no action. They say they are overwhelmed by the work load -- maybe this is evidence that local police and prosecutors should shift their priorities. In any case, it's not something that can be swept under the rug at this point.
I feel comfortable with our coverage. Child abuse in various forms -- and child pornography is certainly child abuse -- is rampant in this country, as well as in our local communities. When it occurs in unexpected corners, it's even more important to get the word out.
