There was some bigtime confusion on Saturday regarding how a Milwaukee TV station was conducting itself when covering the Daniel Acker case.
Kevin Fischer has Greenfield Police Deputy Inspector Bradley Wentlandt's statement:
"I wanted to take a moment to address the practice of media outlets waiting in our front parking lot and approaching all males exiting the building, questioning them about the Acker case.
"While you all have the absolute right to conduct your investigative reporting in any legal way you see fit, you should be aware that your reporting practices have harmed our ability to prosecute one of the worst pedophiles this area has ever seen.
"Previously cooperative victims have contacted us after they were approached by this particular media outlet in our parking lot and have advised us they WERE willing to come forward and cooperate, but after being confronted by this media outlet, and were put on the spot after a difficult interview with our investigators, they no longer feel willing to cooperate.
"I would ask that you balance your desire for the big scoop with the privacy interests of sexual assault victims and our need (and your viewers' desire) to put this pedophile away.
"If this practice continues, I intend to publicly identify this media outlet on Monday and specifically outline the heinous details of the cases that were damaged, the victim cooperation we've lost, and the fact that Mr. Acker might end up walking the streets, because of this media outlet's decision to conduct themselves in this fashion."
Wentlandt did some backtracking later on Saturday.
From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:
Greenfield police now say a Milwaukee TV station didn't act inappropriately when interviewing someone connected with the investigation of swim coach Daniel Acker in the police station's parking lot.
Greenfield Police Deputy Inspector Bradley Wentlandt released a statement early Saturday, saying previously cooperative accusers said "they no longer feel willing to cooperate" with investigators after being interviewed by the station.
But the television station conducted an investigation Saturday and Greenfield police reviewed security tapes of their parking lot, Wentlandt said Saturday night. It turns out that the person interviewed by police approached the television station's journalists, seeking information. The TV station didn't approach the person, Wentlandt said.
That person is now cooperating with police again, Wentlandt said.
When asked whether the television station did anything wrong, Wentlandt said: "It does not appear to be so."
I'd like to know which TV station was the one to draw the ire of the Greenfield Police.
Why not be more transparent and come clean? It doesn't appear that the TV station did anything wrong.
Can we draw any conclusions from the fact that the Journal Sentinel is protecting the station involved?
No comments:
Post a Comment