————————————–
Original Post from This Morning
This morning I awoke to a new story about Henry’s death in our local newspaper. The story is pretty much a recap of what I blogged about two days ago regarding Henry’s autopsy results, except in this case, the newspaper story makes me out to be a bit of a nut.
For the record, I did not show the reporter “selected” medical records. He called me at around noon and said he was on deadline for a story about Henry’s final autopsy, so I offered to go pick up a copy of Henry’s complete medical records (I didn’t have a set in my possession that day) and bring them to him at the newspaper’s offices for his review, which I rushed out to do so he could meet his 2pm deadline.
I went and picked up Henry’s records and brought all of them to the reporter at the KNS offices and I would have sat there as long as he would have liked to review them. He chose to look at only a few pages during our relatively brief time together. I declined to leave them with him, as the story notes, because they were the only copy I had. I offered to get copies made and bring them back another day but he said he needed to finish up the story that afternoon (there were about 300 pages to get copied).
So that’s how that went down.
I can’t wait to read the comments under the story today that make me sound deranged for only being willing to offer “selected” medical records.
Additionally, when the reporter asked me for a direct, on the record quote about this matter, and I started my quote by referring to Henry as “a teenage boy.” The reporter stopped me mid-quote and told me that my son was “not a boy, but a man.” He then went on to lecture me about how some 18 year old boys, Henry’s age, are fighting and dying in Iraq. He basically refused to take my quote in which I referred to Henry as “a boy,” and insisted that I reword what I’d said to something else. We settled on “teenager” or “teen.” I can’t quite recall. By that time I was in tears, having been fussed at by the reporter for calling my son “a boy” when describing him at the reporter’s request.
On a happier note, I am very pleased to read in the story that the Sheriff’s Department intends to keep looking into where Henry got the drugs that killed him and why help wasn’t summoned. Kudos to KCSO on that. However, the comments below the story in which folks are suggesting that I publicly apologize to the KCSO for having suggested that the investigation wasn’t handled properly are very hurtful because THE INVESTIGATION WASN’T HANDLED PROPERLY. And you have no idea how painful it is for me to be unable to share the details of what I know about what happened that day when Henry was assaulted because I continue to hold out hope that things WILL be investigated properly, and I don’t want to sully the investigators’ work by talking publicly about the facts and details of the case. But it’s really difficult for me. The KCSO knows a lot more than they are sharing publicly at this time and so do I. And that’s all I can say at the moment.
I guess I shouldn’t read the comments. I’ll try that, but it’s hard.
69 Responses to “UPDATED: Those “Selected” Medical Records”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
What a nightmare. And mind-boggling that you have to endure all of this, too. The whole episode with the “boy” and “teen” and “man” literally made me feel sick inside. As Wallace Stevens said, “The world is ugly and the people are sad.”
Much strength and courage to you as you continue to fight for your boy. He was beautiful.
You don’t know me, but I just wanted to add another voice to the ones that say DON’T READ THOSE COMMENTS. On every story in the KNS (and in most internet news sources), it’s usually mostly the lowest common denominator that comments and really don’t care about the people in the story- it’s just their moment to get their random thoughts out, relevant or irrelevant they may be. Besides, no matter what the comments are, you don’t need to be reading others impersonal comments about your son’s death, who don’t know all the facts, don’t know you or your family, and are just making generalized speculations. Believe me- it doesn’t help…
MaryMS- I just read the article a little while ago, and that comment you made is on there. Maybe it does just take a bit for them to be approved.
The KNS reporter’s behavior and his comments to you are unconscionable. This is why when anyone from the KNS tries to sell me a subscription to the paper I reply, “I wouldn’t read that rag if you gave it to me for free and with a $100 bill tucked inside every issue.”
Re: the KCSO, what can anyone say? If something doesn’t benefit their political agenda de jour, it’s a non-issue. Again, unconscionable.
Katie, you are much more gracious toward both of these entities than I could ever be. Surely there’s a special place in hell …..
As a voyeur to your blog I am left wondering lately a few things . . . do you have a lawyer? If so, is your legal counsel advicing you NOT to be laying this all out on your blog? It seems to me, an outsider, that it will only hurt any case re: Henry not to mention your own reputation. I like your blog and I like you but honestly I find the whole blogging thing a mystery, laying out ones personal business for the world. I don’t do it but I read them because I’m a voyeur. I find people interesting. But honestly, I worry sometimes about you and how much you are disclosing on this blog about Henry’s case. I understand your need to want to fight but I don’t think this is helping. That’s just my opinion. I hope someone close to you is advising you on this.
Don’t read the comments, Katie. Really, don’t. You’re not missing anything. If there’s something really important that happens in the comments on the local paper’s website someone will let you know. But don’t look yourself. It’s just a waste of your spirit.
Another newspaper journalist weighing in here. Most newspapers adhere to the style guidelines laid out in the AP Stylebook for most things like the “man” vs. “boy” debate. For the non-media types, the AP stylebook is the go-to source for answers to questions like, “Should the time be written as ’9:30 a.m.’ or “9:30 A.M.?” It has rules for how sports scores are punctuated, when to capitalize things like “Girl Scouts,” whether anyone than the president of the United States should be referred to as “Mr. President,” if two moving vehicles hit each other, it’s a collision, but if one vehicle hits a stationary object it’s a crash, etc etc etc.
According this style guide, which is used industry wide, subjects of stories who are 18 or older are described as men and women. So if the headline reads “Man Bites Dog,” then the person who did the biting was 18 or older. If the person who bit the dog was 17, then the AP Stylebook indicates that “Boy Bites Dog” is the proper wording for the headline.
HOWEVER!!! And this is HUGE- the reporter shouldn’t be imposing those rules on an interviewee’s QUOTE. Jeez Louise. Manipulating quotes is a big no-no. Newspaper photographers are NEVER supposed to stage a shot. They are never allowed to ask a subject to act a certain way or tell them to “look angry,” and by asking you to change your quote, that’s exactly what he did. Ugh. So wrong.
A question to the journalists out there: If Katie’s quote had run with Henry described as a boy, would the reporter have been expected to point out elsewhere in the article that (according to the law, which is relevant because we’re talking about using the criminal justice system to achieve justice for Henry, and the AP Stylebook) he was in fact a man? I suspect that that might have been more objectionable to you, Katie, than having your quote changed so that he was referred to as a “teen.” And this is something you’ve posted about before, so it’s entirely possible that the reporter knew how you would feel about it being explicitly pointed out that Henry was of age.
As far as “Katie Granju showed the News Sentinel selected medical records from a 2-inch-high file of records,” I guess that would seem fair to me if the reporter was asking to see certain things and you were finding the pages and handing them to him, but not if he was holding the records and looking through them on his own while you just sat there. I don’t think it makes you sound “deranged.” I just think that there is a difference between a reporter being directed to specific documents and having to take on trust that they give an accurate picture of the whole of the record and a reporter looking through a file to see what he can find, even if the time he has with the file is limited — and I think that that difference is relevant enough that it should be mentioned. In the future I might keep a full copy of Henry’s records on hand so that I could leave it with a reporter on deadline. I think that when we are trying to get media coverage for specific issues, it is our job to make it as easy as possible for the reporter to write an accurate story, and having documents ready to hand over is one of the ways we do that.
I’m not suggesting that the reporter did everything right, especially since people who would know better than I are saying he did something really wrong. I’m just saying that I don’t think the story that resulted was any less accurate than I would expect, given my experience with newspaper reporters (which is as an activist participating in events for which we wanted media coverage), who in fairness have limited time and space to spend on any one story and could probably find another story that would be easier to write about.
I hope you get better coverage the next time the sheriff’s department
(Sorry, I hit “Submit” before I was ready.) … or any other official agency releases information about Henry’s case.
“A question to the journalists out there: If Katie’s quote had run with Henry described as a boy, would the reporter have been expected to point out elsewhere in the article that (according to the law, which is relevant because we’re talking about using the criminal justice system to achieve justice for Henry, and the AP Stylebook) he was in fact a man?”
I was a print journalist for a number of years. I would expect the reporter to point out Henry’s age, which he did. I know nothing about Tennessee law, but I don’t see that the man/boy distinction is relevant at all. His age would be relevant if Henry were alive and there were some question of charging *him* with a crime (at least, it would be relevant here in South Carolina, and I would expect it’s similar in most/all states). However, the issue at hand is whether anyone can be held liable for injuring Henry. I think there are some cases where there are greater penalties for assaulting very young or very old people – but I’d be surprised if a state’s laws distinguished between assaulting a 17-year-old and assaulting an 18-year-old. That aside, a reporter shouldn’t be challenging an interviewee to change a quote. Let’s say the mother of one of those soldiers in Afghanistan is interviewed about her son’s death. If she heartbrokenly refers to him as “my child”, do you expect a reporter to say, “Hey lady, cut the mush – he wasn’t a child, he was a man. Come up with a better quote.”
I second one commenter’s suggestion of having the complete records scanned, to make them more easily available.
I was a newspaper reporter and have written for magazines as well, ones that are scrupulously factchecked, and you don’t change quotes or script quotes. You just don’t. Squabbling over such a thing with a grieving mother suggests insensitivity on the reporter’s part. I also do not see why the reporter could not wait until he could review the medical records. Maybe he asked for more time and his editor said no, we don’t know. The medical records seem to be at the heart of the story, I certainly would wanted to have had them in hand before I wrote my story. Katie, I don’t think this article makes you seem like a nut. Knowing your version makes me think he’s a slippery reporter.
So who did end up calling 911 for H? Was it the people in the house and you’re saying they called too late?
Your son was and always will be your boy – even if he had lived to be 100. Sending love and support your way.
It’s none of my business but I feel like I want to tell you to stop blogging about this and stop talking to reporters until the investigation is complete, and then you should lay it all out. I don’t think you are helping your case or yourself by sharing these details now. Don’t respond to another reporter’s request. It’s not a good story that a drug user and dealer is dead, at least not for the user/dealer’s side. Not a lot of sympathy out there from people who don’t know you and your family personally. This can’t be good for your other kids either. I’m so sorry for what you are going through and understand the compulsion to share and feel angry and devastated. I just don’t think it’s going to help you in the long run. I’m so sorry.
Katie – is this the same person as may potentially be involved?
http://www.mccrackencountysheriff.com/media/100714a.htm
I shared the story about the reporter making you change your quote with my sister, a journalist of 18 years. She responded and said it was outrageously and totally inappropriate, and suggested you let the reporter’s editor know about the exchange.
Katie, DO NOT READ THE COMMENTS on KNS. I am appaled at the childish, rude, obnoxious behavior of the people commenting on that website. GEESH! Don’t do it girl!
I read the article. I read your reaction. I used to be a reporter. You have every RIGHT to be quoted the way you want to be quoted without having a reporter show bias and lecture you. If you think of H as a boy, that is your right, and it’s up to the reporter to accurately capture what you say in your quote. Since H was 18, the reporter also has the option to refer to him as a man or a teen in the narrative. I’m really surprised the reporter’s editor did not trim the ME’s quotes. There are way to convey meaning without being overly graphic. In my experience, the reporter had an opinion and it clouded his reporting.
Further, if you are so inclined, I would call the news editor and relate how the reporter lectured you on AP style and that he demanded you rephrase your quote. Point out that the reporter is biased and his article twists the facts about the medical record. They will write another article, and it should be by a fair and unbiased reporter.
Oh, Katie. I read only a few of the comments on the article (and, thankfully, saw that some were truly supportive of you and what you must be going through). Don’t listen to the hateful, ignorant people saying such unfair things. Anyone who spends 10 minutes reading your blog knows that Henry was so very, very much more than “a druggie” and that your intentions in pursuing a thorough investigation of his death are honorable. I’ve been struck so many times at how generous you’ve been–despite the roadblocks you’ve faced–with both the local press and the local police. I’m a complete stranger who lives clear across the country and I think about you, Henry, your family, and the torture of drug addiction every day because of what I read here. I have two young boys, and you have inspired several conversations between my husband and me about how we’ll approach their probable experimentation with drugs when they’re teenagers. What you’re doing is so important, so meaningful, and surely so thoroughly exhausting. I hope you feel all the support you have right now.