Tuesday, February 14, 2012

Weber County Forum Housekeeping Note

An alert for our readers to a brand new feature which we've added to the blog sidebar

We've been out of the office all day; and lacking any real red-meat news in today's snoozer of a news cycle, we'd like to alert our readers to a brand new feature which we've added to the blog. We've been following, and will continue to follow developments in the still fast developing 1/4/12 Ogden Shootings case, in which connection we'll make note of our new "People v Stewart" sidebar module which so far includes these links:
We've put this one up for quick reference so our readers can quickly and conveniently check all significant past WCF stories, and those which will arise as this case develops. We anticipate that this will be one of the biggest local stories of the decade; so we want all important developments in this story to be right there, at our readers' fingertips.
We received this link from friends of the defendant, Matthew Stewart. It includes, among other things, a link to Mr. Stewart's Facebook "support" page, other interesting info designed to humanize the defendant in this case and also a link to a PayPal donation button, for those fair minded readers who'd like to kick in a few bucks, just to make sure that Mr. Stewart gets a fair trial in this case. We invite our readers to wade in and check it out.

We'd like to also solicit our readers to submit their own links for this module. We anticipate that this story will be a major discussion item for some significant time in the future, so please, O Gentle Ones... submit your links.

Have at it, WCF political wonks.

Comments, anyone?


Flowbee said...

The candidate you endorsed for City Council was arrested for multiple drug and impaired driving charges...  
and that is a slow news day?

rudizink said...

We'll comment on this story if and when the former candidate is ever convicted.

Stephen M. Cook said...

She already admitted guilt.  Can't help but notice your buddy Stewart getting lots of mention here on your personal I hate Ogden blog, for multiple attempted murder of Ogden's best and bravest.
Best and bravest.  Give it a try.

Stewart,  sure.  O'neil? no.

Notice you removed all of your Booze Edwards-worshiping links:  nice back-track and cover.

rudizink said...

Wrong Stephen.  I love Ogden.  And I haven't deleted any references to Edwards, other than the libelous post which you lodged over an extended period of time last year.  If you don't believe me, search "Buce Edwards." You'll notice, by the way, that you're no longer blacklisted on WCF.  Please don't abuse your newly-restored posting privileges.  Thanks in advance.

Bob Becker said...

Sorry, Rudi, but the TLJ story is news, it's relevant to Weber County, and it ought to be here.  I understand the reticence during a city election, and applaud it, but there's no election on now.  WCF and its posters, me among them, were quick enough to jump on news that Mr. Lesham was in legal trouble in California for example, as soon as it was known that he'd been charged. 

I was saddened by the news about TLJ, and disappointed, but it does seem to me it's a topic that ought to be on WCF for comment.  I was surprised when I didn't see it here earlier.

rudizink said...

  Sorry, Bob.  I've consistently avoided posting the accusatory innuendo
in misdemeanor cases, notably the today's ridiculous story, the story of
the council candidate who was arrested weeks before the November
election, and as Mr. Cook points out, the misdemeanor charges which were
lodged (and still remain unproven) against Mr. Edwards over a year ago.
I've followed the same policy in several other minor cases over the
past seven years too, btw.

Felony charges are another matter.

It's a balancing act, as far as I'm concerned, Bob.

I don't believe that in fairness it's right to hammer somebody for what
boils down to minor criminal charges, especially when it comes to
individuals  who might not be arguably construed as public figures.

Major felonies are a different matter, of course, afaic.

As for the Standard's publication of booking photos in virtually EVERY
Weber County arrest, the SE publisher ought to be horsewhipped for that,
afaic. I'm sure most defense counsel would also agree with me on that.

It's nothing short of greed-motivated sensationalism, afaic, and its
effect is far more prejudicial to the fairness of the judicial process
than probative of the facts, in my ever not-so-humble view.

That's my take; and I'm stickin' with it, Bob.

This is the policy I've stuck with over the years; and this is the policy I plan to stick with.

Markmalone said...

But gossip and inuendo is the WCF's stock and trade. Why change now?

rudizink said...

 If you were a regular WCF reader, Markalone, you'd know better than that.  Of course you're not; so you don't.

Bob Becker said...

Arrests are not gossip, Rudi. They are fact and they are public record. And when they involve a public person, they are news. Any former candidate for elected office  in Ogden City or Weber County is a public person by right of their having stood for office.

As for the SE's booking photos, I don't much like them either, and seems to me if the SE is going to keep posting them [they tell me it's one of their most visited on line features], seems to me they're obligated in the same space to post notices when someone whose booking photo they posted is either acquitted or has the charges dropped. Fair's fair.

BikerBabe said...

battling evil, excess is good; for he who is moderate in announcing the
truth is presenting half-truth. He conceals the other half out of fear
of the people's wrath. - Kahlil Gibran (1883 - 1931)

The Truth, remember -- not assumptions and accusations.



rudizink said...

Once again we'll have to agree to disagree, eh, Curm?

Stephen M. Cook said...


rudizink said...

This is Good, Steohen. Welcome back to the WCF blog community.

Dorrene Jeske said...

I have a hard time with the idea of making a donation to help a murderer.  I know that I will take a lot of flack on my stand on support for Matthew Stewart because he should be allowed a good defense attorney.  I'm not denying him that, but I will not do anything to help him.  I feel that he should have considered that when he was preparing to ambush the police, DEA agents or anyone else who went to his house.  In his statements to the press he contradicted himself, and his statements were oxymorons because he really doesn't have a leg to stand on (and not because he was shot in the leg) -- he can not justify his actions.  His actions were premeditated -- all his preparation before hand proves that. 

He has deprived three innocent little children of the love, association and doing things with a caring, loving father.   I won't presume to know how much his wife will need him and his support in rearing their children or how much she misses him.  I think we need to keep things in their proper perspective.

metalfuseman said...

Highly disappointed in you Dorrene.   I do not see how he contradicted himself  in his statements.  I do however see how you contradict yourself   as  in stating that the "murderer" deserves a good defense Lawyer.   Now how could he have premeditated this invasion by the WMNSF?    Does "the murderer/terrorist/bomber"  not deserve his day in court?
If you are upset over the mounting support in the community and beyond for this man then blame Dee Smith and the rest of the team for there lame ass  (Business as usual in Ogden) handling of this case.   Do you really think that the supporters of  Mathew Stewart wanted any police killed or heart?    There is way to many things that don't add up and It is much to early for the pitchforks and  noose.    
At the very least this veteran has earned that right,    Now,  I believe I have a donation to make!

Dorrene Jeske said...

Metalfuseman, the reason that I believe Stewart deserves a good defense attorney is because it is his right as guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.  I'm surprised that you don't recognize that.  You mentioned that as a vet he had earned the right to have his day in court -- being a vet has nothing to do with that right -- every U.S. citizen has that right. 
It seems that you did not carefully and thoughtfully read his statements or you would have seen the holes in his attempts to justify his actions.  Any rational, law-abiding person does not build a barricade in his house stocked with guns and ammunition, and he had planned and prepared an escape route which he used to further wreak havoc and do the most damage possible.  He had made a bomb, but didn't have a chance to detonate it.  He made these preparations in advance.  I see that as premeditated -- these preparations didn't happen by themselves and they were not an accident.  In his combat training he received the knowledge of where armored protection covered a person and he shot the officers where they did not have protection.

How do you feel about leaving his family fatherless and husbandless?  Do they deserve that?

Remember he was growing marijuana in his house and breaking the law and had warrrants for his arrest concerning other issues where he had broken the law.  The police were only doing their job of protecting us, the public.

Post a Comment

© 2005 - 2014 Weber County Forum™ -- All Rights Reserved