I’m not sure when the Courant, or any other local corporate media outlet, has given three pages of story to a rally or a crime, and yet, today that’s been done.
You could say that is a step forward. I wouldn’t.
I could not read past 1.5 pages of it. The details disclosed in it are not necessary for the public to know. What purpose does it serve by telling the public every lurid and horrible moment in the last hours of three females’ lives?
Well, it gets people riled up, for sure. As the discussion taking place over the past few weeks has shown, people really care about what happens now, after an elite family has been so savagely destroyed. It does not take the most skilled reader of media out there to know that the daily horrors (daily, versus absolute exception to the rule) that afflict people in various urban communities (Hartford, Bridgeport, New Haven, Middletown) are not given this same treatment.
Still, disclosing too much can disrupt the grieving process for victims’ family and friends. Legally, it can hurt the chances of a fair trial. I don’t need to know who collapsed where.
Being critical of how media and lawmakers are handling this crime, I am aware there are people who have interpreted that as siding with the criminals. There are also those who believe that bringing up important issues (such as the causes of such crimes) is more disrespectful than divulging information on how a child was raped. To that, all I can respond is with a rhetorical question: When is a more convenient time for you to talk about these things?
Because while what happened to the Petit family is horrible (and I should not have to even write such obvious disclaimers. is there anyone saying that they deserved it? christ.), there were people in urban areas permanently and fatally victimized before all of that happened, and it is still happening. Putting a face on violent crime helps to make the public more sympathetic; let’s realize that there are many victims’ faces out there.