Prosecutor: Signature forgery decision within 30 days
Just reported moments ago by the Toledo Free Press, Prosecutor: Signature forgery decision within 30 days. Part of the recommended news piece:
A decision on whether to move forward with the Lucas County Republican Party signature fraud case will take place in the next 30 days, according to Cuyahoga County Prosecutor James Gutierrez.
The Cuyahoga County prosecutor’s office is investigating the alleged signature fraud case involving campaign finance forms filed during Jon
Stainbrook’s chairmanship. The case was sent to Cleveland on Oct. 26 after Lucas County Chief Investigator Frank Stiles concluded his investigation; this was due to concerns of the appearance of conflict and “allegations that are flying around” in the Toledo market.
Personally, it’s hard to understand why it’s taken this long, people have gone before the Grand Jury on murder cases that took place after these issues were raised, but? We’ll learn in the next 30 days if there is enough evidence for prosecution, if it will go to a Grand Jury or if no action will be taken.
Well, for – what is it now, the seventh time in as many months? – it’s time for the TFP to go back to the fact-checker. The beleaguered Bill Mason, not Jim Guttierez, is the Cuyahoga Co. Prosecutor, and has been since 2001. Guttierez is one of Mason’s assistant prosecutors.
February 5th, 2010 at 9:35 pmYou don’t read the TFP remember? He’s one of the prosecuting attorney’s there, so it’s not a huge deal, except for those looking for anything to nit pick about.
It’s not that uncommon to not add the specific title, just one example:
Since there is technically only “one” Cuyahoga County Prosecutor, this would mean the Plain Dealer wasn’t “precise” enough either.
February 5th, 2010 at 9:54 pmWhat mistake did the PD make? I see no reference to it in the TFP article.
In any event, “prosecutors,” with a lower case “p,” is a generic term, and was used properly in your example. “Prosecutor,” with a capital “P,” is a proper noun understood to mean THE actual elected official. This is why TFP was wrong, and why a reader who didn’t know better would believe that Guttierez was the Cuyahoga Co. Prosecutor. Any serious journalist will back me up on this.
Am I nitpicking? No more than you were recently when, in an effort to point out that Tom Waniewski opposes gay rights (or for that matter gay anything), I mistakenly claimed that he voted against the domestic partner registry, when in fact he “only” went on record to say that he would have voted against it if he had been on council at the time it was voted on. I recall being hugely taken to task for that slip up. But unlike TFP I don’t claim to be a journalist, I don’t reach mass audiences and I therefore don’t have professional standards to meet.
February 5th, 2010 at 10:26 pmOkay Sujay, the mere difference in not adding “assistant” clearly to you means the same as a vote that did not take place as far as the level of what’s right and what’s wrong.
You did not just not include one word, you were wrong about it completely. But, if it makes you feel better to go off topic to make one word an issue as opposed to commenting on the story? I’m happy for you.
February 5th, 2010 at 10:30 pmThe TFP should do what every other media source does that makes an omission on an online story, just change it without a word of correction. At least they got the name right.
February 5th, 2010 at 10:33 pmYes, and at least it wasn’t an advertorial.
February 5th, 2010 at 10:46 pmWell, my sources say this is a slam dunk. And, that the prosecutor is going out of his way to tie up ALL loose ends.
One wonders how long MegKelJo can keep the proverbial finger in the proverbial dike.
Cheers…
February 6th, 2010 at 8:39 amOK, Rogue,
Gotta ask…
If indeedy this is a “slam-dunk” What the heck is taking sooo long. I would think this would be rather cut and dried, yes or no, black or white, right or wrong…you get the idea.
MegKelJo? (I love it when my verbage comes home!)
Happy Saturday!
mj
February 6th, 2010 at 10:40 amI just can’t wait for all of the little staniacs other issues to come home to roost!
Game on, little jon.
February 6th, 2010 at 11:47 amI am not surprised it’s taking so long – I predicted that it would. This is a political hot potato for those who will be handling the prosecution(s).
The Blade has such a warm place in its stony heart for this fellow that everyone involved knows there will be a backlash in the publication if anyone holds Stainbrook accountable. For anything, really.
Happily the locals have both quit their subscriptions or are now reading the publication with a critical eye.
My opinion only..
February 7th, 2010 at 11:09 amMindy and Rogue-
One will have to wonder, which of the two is Sadie Mae, and which one is Squeaky Fromme when it comes to Jon’s two consorts…
February 7th, 2010 at 3:23 pmThanks, Henrietta,
I tried to tell him that comment wasn’t mine, I am guessing it was yours. Making a reference such as that is not something I sould say. Again, its not even clever.
For the record…MegKelJo is mine and I have made this reference to the original intendees. When the term was originated, there was no malfeaence intended.
I’m not snarky all the time.
Be well.
mj
February 7th, 2010 at 4:59 pmThe prosecutor might want to look at the signature of Jon’s from the fire marshall report, as shown on Swampbubble’s. It could hold some clues!
http://swampbubbles.com/20100208/jon-busy-or-he-trying-avoid-fire-marshal
And what happens when you blow off a follow-up inspection?
What about holding another meeting prior to resolving the issues listed?
Jon held a meeting on January 9 in the same upstairs location that the Fire Marshall initially said that his people had to be present for any gathering to continue back on December 21, 2009.
Maybe LisaRenee is able to get some answers to this…
February 8th, 2010 at 2:29 pm