Until his death my favorite "Newsman" was Paul Harvey. More than anything, he commented on the "news." He seemed to always be incredibly wise in his evaluation of what to say in any given matter.
I recall once, when a particularly heinous crime had been committed by an individual, Mr. Harvey said, "He would want you to know his name." Of course he never revealed the name.
Maybe the headline should read:
Darren Goforth, a 10-year veteran of the Harris County Sheriff’s Office slain by a back-shooting coward.
Then a story should follow regarding the life, work, and family of Mr. Goforth. The only commentary regarding the killer would be that he was captured and in jail awaiting trial.
Rather, I imagine, the narrative will undoubtedly continue regarding this (alleged) killer, his motives, and reasonings (????), and how the "events" of other crimes pushed him to this act.
The report I read in TIME went on, as usual:
The nationwide “Black Lives Matter” movement that formed after 18-year-old Michael Brown was shot and killed by a white police officer in Ferguson, Missouri has sought sweeping reforms of policing. Related protests erupted in Texas recently after a 28-year-old Chicago-area black woman, Sandra Bland, was found dead in a county jail about 50 miles northwest of Houston three days after her arrest on a traffic violation. Texas authorities said she committed suicide but her family is skeptical of that.
Maybe these thing are not interconnected. My money is that they are, and largely in part because the "media" does not have the wisdom of the late Paul Harvey.
Does that mean we wouldn't know who killed Michael Brown, or who shot up the theatre in Colorado, or gunned down people in a Church? Suits me just fine if that news is never released. Let the guilty live and die in obscurity? Would it help?