Let's hope he doesn't manage to legally force his way back into the subsidized housing project.
He claims to withhold evidence for ethical reasons, none ever surfaced.
Who killed Jackie Nations?
Did the Council House Administrator kill her?
Has the Activities Director killed her aunt?
Did the Social Services Director do it?
Did Council House Co-Presidents cause her death?
Has lack of oversight by HUD contributed to her death?
They all probably contributed to her death through abuse or indifference. That construes as gross negligence especially when some of them acted for financial gain. Both police and medical examiners ruled out homicide yet Mitchell has since accused at least two residents with premeditated culpability in her death. He has made those official statements without a smidgen of evidence to support his contentions.
Jackie Nations (50), a healthy and active woman for her size, evidently died a painful, lingering death. Nations fell or jumped out of a window and lay dying on a roof. She had no help and lay there for up to three hours according to medical reports. Witnesses later identified sounds that they heard during the night and came forward to say that she did not die immediately. Others gave detailed reports about abuse that Nations, a person of diminished mental capacity, experienced during the days before her death.
This reporter has a dual obligation, truthfully to report wrongdoing to his audience and a sometimes competing obligation to wrongdoers. He meets both obligations by alerting authorities about upcoming publication when circumstances suggest violence. When authorities do nothing, then a journalist's personal responsibility ends whatever the outcome.
The death of Jackie Nations involves violence and misappropriation. Therefore, this reporter will withhold details temporarily. That will give state and federal authorities an opportunity to gather documents and interview witnesses without interference by third parties. It will also protect sources from intimidation by an administrator who has a history of fabricating evidence and tampering with witnesses.
A basic journalism principle allows alleged wrongdoers to explain themselves before publishing details of their alleged crimes. Sometimes that results in publication of a rebuttal. By that, they have a chance to give their side of the story.
Stephen (aka Stefan) A. Mitchell, Administrator, Council House, has obtained a blanket injunction restraining this reporter from approaching hundreds of people. He has attempted to stop publication of reports about abuse and misappropriation at Council House. He has also attempted to have this web site taken down. Presumably, he thinks that he can stop publication of the truth about what has happened to several residents.
That restriction affects people mentioned in this exposé and prevents the reporter from contacting them. Individuals mentioned negatively in published material have a constitutional right to respond to what they read about themselves. Mitchell has denied them that right.
Naming alleged wrongdoers insures that the public will have no doubt to whom a report applies and helps hold harmless as many innocent people as possible. Precise identification avoids mistaken identity. Use of names and addresses to support exposé is a time-honored tradition and within legal constraints.
Using personal data to support a story warns the public of unlawful activity and has always been considered ethical journalism. Otherwise, criminals can hide behind a curtain of censorship and prior restraint. Mitchell cannot lawfully restrict publication of names as he has tried to do. Naming individuals remains the prerogative of the reporter or editor.
All information contained in the Nations essay derives from public and other documents verified and validated with sources. After publication, the alleged wrongdoers may write to the editor if they wish and state their point of view. They must support their contentions with documentation. This unusual opportunity may mitigate damage caused to them by Mitchell's unusual injunction.
Mitchell persists in his supremacist behavior, unchecked. HUD has still not moved to launch a full investigation although they have received adequate information for that purpose. Instead, they have chosen to collude with Mitchell and his predecessor Mark T. Mullen to cover up abuse and misappropriation of government funds. Must other residents die before HUD officials stop the out-of-control, Council House management team in their tracks?