~ Ricci's auto mechanic testified in front of the Federal Grand Jury on Wednesday. We have learned from this mechanic that Ricci took the Jeep in sometime before May 30th to have it repaired. The auto machanic started working on the Jeep, but received a call from a woman near on or before May 30th, saying she was Ricci's wife and that needed the Jeep for an emergency. The mechanic allowed Ricci to pick it up and Ricci picked it up on May 30th, 2002. Ricci then returned it on June 8th, 2002 so that the mechanic could finish the repair work on it. When the Jeep was returned on the 8th, the Jeep was muddy and dirty on the outside. The mechanic observed Ricci remove and place into a plastic bag, seat covers that were laying in the back the Jeep and he watch Ricci also remove a post hole digger tool. The mechanic also took down the new mileage on the Jeep and noticed that from 500 to 1000 extra miles had been placed on the Jeep from the time Ricci picked it up on May 30th, 2002.
Also we learned that several items were taken from Ricci's father-in-laws mobile home by police (Ricci lives next door to his in-laws). A golf cap (from inside the home), a machete (from the storage shed), a white polo shirt (from the storage shed ?), a light colored pair of pants (from the storage shed ?).
SLCPD are still not calling Ricci a suspect in this case and no charges have been filed against him in the kidnapping of Elizabeth Smart.
FRANK BEACON: Elizabeth Please Come Home
I've been watching the trauma unfold on television, over the radio and in newspapers daily. The apparent kidnapping of Elizabeth Smart from her Salt Lake City, Utah bedroom on 5 June has shaken a city, a state, maybe even a nation. These are troubled times. People are antsy. No one wants to accept the possibility that there is - once and for all - no safe place left in the world. Elizabeth, 14, was reportedly tucked tight in her bed next to her 9-year-old sister in a secure home located in an upscale neighborhood in a city famous for its religious affiliations. Who would have imagined? Who could have known?
Suddenly, everyone is suspect. A distraught mother and father are bombarded with "routine" questions. Intricate details about their home, family, work, relationships and personal lives are under the nation's fleeting microscope - you know the one - in a crisis it settles in an area illuminated by the spotlight so society's self-proclaimed scientists can make their own hypothesis based on minimal facts and maximum hype.
Do you note a tone of sarcasm here? Yeah, maybe. As a journalist I'm an adamant proponent of the public's right to know. The question I haven't answered yet is this: "The right to know what?"
I pray each day for Elizabeth's safe return. I praise each day the volunteers that stand behind this family. I am warmed by the candlelight vigils held on her behalf. I mourn for others who are also missing and didn't have the benefit of the nation's attention. I am appalled by the media's reckless coverage (but lap it up hourly).
Having a strong background in investigative journalism, I understand the motivations that cause reporters to flock to a morsel of news like crows to a hunk of raw meat. Many swallow before they've even had a chance to taste it. Some members of the media genuinely want to help. Some thrive on the thrill of the hunt. For some, it's all about ratings. All of them know it's what their customers really, really want - news, any news. "Just tell us something."
Reality TV is huge right now. The reality is, nothing is sacred. Nothing is too dangerous, too personal, too obscene, too frightening, too obscure or even too hurtful to throw at a sea of hungry fish that will pay to eat what tastes good to them (regardless of the price).
Bret Michael Edmunds knows what it's like to be in the spotlight. He's the "not a suspect, just wanted for questioning" guy police zoomed in on last week. We've seen his parents, know about his drug habits, have examined his car, are familiar with his personal hygiene habits, have heard an exclusive interview with his ex-landlord and know his mental state. Was he involved? We don't know that yet.
This week Richard Ricci is officers' top "potential" suspect. Law enforcement officers (or somebody) must have sensed the media circus was getting a little out of hand. It has begun to cross the line between humanitarian coverage of trial and community spirit and a good old-fashioned witch-hunt. This is evident in the move to hear testimony from Ricci's friends, family and neighbors in highly secret hearings before a federal grand jury. Is Ricci our guy? I certainly hope so. If not, his life will never be the same again now that the full extent of his rap sheet has been broadcast on national television.
My younger brother was once driving down an Arizona side street on a motorcycle when he was pulled over by police. It seemed that he matched the description of a rapist reported to have struck not long before he surfaced there. He wasn't the rapist, of course. "But I've got to tell you, my life flashed before my eyes," he said. The insinuation of such a possibility is enough to cast a shadow of a doubt - a shadow that can be impossible to lift. He was questioned only on the street and released. Could his life have been played back before his eyes (all of our eyes) on the nightly news? Of course. Police had, after all, questioned him.
I believe strongly in opened public records. I will fight vehemently to keep public meetings public. I have demanded documents protected by my state's Sunshine Law. I am also a grizzly advocate of responsible reporting.
To tell, or not to tell. That is the question.
Genealogists, like journalists, have a solemn responsibility to determine the difference between good solid news and gossip. I'm not suggesting censorship. I'm suggesting the use of thought and compassion in determining which items of interest you will include in a story or history about your research subject. There's no need to tiptoe around an issue or (heaven forbid) hide it, but before you include potentially harmful juicy details about someone's life in a publication (or conversation) of any kind, ask yourself these questions:
1) Is it true?
2) Is it documented by official, legal or other reliable sources?
3) Is it important?
4) Is it relevant?
5) Does it help develop a general sense of this individual's true character?
6) Is it common knowledge? If not, why?
7) Is it disputed? If so, why?
8) How will it help?
9) Who could it hurt?
10) Is there a way I can present it so that people will have the information without any implied or intended judgment on my part?
There are other issues to consider. Some will be specific to your circumstance. The important thing is that you do consider them.
More than just a thought,
Frank
Is there anything to back this up?
What is it 500 or 1000 miles. If the mechanic can be more accurate how can we be sure it was even 500 miles.
Utah Abduction Probe Taking Time
ASSOCIATED PRESSSALT LAKE CITY- For more than a week, investigators looking into the disappearance of Elizabeth Smart urgently wanted to talk to a drifter they said might have information about the mysterious abduction. But once Bret Edmunds was found, recovering from a drug overdose in a hospital 1,800 miles away, police appeared to lose interest.
And Richard Ricci, an ex-convict who once worked as a handyman in the Smart home, went to the top of the list of potential suspects. There were earlier dead-ends in the 3-week-old case - the man with a missing front tooth and a multicolored Rastafarian-style knit hat, the apparently fruitless search of nearby Emigration Canyon for the girl. So does this mean the Salt Lake City police are floundering, much as Boulder, Colo., police were accused of in the JonBenet Ramsey case? Not at all, some experts say. They say Salt Lake City investigators appear to be doing what they need to do to build a case. To Mike King, a criminal justice instructor, investigator for the Utah attorney general's office and coordinator of the Utah Criminal Tracking and Analysis Project, it is methodical police work. In fact, he said, police investigating a crime should not come to a conclusion too soon. "We can sometimes develop a theory before we have all the facts. Then we can spend all our time adjusting our facts to fit the theory," King said.
Police say 14-year-old Elizabeth was taken at gunpoint from her bedroom in the early morning hours of June 5. The early stages of the case were marked by misinformation. Police initially reported that Elizabeth's 9-year-old sister, Mary Katherine, was threatened by the kidnapper. But after police talked a fourth time with the younger girl, they changed their account and said that Mary Elizabeth had pretended to be asleep through much of the abduction and that the kidnapper may not have realized she was watching. Investigators say that during the first couple of days, police had to move fast - and chase down all sorts of possibilities - because the chances of finding the teen unharmed diminished as the hours passed.
Scott Robinson, a Denver defense attorney who closely watched the 1996 JonBenet case, said police in Boulder were accused of sloppy police work and were criticized for their refusal to quickly call in the FBI and for what was seen as arrogance when anyone asked a tough question.
In contrast, Salt Lake City investigators appear to be highly professional, Robinson said. If they are withholding investigative details, the lawyer said, that is exactly what they should be doing.
Certain crime-scene details known only to the police and the suspect can be used to confirm whether investigators have the right man.
Salt Lake City Police Chief Rick Dinse said police have received between 8,000 and 10,000 leads. They culled 1,300 as worth checking out. As of last week, Dinse said, 900 had been cleared, leaving 400 to go. "There's a whole bunch of questions out there but not enough answers," Capt. Scott Atkinson said. ---