Generalizations don’t generally work on Facebook
Little Charlotte Neff, all of 21 and righteously indignant as only those in that age group these days can be, began ragging us on our Facebook Tuesday night shortly before 8 p.m. I watched in amusement as she of the Fairfield Community Schools education (wherein students are taught that a little dissertation has an intro, as many pertinent paragraphs as you need for an outline, the summary, and an ‘in conclusion’) apparently thought she was taking me to task for “lying” about her in the current issue’s article about the Haven Kirkpatrick trial coverage.
I had to scratch my head….I didn’t remember seeing her name in the coverage, but I figured if it was in there, there was a reason for it. So the next morning I went to re-read not only the coverage, but the notes that came in from our correspondent on it as well…and sure enough, there she was. Here it is directly from the raw notes, as issued by state’s witness Kara Trueblood Rodgers, under direct examination by prosecutor Mike Valentine, day 1:
Kara had knowledge of Charlotte Neff and Tiffany Williams, both former students of Haven Kirkpatrick’s, having a sexual relationship with Haven, but Kara denied having a sexual relationship with Haven.
In our coverage, which was an edited version of the raw notes our correspondent took, it appeared this way:
Rodgers also testified that she was aware that Kirkpatrick had had sexual relationships with former students Charlotte Neff (in Wayne County) and Tiffany Williams (in Gallatin County).
Now, we’re not going to second guess our correspondent. He sat right there throughout the entire trial while we were housebound handling other projects that needed our imminent attention. He’s not going to just pull a name out of his ass to ascribe to testimony being given on the stand. If he reported that Kara Rodgers said this, she flippin said it, end of story; what point would there be in making it up? All he’s there to do is take notes.
However, Ms. Neff says SHE was right there, and she didn’t hear Rodgers say it. Generally, we call that ‘selective hearing.’
Anyway, Ms. Neff wigged out—roughly two weeks after this most recent issue has been on the stands—and sent us her diatribe. Here is the beginning of it:
It continues, but I wasn’t able to screen cap it, as I was looking at the rest of it on the phone. I continued to address her concerns, and she continued to send them, as follows:
“Honey, I know for a fact that was NEVER said in court. Especially from Kara. Kara spent time with Haven as well. Tiffany and Haven did have a relationship, which was admitted to by both of them. Never was my name mentioned in court. It was however, mentioned a couple articles ago in a discussion post. You lie. Everyone knows your paper is a pile of lies. It is the joke of Southeastern Illinois and reasons like this are why. You are infuriated with me that I am calling you out on it on your page.”
I responded to this (remember, I don’t have the exact wording, as the thread was deleted by Ms. Neff) by telling her that I wasn’t infuriated at all; I was just boggled at the number of people who can’t wrap their heads around the fact that one of their best buds is a CHILD MOLESTER.
She responded (remember, I don’t have the exact wording, as the thread was deleted by Ms. Neff) that yes I WAS pissed off, and the fact that I deleted the thread was proof of that, and she would be getting back with me about the whole “lying about her” thing.
I read the final post (on my phone, remember), being puzzled over the “deleted” comment (as I hadn’t deleted anything), and with great bemusement, went to enter—on my phone—”We miss you already” as a final comment. But when I went to post that, a message popped up on my phone advising me that the thread no longer existed.
Cussing, I ran upstairs to the laptop and thanked the stars that Facebook doesn’t automatically refresh like some web pages do. I was able to screen cap what you see above, but everything else was gone. So, not only was this dimbulb ragging, but she was deleting her rag (which she is able to, as she started it)….then blamed ME. Shit.
She popped back up later on when I posted a follow-up on it, not quite as vicious, but ragging about how she didn’t expect I would be truthful in recounting the whole thing. Again: why make it up? The reality of it is MUCH more interesting. Even if she opted to take a lot of it away from me.
But what she has also done is provided me with an opportunity to make several pertinent points….points that people with common sense already know, but little dimwit kids—and their older, my-shit-don’t-stink parents so entrenched in their high-and-mighty lifestyles—seem never to “get.”
A) We don’t “make things up” around here. We cover 16 counties regularly; there’s plenty enough going on without having to concoct things. Reality, we have found, is much more bizarre than anything people could fabricate….and bizarre is just interesting.
B) If it’s said in court, we’re going to report it. We’re not going to “gloss over” testimony that could make a person with “standing in so-ci-eh-teh” uncomfortable….like SOME news outlets would. And I strongly suspect that this is what Ms. Neff’s problem, in large part, is. We don’t know who so-ci-eh-teh people are in Wayne County, and furthermore, we don’t CARE.
C) If it’s said in court, WE DIDN’T SAY IT. We only REPORTED it. There is nothing that causes us to be more aghast at the utter and sheer stupidity some people possess than to be told “YOU SAID (blah blah blah).” No, WE didn’t. We are there to report and chronicle what’s said. If someone else SAYS it, we are only the MESSENGER.
I don’t know what Ms. Neff’s real problem is. We believe our correspondent when he reported what he did. We also believe it might have gone right over Ms. Neff’s somewhat vapid head when it was being said right in front of her. She has advised that it is her goal to get court transcripts and see if that’s what Kara Trueblood Rodgers really said in her testimony. We say have at it. She says if it’s in there, she’ll apologize. We’re saying if it’s not, we’ll not only correct, but have more than a little powwow with our correspondent. But we believe it is. And we also believe that if she discovers that, we won’t hear another peep out of her. Because we’re pretty sure that her “daddy” (we hear it’s actually her STEPdaddy, surgeon Pat Molt, although that’s not been independently confirmed) likely heard about Ms. Neff’s alleged indiscretions that were probably suspected, but probably long denied by the youngun when it came to Ms. Kirkpatrick. After all, this is the kind of thing Ms. (B)Haven inspires in her young students:
This photo was grabbed from the MySpace of one of Haven’s “friends” and “supporters” by the name of Robson (we can’t remember her first name; the site’s since been deleted), which Haven “commented” about favorably; I mean, OF COURSE she did….these were high-school-age girls, after all.
So to end this little expose, I’ll wrap it with this: Ms. Neff can generalize all she wants, and blanket the internet with her opinion that because she’s taking issue with ONE SENTENCE in an article, that means “we lie” here at Disclosure. All the time. With impunity. Which is ridiculous because we’re about to embark on our tenth year at this, so how did we get this far? But I digress. Such a generalization doesn’t work. It’s about as effective as saying that everyone who supports Haven Kirkpatrick in any form is a lesbian, homosexual, and/or child molester….
….and Ms. Neff would certainly take issue with that, now, wouldn’t she?
Short URL: http://www.disclosurenewsonline.com/?p=10610