I feel as though this article is all over the place. It starts off by saying he was arrested for "interstate travel with intent to engage in illicit sexual conduct." but then in another paragraph says that he admitted to having sexual intercourse with a 13-year-old girl at least five times.
I think the entire thing could be rearranged. I think the article should start out by explaining what happened, and why (each persons side of the story) it happened, the details such as how long he is going to be in jail and what his parole conditions are, are not as interesting and "news worthy". Yes, those details are important, but I feel like they can wait. The ending seems like the beginning. The article ends in where the girl was found after the crime was committed. Maybe the writer of the article could explain why. Did the victim call the police, or was she being searched for?
I the quotes that the writer used, from the two separate attorneys, work well and help you understand the situation better. But I feel as though the write is somewhat 'siding with' the criminal in the end. I think the two different arguments are too grouped together, in the beginning it seems as though the writer is siding with the victim and then in the end it seems like he has switched sides completely. Although the article shows no real emotion or opinion, that is just how I feel due to the way the information is put together.
http://www.bangordailynews.com/detail/139850.html
Friday, March 26, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment