Amid all these accusations (which if true, then good old Bernie can go f*%$ himself in hell), it would be nice if one of these news outlets would actually update this story. As of now, all we know is what Mark Schwarz says Bobby Davis told him. Other than that, we are only getting reactions by everyone. Why are there no reporters actually doing they're jobs and finding out anything new. I saw a new story this morning from Schwarz, standing outside the Carmelo, but he said the exact same things he said last night. Go find out something new! Here's some things I would love to know about, but no one has investigated:
- If Davis is claiming that a detective he talked to (Detective Doug Fox) guessed which "very prominent individual in the Syracuse area" molested him, saying there was a "tip" about something, shouldn't the police have at least some sort of file on Fine. It seems like a "tip" about child molestation would at least merit some questioning by someone. And if they're isn't a file, can't we track down Doug Fox and ask him what the "tip" was about? It seems like he would have something to say that would add some new information to the story. Also, according to Schwarz's report, Davis said Fox told him "...if you hear that it's happening to younger kids, then definitely let us know..." Doesn't it seem strange that a SVU detective would tell a victim to basically do his job for him? I know the statute of limitations was up for Davis, but if Fox had been "tipped" off before about Fine and had gotten a second victim to come forward, wouldn't that be enough to warrant at least a simple investigation?
- This altercation (would have called it an argument, but it's been reported Fine grabbed his neck) between Fine and Davis about a $5,000 loan has been brushed off so far, but seems like it could be a big deal. What was the intent of the loan? What was it actually used for? Why was Fine so upset about not getting paid up (I'm sure Fine wasn't scrimping for cash in 2001), to the point of a physical altercation? It's reported that Davis says he never paid the money back, but why not? Which leads to.....
- I know it has not been reported, but has been brought up on message boards and after watching the interviews it should at least warrant the question: Do these guys have a history of drug abuse? Not a question to ask to discount their credibility, but could answer a lot of questions about motive, and could answer questions about the above altercation. And I understand that an admission of drug use could have a chicken or the egg effect: he turned to drugs because of the abuse, or he was able to be abused so much because of drugs, or to go the other way, he wanted a fix so he's tried/trying to exhort it. Again, the answer could go a lot of ways, but could lead to new information.
-Why is there no hard evidence to back up anything Davis is saying (i.e. plane records, hotel bills, photos, etc.)? As a manager for the women's soccer team at SU, I know I had to get the ok by the athletic department to hop on a bus to go to Colgate for a game. There should be a paper record of everyone who traveled to every game. The way Schwarz is reporting it, it sounds like Davis was being snuck around everywhere in a duffle bag. If he was on every away trip, it seems like something everyone else on the flight/bus and the athletic department would know and have some sort of record.
- What was wrong with these two alleged victims in the interview? I'm not attacking the validity of their statements or character, but these two physically did not look good. And I know there could be a lot of reasons for this: being on camera, telling the world your story, or reliving horrendous memories. But from my standpoint, they looked more like one of two things: he was going through withdrawal of something or he was lying. Davis was jittery the whole time moving his hands, blinking a lot and avoiding eye contact. Lang was bright red, his eyes glassed over, and was slurring parts of his speech a bit. It would be interesting to know if there was some sort of explanation behind this.
- Are there any detailed accounts? Not to sound like sicko, but let's face it, the main reason why the PSU case was so appalling and credible was because of of McQueary's account of seeing a 10 year old with his hands against the shower wall and hearing a slapping sound. Schwarz reported that in talking to Davis 8 years apart, his story has stayed the same. Well if the accounts are "he reached up my shorts and touched my penis," then it would be easy to keep it straight, if it is lie. If he can recount specific assaults with the same accuracy, though, that would seem much more credible.
- Why is ESPN covering this story the way they are? Tough question to ask for a reporter, but should be a credible one. I'm only going by what they've been doing on the website (I've been reading a lot of more of this than watching it), but last night when this broke, it was not a "top story", but was atop the "Headline" box. After PSU, it seems like this would be much bigger than Tebow running in for a game winning touchdown, which was the "top story" all last night up until at least this morning. Only this evening did the story make it to the 5th "top story," which include no new updates, a story by Dana O'Neil writing about how recruiting infractions don't compare to child molestation cases, and Fine's issue of innocence. They clearly do not have enough details here to make it a big thing yet, and in doing so they may have destroyed a man's life without proof (if he's innocent). And if he's guilty of the allegations, why not hold off until you have a real update in the story. Journalism is (at least should be) about reporting facts. As of now, we have very little facts. I'm not sure what ESPN was thinking was going to happen after running the piece last night, but it sure seems like they pumped their brakes pretty hard pretty quick, and it would be interesting to hear their take on why.
What started out as a simple post turned into nearly 1200 words. It just seems with a story with the potential to be big, more questions should have been asked and more facts should have been gathered before taking this to air. There are a lot of questions that need to be answered, just thinking these may be a start.
P.S. Mark Schwarz needs to stop saying "Davis feels..." and "Davis thought..." Any intro journalism class will teach you not to use those words. Schwarz doesn't know how Davis "feels" or "thinks," all he knows is what Davis says. (Just a criticism of Schwarz's reporting skills)