A father, Allan Dwayne Schoenborn, identified by the RCMP as the prime suspect in the April 6th deaths of his three children in Merritt, B.C., was finally captured yesterday (April 16/08). He had been on the run from the police since the children were reportedly stabbed in their mother’s trailer.
Just hours after the arrest, CBC had their report telling us what happened. Apparently an expert tracker with dogs, who got fed up waiting for the police to find the man, took it upon himself to go out into the woods and see if he could find the suspect. The reporter told us how this man was probably the most knowledgeable person on the layout of the land in the entire area. He knew every cave and hiding spot and where the suspect could possibly be getting food. He captured the man who tried to run but the tracking dogs kept the suspect contained until the police arrived 15 minutes later. The tracker, Kim Robinson, said he had offered his services four or five days earlier to help the police find the suspect but his offer had been turned down. (Is this accurate? – A newspaper report quoted the tracker’s son, Paul, as saying police had approached his father to keep an eye out for Schoenborn.)
The paper also quoted the son as saying, “The guy’s arm was messed up because he tried killing himself,” yet police denied that fact.
And Mr. Kim Robinson denied other reports that his dog had nearly torn Mr. Schoenborn’s arm off, and also said reports that he’d tied him to a tree were false.
Now last night at the national press conference, I heard the officer say, “A guy out walking his dog found the suspect.” And that was also printed in one of the papers.
If I hadn’t heard the interview on CBC earlier in the day I would have thought the police had been lucky to find their man because I hadn’t heard mention of an expert tracker.
Also, the newspapers reported the tracker had only used one dog (not “dogs” as was mentioned on CBC).
So, hearing different versions of the same event, I can’t help but wonder if, or how much, misinformation happened around Cindy’s case…and why does it seemingly continue to happen.
One thing I have learned…take what you hear and read and see in the media with a grain of salt!
Melanie Hack
Author of Who Killed My Sister, My friend
Read an excerpt now
TV Shows and Clips about the Death of Cindy James
Years ago, I attended a sensational murder trial in our city and it was interesting to sit through the daily session and then read the newspaper report the following day. For example, the murdered man’s wife left the courtroom in the middle of the accused’s testimony. She simply walked out.
The following morning’s paper ran a head line “Wife flees courtroom after outburst”.
The article said that the wife interrupted the accused’s testimony and became very distraught and then “ran” from the court room.
Two days later, there was a VERY SMALL correction printed, in the back section of the paper.
We just have to remember that reporting the news is JUST ONE aspect of a newspaper or network. Ratings and selling papers is also another. Yes, we all need to remember to take what we see/hear/read in the press, with a grain of salt.
Dwight
April 17, 2008 @ 7:28 am