Whatever David Dewees did or did not do, he was not accused of what The Toronto Star printed before he committed suicide by laying across railroad tracks: molestation of young boys. Yet, the newspaper (the largest in Canada) published a story on his death that can only be described as remarkably cold and callous.
In its publication today, the Star recounts how Dewees, a popular teacher at the Christian-based Ontario Pioneer Camp in Port Sydney, Ontario had “died an innocent man.” It then, however, writes the entire article with a mocking presumption of guilt. This is precisely why I have written and spoken against the rule that you “cannot defame the dead,” here.
The newspaper quickly asks “was it guilt of another kind, shame and self-loathing, that made the 32-year-old lie down on the tracks at High Park subway station Saturday morning rather than face trial?” Well, then there is the fact (buried deep in the article) that the newspaper earlier reported that he had actually molested little boys:
The Star, it must be acknowledged, got the charges wrong in a Friday digest item that said Dewees had been charged with sexually assaulting two 13-year-olds. There was no assault alleged by police. The distinction is important though it’s doubtful – this too can never be ascertained – such an error (corrected) had much impact on Dewees’ state of mind.
“The distinction is important though it’s doubtful”? The difference is between alleged Internet solicitation and actual molestation of boys. The newspaper goes on to say that the Dewees’ family with have to deal with ” the taint of cowardliness.” Most such solicitations, while potentially criminal in their own right, do not result in actual acts of molestation and are given far lower sentences, including probation without jail.
The newspaper admits that the police have withheld the details of any alleged crime but still speculates in purple prose where “Dewees really did lie prone on the rails and wait for an oncoming train to mangle his body, condemning himself to those moments of terrifying anticipation, then he embraced a worse comeuppance than any retribution the courts could impose. This was a ritualistic punishment, a self-mutilation.” Wow.
Not done, the newspaper accuses him of shunting blame on to others and acting guilty.
What is most striking is that the newspaper expressly states “our law affords no protection from libel to the dead. So we will assume by his actions, and for the purpose of exploring this awful event, that Dewees was guilty as charged.” Unbelievable.
For the Star article, click here.
This was a good take on the article. The Toronto Sun, it should be noted, wrote a much better article that had some warmth and compassion. It is sad when a tabloid shows more compassion than a newspaper.
I wrote an email to the journalist of this article, nonetheless it was I never received a reply. But I think she needs to return to school, to gain some knowledge of the Canadian law system before she is to write about it, I learned more in Gr.12. Innocent until proven guilty.
I have only read the Toronto Star this one time and I must say it will be the last time. A newspaper that allows such a biased, ignorant piece of literature has lost the respect and trust of a good percentage of its audience.
Mr Turley,
I appreciate your take on this horrible tragedy, particularly as it pertains to the media. I have been repulsed by radio, TV and newspaper coverage of this situation and my blog saying as much has had unprecedented traffic. With the endless dumbing down of mainstream media – private and public – I wonder how you think we might all resolve to encourage the newer forms of journalism? It’s a topic for another day, perhaps, but just seeing you being picked up by Huffington Post heartened me.
TheReader,
I will not follow your links. Mr. Collingham posted within this forum, which means to me that he wants his situation known, possibly to help others understand. It is he who will most likely know the best links that fairly respresent what occurred in his specific case. I have not searched for any links and I will not unless Mr. Collingham replies.
Dear FormerFederalLEO,
Here is some coverage to the story in question, though really, did you have to ask for it. Does he have to yet again prove himself in some way?! Could you not do your own research?
Any one who really wants to know the story will look it up themselves, and no doubt you have already checked it out yourself. How very smug of you.
http://newsdurhamregion.com/article/128548
http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Crime/2009/07/28/10285751-sun.html
TheReader
Mr. Collingham,
Can you supply the readers here with relevant links to the news coverage of your case?
Thanks.
by Ray Collingham
So much can be said about the circumstances surrounding Mr. David Dewees’ suicide. Was he guilty and felt depressed over his actions or was he innocent and could not face his peers, family, friends and students after the media labelled him a sex offender?
Should ones identity be made public when faced with an allegation of a sexual crime? On one hand, yes, the public should be made aware that if there is a previously convicted sexual predator out on bail or roaming the streets, as a parent I am sure you would want to be informed. On the other hand, what about those people who are not guilty and have never been previously charged. False accusations are real and are becoming more frequent as people realize that nothing happens to you after falsely accusing someone. Once accused of a sexual crime you are stigmatized, possibly for life. Contrary to Canadian law, you are immediately labelled and at least, suspected of being guilty. The realism that you might be innocent rarely crosses your mind as you read titles in the newspaper like “accused pedophile” or “Acclaimed Sex offender”. But the truth is that false allegations are very real and are extremely destructive to the person accused and to his/her family members and friends.
When I was arrested in July of 2007, my name and picture were publicized throughout the Canadian news. I was front page news in many cities. Headlines with words such as ‘pedophile’, ‘sex offender’, and ‘child predator’ have all been associated with my name and my picture. I had no history of sexual assault, I had no complaints of sexual misconduct, there was no reason to make my identity known. The police will tell you that the public needs to know if there was other ‘victims’. They needed to inform the public so other children, if any, could come forward.
Having said that, there is a time and a place for everything. The time to make some one’s identity known to the public, in some circumstances, should only be made if there is an admission of guilt or the court have found the accused guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Once this decision is made, only then should pictures and names become available. Then the time for other victims may come forward.
Publishing an accused person’s identity, when there is no history and only one complainant, is an injustice, not only to the accused but to the accused person’s family, friends and peers. My family was devastated. I was ‘fired’ publicly. The organizations I was involved in all suspended my memberships publicly. Facing everyone I knew was very difficult. I was embarrassed, humiliated and depressed. I lost my career, as did my partner. I lost my life savings, everything I owned. I lost the innocence I had with working with children. My actions were/are almost always analyzed. Did I stare to long, where was I looking, should I hug my nephew, how long should I hug him, it was terrible.
I was acquitted in July 2009. I thought after my acquittal I would feel some sort of mental relief, in some aspects I do. The uncertainty of not knowing whether or not I was going to be spending the next few years in prison was relieving, but the feelings of wondering what people still really think, the feelings of mistrusting people and their motives all remain. The after math psychologically has had a tremendous effect on not only myself, but all of the people closest to me.
For Mr. Dewees, we will never know if he is innocent or guilty. But if we believe in our system of justice he must remain innocent. It is his family that will now have to face all the feelings of humiliation and the wonderment of what happened or didn’t happen.
Did David Dewees commit suicide because his identity was made public? Could he face his students, his co-workers and friends, knowing the stigma attached to being accused of a sexual crime? We will never know but I can sure tell you I had thought about ending it all. Following through with it may be a different story, but I can sympathize with Mr. Dewees in his feelings.
Our laws need to reflect the sensitivity of sexual crimes against children and the person accused. Guilty or innocent, this crime is life altering. Society has a role in protecting the innocent against further injustices.
Shame on the Star. Shame, shame, shame! There’s a reason I don’t read the tabloids and now with these recent actions, it seems I can’t trust the Star either. How dare they draw assumptions that he is guilty because of his acitons. I doubt such writers have had their names smeared before the media, no doubt tormenting this poor man.
I am outraged and offended by the injustice of this situation. Thank you for drawing attention to the shortcomings of this supposed reliable news source.
Thank you for writing this article. I was so angered after reading that disgusting excuse for journalism, I couldn’t find the words to express myself. I just can’t believe (And this after publishing the wrong charge against David), a ‘journalist’ could write such a cold article, and feel comfortable publishing it. I’m still steaming mad. I hope she is pleased with herself.
Good evening Judge. Who do you think will win tomorrows one game playoff, the Twins or Tigers?
“our law affords no protection from libel to the dead. So we will assume by his actions, and for the purpose of exploring this awful event, that Dewees was guilty as charged.”
***********************
Commenting of the yellow journalists of turn of the century Gotham, the New York Press got it right, “We called them Yellow because they are Yellow.”
I know of no more demeaning insult nor better description of the Toronto Star than this.
Innocent before being proven guilty? Obviously not in this country. A good man killed himself a short few days ago. Why? Because he was already judged by the police and the media as soon as the accusations arose. You plaster his face in every form of media, across the country, simply because it makes good news. Ant the man was not even found guilty of anything!!
To the members of the media reading this: tell me something- how does it feel to be responsible for a man’s death? I don’t know how you can live with yourselves!
cancel your subscription to the Toronto Star. Tell you friends to cancel. Tell everyone to cancel.
David Dewess may or may not have been guilty. But a “newspaper” shouldn’t publish such trash about another human being who was innocent until proven guilty.
What a hurtful, spiteful piece of writting.
See the following web address for a comforting piece as an example of what the Toronto Star could have written.
http://lastexiled.com/?p=3672
thanks for making us aware of how bad the toronto star SUCKS!
CFTO LOCAL TV NEWS IN TORONTO WAS ALMOST AS BAD–LURIDLY SENSATIONALIZING THE CHARGES AS IF THEY WERE FACT—I PUT IT ON MY FACEBOOK SITE WIITH A CONDEMNING NOTE ON SUNDAY AM AFTER I HEARD OF THE SUICIDE. DEATH BY MEDIA LURIDNESS I WOULD SAY.
JAMES DUBRO
OT but related to publishing.
I couldn’t locate the last thread about Amazon deleting copies of 1984 from Kindles, but there has been movement on the case.
Amazon agreed to pay $150,000 to settle a federal lawsuit brought by a Michigan high school student and an California academic whose electronic copies of George Orwell’s novel, 1984 were deleted from their Kindle devices in mid-July.
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9138818/Amazon.com_to_pay_150_000_to_settle_suit_challenging_take_back_of_i_1984_i_?taxonomyId=1
Wow. The Toronto Star is “supposedly” run according to the Atkinson Principles, established by the paper’s founder:
* A strong, united and independent Canada
* Social justice
* Individual and civil liberties
* Community and civic engagement
* The rights of working people
* The necessary role of government
Really?
What do you mean you cannot defame the dead? That is unmitigated Bullshit.
Buddha Is Laughing
Because if you can’t run a newspaper any better than that? If your editors are so damn stupid that they can’t tell you were handling this wrong from the start? Fold. You have no business being in journalism.
—-
Yup. Seriously there are so many things wrong with that piece that I’d suggest that the author get psychological evaluation herself.
That should help newspaper circulation.
“The distinction is important though it’s doubtful – this too can never be ascertained – such an error (corrected) had much impact on Dewees’ state of mind.”
Well it’s a good thing you boys at the Toronto Star had column space for that. You could have just said “We’re covering our asses.” and left it at that.
I know a guy who graduated McGill who would love to take a look at the family’s soon to be filed civil case against you.
Because if you can’t run a newspaper any better than that? If your editors are so damn stupid that they can’t tell you were handling this wrong from the start? Fold. You have no business being in journalism.