Marshall Democrat-News: Local News: Napton driver charged with multiple violations (06/05/09)

Corey B. King, 32, of Napton, has been charged with class B misdemeanor driving under the influence of alcohol, class C misdemeanor driving with no insurance, class C misdemeanor failure to stop at a stop sign and the unclassified infraction of failure to drive on the right side of the road.

King was stopped by Marshall police April 25 near the intersection of Morrow and Grant streets in Marshall after he failed to stop at a stop sign and, according to the incident report, appeared to be repeatedly crossing the centerline of the roadway.

The report indicates King was taken to Saline County Justice Facility when he had difficulty performing field sobriety tests; he subsequently registered a blood alcohol content of .107 percent on further testing.

He is scheduled to appear in Associate Court July 2.

Charges contained in reports provided by law enforcement officials are not evidence of guilt. Evidence supporting charges must be presented before a jury, whose duty is to determine if the accused is guilty or not guilty of the charges.

Contact Kathy Fairchild at marshallhealth@socket.net

Several commenters have questioned why we chose to publish this story and why other similar cases were not published. We focus our attention on Saline County Circuit Court Division 6 and Division 4 because that's where most cases of interest tend to be heard. There are other courts in the county, including probate, traffic and municipal courts. In an ideal world, we would gather information from all courts in the county and publish their public records. However, we must prioritize which courts to cover in order to make the best use of our staff and space resources. Cases that appear in courts we don't gather information from will be unlikely to appear in the paper or on our website. We don't decide which cases go where, but we do decide which courts to cover.

-- Posted by Eric Crump on Tue, Jun 16, 2009, at 12:53 PM

cpcrazy21: I'd imagine people are complaining over a perceived bias that does not exist. Yes, it is all news, and it is all public record. However, I can understand people's confusion over what is printed and when when it comes to police reports.

Unfortunately, rather than investigate what information is given to the paper, what information the paper has available to them, what information they can legally print, and what information they simply do not have access to, people accuse the newspaper of withholding certain reports or maliciously playing up some reports.

-- Posted by koeller77 on Fri, Jun 12, 2009, at 11:21 AM

why are we complaining it is the news. And is this or is it not why we have a paper.

-- Posted by cpcrazy21 on Thu, Jun 11, 2009, at 9:53 AM

patron: We have indeed published similar stories in the past. In this particular case, although the arrest took place on April 25, charges were not filed by the prosecutor until June 2. We received the probable cause statement on June 5. You can confirm the incident and filing dates on Missouri Casenet, the unofficial online public resource of the Missouri court system. Click the link below to search cases by name, by case number, by filing date or by scheduled hearing date:

www.courts.mo.gov/casenet/base/welcome.d...

-- Posted by Kathy Fairchild on Wed, Jun 10, 2009, at 4:13 PM

still wondering....

-- Posted by patron on Wed, Jun 10, 2009, at 11:23 AM

And don't criticize certain people or officials in our county either, they will pull it in a heartbeat...

-- Posted by muddywater on Mon, Jun 8, 2009, at 10:56 PM

It's pick and choose with this paper mosthonest1. If not they would have published Michael Arth's DWI last June. I wonder who he is married to? Let hypocrisy ring free!

-- Posted by amenforthat on Mon, Jun 8, 2009, at 5:09 PM

We have not changed our policy on publishing names. We do not publish them only on the basis of an arrest report.

We do, however, publish names when charges are filed. In this case, although the incident occurred in April, charges were not filed until June 2. The probable cause statement filed on that date was not made available to us until June 5.

Filing dates for the arrest and the charges are shown online at Missouri Casenet.

-- Posted by Kathy Fairchild on Mon, Jun 8, 2009, at 12:16 PM

WHY was this published in the newspaper?!! Usually when things get published, you don't publish the names! The newspaper used to publish the names always, but stopped this practice, and on this one, dated 11 days later, you publish this. Why not just go back to publishing all names, it IS public record?

-- Posted by mosthonest1 on Mon, Jun 8, 2009, at 10:37 AM

Ok can we please STOP with the why did this get printed crap?? If they didnt print it you all would be griping that they were trying to hide something! As far as I am concerned this is their paper,they can print what they want. For all you complainers, get your own paper if you want to pick what is printed, if not quit wasting valuable comment space with your childish complaints. If you dont like it, dont read it!

-- Posted by Laura1 on Sun, Jun 7, 2009, at 9:58 PM

We have published other, similar stories. It's appearing after the incident because the probable cause statement wasn't filed until just a few days ago.

-- Posted by Kathy Fairchild on Sat, Jun 6, 2009, at 4:29 PM

I'm curious too. Why was this one published? Out of all there are to choose from, I mean.

I don't see the need or reason for this sort of public flogging, so to speak.

-- Posted by Tori on Sat, Jun 6, 2009, at 3:17 PM

I agree patron. Leave it to our wonderful reporters to stay on top of the "breaking news" in this town.

-- Posted by amenforthat on Sat, Jun 6, 2009, at 12:47 PM

I'm sorry, but I've never seen this kind of thing in the paper before without an accident, or other criminal activity. Just curious why this one ended up in the paper?...and why so far after the incident? (april 25th)

-- Posted by patron on Fri, Jun 5, 2009, at 4:23 PM