I wouldn't make too much of the lack of a signature. KNS editorials are never signed.

I do believe this is the first time I have ever seen the KNS or any newspaper editorialize on the subject of an open lawsuit of any kind, which is an action that would place this or any newspaper on very thin ice, indeed.

It is especially shocking that KNS has chosen to editorialize on this particular lawsuit, given the deeply personal nature of the concerns it lays bare.

I am someone who has not previously commented publicly on Katie's efforts to see the circumstances of her son's death more thoroughly investigated, quite honestly because I don't completely know what to make of those circumstances.

My indecision in that question has no bearing on this assertion, though:

The very notion that KNS believes this subject is fodder for an editorial--now or after a ruling is rendered either one--is outrageous.

This matter is to be tried in a court of law, not in the court of public opinion.

I saw that this AM and wondered why they were doing it. What's the point? They already reported on the tragedy, and more recently on the lawsuit. I couldn't see what purpose this editorial served, unless it was to defend KCSO and the paper's reporting.

(Good response, Katie.)

I agree with Randy and Tamara on this. Weighing in at this point is rather bizarre, and, from where I sit, it seems, is taking a personal swing at Katie. While they can certainly disagree with the need for a lawsuit, the newspaper taking an editorial stance against the filing of a civil suit when in other jurisdictions, including in neighboring Tennessee counties, criminal charges have been filed in similar cases smacks of pettiness. The paper's reporting side botched this story, and now, the editorial side is making the same mistake.

I agree that I don't see the point of this "editorial". I too was quite surprised they wrote and published it. I'm sorry you are having to go through this, Katie. I'm also sorry the Sentinel felt they had to comment in this manner. As Randy said, it does seem they are on the defensive for some weird reason.

As of late morning on Friday, June 10 - about 12 hours after the piece was originally published - the News Sentinel has now added a byline to the editorial. It reads, "News Sentinel Editorial Board," and the byline links to this page. Currently, there is no note published with the editorial making mention of this edit. - Katie

The News Sentinel editorial process

Kati, I am with you in this struggle because our family has experienced similar 'trauma', and because I have met many parents here, members of Joan Berry's group, parents and grandparents, who have lost children and are still fighting for justice for their loved ones.
And I totally agree that this 'couple' who gave Henry a lethal dose of methadone should be held accountable. And the DRD should immediately change their 'rule' and NO LONGER allow their patients to "TAKE their methadone home"! While legal, these patients are allowed to become addicted to the very drug that is supposed to help them recover FROM their other addictions. And they should NEVER share their drugs with anyone!
And as to your criticism of local law enforcement, I can certainly empathasize with every word. One of my children was tied up, blindfolded, beaten with a gun, threatened with a knife for 2 hours in an apartment with two other friends and a 2 year old by two thugs who are STILL OUT THERE...the 'law' refused to DO THEIR JOB, refused to follow up, collect evidence, take accurate descripsions, call victims, suggest the Victims Fund to help...NOTHING. We filed a complaint with their "PARC" but never heard a word. And at that time, KNS refused to write about it...why? Because "they had heard too many contradictory stories"!
And this February, the Sheriff's office performed a similar 'action', a false arrest, jail, impounded MY CAR and the reason? My car was parked in a lot, and it was the ONLY car there! So, the best lesson you must learn is this: Law Enforcement here is NOT required to do their/its job. And it does not matter if you complain publicly or privately.
Still I have hope you will receive justice and closure. Also, I have been meaning to ask: Didn't the trauma doctors at UT recognize the fact that Henry had been beaten? I seem to remember in your diary you mentioned that fact.
I am sure our God is with you. And I have hope that your public actions will inform and educate others to know they can stand up and speak truth to power. My love to you and yours...M

Are they on the defensive because kag earlier criticized Satterfield (but later praised her)?

Could they be that petty?

I won't go into the specifics, but we think it is entirely appropriate for us to write about this. It's a high profile case about drug abuse, which is an important issue in East Tennessee.

Henry was not the only Knoxville/Knox County teenager to suffer a fatal overdose of illegally distributed pills on April 27, 2010. The other victim was named Amber Blizard, and her mother Carla has written a powerful essay about her experience with her loss, and with local authorities in the wake of her loss: (link...)

-Katie

With regard to this opionion that I'd first imagined to be unsubstantiated...

Her accusations that the criminal investigation has been bungled, however, might be misplaced.

...I do see that the opinion is substantiated following four rather unrelated paragraphs, here...

Authorities have not closed Henry Granju's case, however, and Sheriff's Office spokeswoman Martha Dooley has said investigators are looking into the narcotics allegations.

Investigators might be using methods unknown to Katie Granju, and likely are reluctant to divulge details of the probe to her out of fear she would make them public as she has in the past.

I suppose it's because of the four "interrupting" paragraphs between these two quotes that I didn't immediately see the point the editorial makes, so mea culpa.

But I hadn't realized that KNS had ever before commented on an open lawsuit?

If you say it's happened, I certainly don't dispute you--I'm just surprised to hear it.

I would think that a newspaper opining on a court case as it's unfolding would cause readers to question the objectivity of the same newspaper's "straight" reporting on the subject?

Then too, this particular case hasn't really even begun to unfold. To my knowledge, all that's happened is Katie has filed her complaint? Have defendents yet had 30 days in which to file their answer?

(Must run now--packing for a trip tonight.)

And, after listing my long letter to Katie here and my support for her quest for justice, my two issues remain:

What is wrong with the procedure that allows drug addicted patients to take home the drug that is supposed to assist their RECOVERY from other drugs...instead of them going to the Clinic to be monitored when taking each dose? The couple/patients in question apparently gave Henry a lethal dose of THEIR methadone prescription...thus they are legally liable for contributing to his death.

And apparently the KCSO is not accountable to anyone, not the County Mayor, NOT County Commission (the entity that signs off on their budget), not any official committee, period. There is NO oversight. And apparently the KPD is not accountable either, regardless of the existence of their "PARC" committee. Katie is correct in calling KCSO to account for their handling of her case...and it doesn't matter if they have secret methods of investigation. She should have been updated and EVERY lead should have been checked out, no matter the origin.