Leaving aside the Daily Wire's fishiness after you reached out, it seems to me that this could easily be a misunderstanding on Smith's part and an obfuscation (or laziness) by DW.
Saying that they were looking into it in-house may ignore the legal responsibilities of an SRO but may well align with a parent's understanding of school perso…
Leaving aside the Daily Wire's fishiness after you reached out, it seems to me that this could easily be a misunderstanding on Smith's part and an obfuscation (or laziness) by DW.
Saying that they were looking into it in-house may ignore the legal responsibilities of an SRO but may well align with a parent's understanding of school personnel. An SRO seems quite different than detectives from the county sheriff's office. Perhaps Smith made a mistake as to the significance of the SRO, which the media covering it (DW, given that legacy media is asleep at the wheel) should've picked up on. It seems reasonable to me for a parent to worry--particularly if the administration failed to express sufficient concern--that the school would sweep it under the rug to keep it from going public.
Moreover, the original entry in the log is ambiguous as to the timing of some key events--did the student tell the administration "a couple of hours ago" (before the 1:30 log entry) or did the alleged assault happen "a couple of hours ago" with the student reporting closer to 1:30? After that, a supervisor was requested at 2:21pm, and it looks like the student's family didn't leave until 3:45. The story says the student didn't go to the hospital until "that night." There are a lot of delays in there. Critically, we don't know what school administration said to Smith--perhaps they were apathetic or otherwise unbothered.
Ultimately, I don't see this document as a smoking-gun against Smith's account. The DW's coverage was perhaps a bit too credulous, but that seems par for the course these days.
Leaving aside the Daily Wire's fishiness after you reached out, it seems to me that this could easily be a misunderstanding on Smith's part and an obfuscation (or laziness) by DW.
Saying that they were looking into it in-house may ignore the legal responsibilities of an SRO but may well align with a parent's understanding of school personnel. An SRO seems quite different than detectives from the county sheriff's office. Perhaps Smith made a mistake as to the significance of the SRO, which the media covering it (DW, given that legacy media is asleep at the wheel) should've picked up on. It seems reasonable to me for a parent to worry--particularly if the administration failed to express sufficient concern--that the school would sweep it under the rug to keep it from going public.
Moreover, the original entry in the log is ambiguous as to the timing of some key events--did the student tell the administration "a couple of hours ago" (before the 1:30 log entry) or did the alleged assault happen "a couple of hours ago" with the student reporting closer to 1:30? After that, a supervisor was requested at 2:21pm, and it looks like the student's family didn't leave until 3:45. The story says the student didn't go to the hospital until "that night." There are a lot of delays in there. Critically, we don't know what school administration said to Smith--perhaps they were apathetic or otherwise unbothered.
Ultimately, I don't see this document as a smoking-gun against Smith's account. The DW's coverage was perhaps a bit too credulous, but that seems par for the course these days.