urbanangel: i responded two posts below yours. here it is again:
urbanangel: I didn't respond to ShureleeUJest for a couple of reasons. I typically avoid snide or sarcastic posts. Also, his post assumes too many things, such as there are 187 reports that the district attorney’s office shorted us, that the so-called missing reports contain “nasty” rejections and that we haven’t already requested the police department’s version of the records. I hope this answers your question. Thanks, Gabe
If blatantly derogatory reports exist, we haven't seen them -- from any office.
Remember, though, our request was for case declines from January to June 2007 -- the period leading up to the stories we first published about the rift. We first reported midway through last year about the rift. So, we wanted to take a look at the cases that led law enforcement to claim that many were often unprofessional and declined unjustifiably. Those would be the cases law enforcement based their criticisms upon, and thus, those were the reports we requested at the time.
Thanks,
Gabe

It's been some time since I checked to see if you responded to Shurlee's question...I think you are avoiding the point behind his comment. Fact is, the cases that the pd was concerned with were not the ones that the DA addressed. Now you take the reports the DA wants you to see and don't wonder if they have at all gone through a filtering process? I don't think those reports are even the tip of the ice berg with how nasty Tyler has been in his comments. I have heard of much worse.

EXCELLENT job Gabe and The Advocate.  Your paper has become much better over the years. Keep up the good work.  Some people just hate the truth. 
Also thanks for answering many of the questions people had, and being able to separate the  snarky, accusatory comments from the serious ones.

urbanangel: I didn’t respond to ShureleeUJest for a couple of reasons.

I typically avoid snide or sarcastic posts.

Also, his post assumes too many things, such as there are 187 reports that the district attorney’s office shorted us, that the so-called missing reports contain “nasty” rejections and that we haven’t already requested the police department’s version of the records.

I hope this answers your question.

Thanks,
Gabe

I agree, Gabe, i would love for someone to address Shurlee's comment.

Gabe,  I'm thinking that Ratcliff must have somebody poppa oscared at him.  You remember that he was widely suspected in a woman's murder.  He didn't do it -- we got a confession from the real killer in that case.  Now, a junkie who apparently spends a lot of time in jail has accused the former sheriff of molesting him and the DA got an indictment in the case.  Since that indictment came down, the district attorney has spent considerable time and tax money going after the law enforcement and political leadership of Victoria. 
If I was the attorney for Ratcliff, I wouldn't allow him to talk to the press either.  It would be stupid for him to play out his case in the newspaper before the trial.  By printing the interview with the guy who was looking for a better deal in jail, I fear you have poisened the atmosphere here to the extent that Ratcliff cannot find an impartial jury.  Certainly I couldn't serve because in a case of he said/the other said, I would find it hard to believe anything a junkie would have to say against a man who had served as sheriff.

Great question, thewaywardwind. I'll try to answer this concisely.
Yes, the story in which the alleged victim was interviewed was one-sided. It was all about the alleged victim and his thoughts. That one story is not balanced, no doubt.
During that time (or before it, I forget), we also asked George Filley III if we could similarly interview Mr. Ratcliff. Filley, the defense attorney, declined, as most do.
Shortly before the alleged victim's story published, we published a story in which former coworkers, employees and friends of Mr. Ratcliff talked about what they think are the former sheriff's redeeming qualities. This, too, might also be considered a one-sided story.
In addition, we later published a story in which the alleged victim, we learned, was in jail.
While it's difficult sometimes to sculpt one story that is balanced from all sides -- it's difficult to do so when the opposing side won't comment, for example -- I hope the overall coverage is balanced.
But, again, great question. If I haven't fully answered it, just post another question.
Thanks,
Gabe

"We strive to offer balanced coverage and to do so with transparency."
Where was that offer when the Advocate printed the one-sided and self-serving interview with the punk who was the supposed victim of Ratcliff shortly after the former sheriff's indictment was announced? If that was what you and your bosses consider balanced I'm glad you aren't a butcher because I'm afraid  you'd have your thumbs on the scales. 

Whats with the advertisement for the lame website? A little off topic, don't you think?

texasbeckylou35: I'm sorry to hear about your experience. Would you be willing to talk more with us? Leslie Wilber, our police reporter, is very easy-going and easy to talk to. If you'd like to talk more, you can mention so in here or reach Leslie at lwilber@vicad.com. Thank you for taking time to offer your thoughts.
darlins64: I appreciate your kind words, especially knowing now that you had to write them twice. That is frustrating and I can relate. About a month ago, I wrote a story for the newspaper and it magically disappeared and I had to re-write it. Not fun.

Gabe,
I had the unfortunate experience of having worked under Bruce Ure.  I don't need any indictments to tell me that he is corrupt. The City of Victoria would have been well served to do some checking on this guy before hiring him.  Has anyone checked around in his past employment and seen the mess he left behind?  I don't blame anyone there that is in support of Bruce Ure, for they know not what they do.  He is an excellent B.S. artist and is very convincing when he wants something.  It was easy for me to fall prey to thinking he was a good guy too.  His followers will realize soon enough exactly the caliber person he is and they will more than thank Tyler for doing his job.  I completely respect a DA that is not on board with prosecutorial misconduct of any kind and would rather face some public scrutiny than waste tax payers time and money by keeping junk cases tied up in the courts.  It's about time someone, somewhere held police departments accountable for their actions.  Mr. Tyler has my utmost respect and admiration.  As far as Bruce Ure, I knew this day would come for him.  I am just sorry that he had to bring negative attention to what I am sure is otherwise a nice city to live in.

I had a lengthy and wonderful comment, but somehow, when I tried to post it, it went *poof*! 
The gist of the comment was this:  Gabe, you are a hell of a reporter and I have enjoyed reading all of your stories!  I am looking forward to many more to come. 
As to the indictments and arrests this week:  This has gotten out of control!  I believe that a higher authority needs to come in and investigate the entire situation! 
I do not believe that Mr. Ratcliffe, Chief Ure and the others can receive a fair and unbiased hearing in Victoria.  Nor do I believe the victim will receive justice.  There have been too much speculation, character assassination, innuendo and rumor for this to proceed in a fair and impartial way. 
I believe that the Advocate has changed for the better, regardless of the fact that some of the long-time readers object to the changes.
Gabe, you and your peers are doing a wonderful job!  Keep up the good work and keep rattling the cages!

Good question, digalitldper. I imagine our coverage will not culminate with just one report, but rather with numerous reports. It'll be a team effort.

I agree, Luminary. Well put.

First,
I would like to express how deeply sadened i am of what's going on my hometown! I mean I can't really say who's right or wrong but, from what I read and hear, no one really does. Like I say what's done in the dark will come to light. I hope this will put to rest of what is going on. It seems there has been alot going there the past seven or eight years. I know were not biggest or best town, but the people from Victoria have always represented ourselves and the state of Texas well. I would like to go on saying that we need to pray that our town rest easy these next troublesome days. Although I now live San Antonio, I have been here since 2001, I have yet to see the hospitality that Victoria shows. Let's hope Steve Tyler knows what he's doing, and not doing this to be vindictive, because he has some skeletons in his closet as well. Much LOVE Victoria. God Bless... Stingaree For always.

Southtexasguy: I don't know how to answer your question any more clearly or honestly than I did in my first post. Thus, I won't  try again.
I will say, though, that it appears you are mixing the elements of how a newspaper works.
If a newspaper disagrees with a subpeona, or a judge's ruling, it should not and did not affect our coverage of news events.
Read this story.
Similarly, a newspaper's editorial board opinions, which publish on the Viewpoints page, should not and do not affect our news coverage.
I understand your concern, though. Given my vantage point from the newsroom -- and from experience inside other newsrooms in other states -- I see firsthand that efforts are always made to report balanced news stories, regardless of other events.
If you are still concerned, I personally invite you to the newsroom. Talk to me in person. Visit with our reporters and editors. You are invited to attend a news budget meeting.
My phone number is 361-580-6519. My e-mail is gsemenza@vicad.com. I'd like to arrange an in-person meeting any time that is convenient for you. The morning news budget is 10 a.m. The afternoon news budget meeting is 2 p.m.
I look forward to seeing you,
Gabe

I think that in spite of the fact that your paper has been taken to task so many times in the news you report and the way you report it, The Advocate has done well to uphold a proud tradition of pioneering news reporting in Texas as it's second oldest newspaper. Keep up the tradition and the good work. I'm not saying you're perfect, but then again (especially after reading the headlines lately) who is? You guys just hang in there and keep reporting the news.

Here's a comment for you Gabe....
Approximately 187 reports rejected by Tyler and company but not provided to you are available at the VPD under the Open Records Act.  Some of the nastier rejections are contained there-in.  you blew it pal by "reviewing" only the sanitized records that Tyler gave you, because there were "too many".  You started strong, but you ended with a whimper - no Pulitzer for you!

Gabe,
Your link  regarding the "harassment and intimidation" claim was simply a link to the Advocate's  motion to quash. 
The judge threw that out...took about 10 minutes, right?   A subpoena, by itself, is not harassment and intimidation. 
Haven't really seen the Advocate back down on that claim, though.  And now, every Tom, Dick and Harry in the forums have taken up that mantra.
Way to stay fair and balanced.

Will do, texasmom. Thanks for the kind words.
Gabe

Gabe, keep your chin up!

We appreciate that, digalitldper.
Thanks,
Gabe

Thanks for the comments, southtexasguy. I'll do my best to answer your questions.
1) Most often, newspapers oppose subpoenas that are served to reporters.  Much has been written about that in the Advocate lately. I could elaborate on that point, but I will refer you to Editor Chris Cobler's blog, which outlines the argument more eloquently. He also offers this blog, which should add depth to the argument.
As for the mention you make of "harassment and intimidation," please see this. The Advocate's media lawyer spells out the newspaper's case for this. I don't write motions to quash subpoenas and I am not a lawyer.
2) If you want to know how "deeply" the Advocate is involved in this: Read our coverage this week, southtexasguy.
I'm sorry to read that you think the Advocate has sunk to a low standard. I would hope you appreciate that the news staff is out in the field working to keep you informed -- and fighting for our ability to continue to keep you informed.
I'd like to think the late Mr. Roberts would be proud.

Gabe,
I want to know two things:
1.  Why did the Advocate shriek "harassment and intimidation" when you were issued a subpoena?  I think both you and Mr. Cobler knew exactly why you were being called back before the grand jury, you knew what was likely to be coming up (the indictments), you knew that the GJ needed was information that was not public (even though your editor said it was). 
2.  I want to know exactly how deeply you and the Advocate are involved in all of this.  I guess I will have to wait for the trials.  Your testimony won't be secret then.
It's a shame that the Advocate has sunk so low to be so involved in a mess such as this.  Morris Roberts must be rolling in his grave to see what has become of his paper.