I rarely appreciate commentators on news articles. Actually, I never do. But this one at the top was actually cogent and is quoted in full below.
“Some questions left unanswered in that story:
– She had a “nine-year gambling spree” that started after the death of her hubby in 1994. So, that lasted until 2003! Why did the case go to court only now, in 2012?
– She sold a hotel for 7 millions in 2009. Why hasn’t she repaid the money to the charity?
– Since her gambling spree only lasted from 1994 to 2003, why should her brain surgery in 2011 be related to that at all?
– She left the charity broke. Why didn’t anybody notice this at once, and it had to be the IRS to uncover her gambling addiction?
Only some of a lot of questions that the story leaves unanswered. All in all, yet another example of nowaday’s “journalism” that focusses on stenographing soundbites without much concern about the coherence of the report. Some actual thinking and investigating would be highly appreciated.”
