Poor little child pornographer

[A. Melon]

http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,49141,00.html

Incredible.  Abso-fucking-lutely incredible.  After telling us all about
the poor little child pornographer, Larry Benedict, and how the mean
old police are out to get him, Declan finally lets the other shoe drop
in part 5 of this 5-part series.

Benedict pled guilty.

He pled guilty, agreeing to a plea bargain calling for 37 months in
prison.

This "innocent" man agreed to spend 3 years in prison for something he
didn't do.  He agreed to brand himself for life as a child pornographer,
setting himself up for 3 years of hell in prison where child pornographers
are the lowest of the low.  All this when supposedly all he really did was
trade some computer games.

One commentator points out the obvious absurdity of this claim:

   "I think most people, if they were trading computer games and then
   arrested and charged with very serious felonies involving child
   pornography -- I don't think most people would wait several years
   and plead guilty (if) in fact they had done nothing wrong."

Wouldn't it have been relevant to let us know this essential fact about
the case back when the series began?  Wouldn't it have colored our
understanding and perception of Benedict's claims, given us perspective
to judge the truth of what he is saying?  Or is this Declan trying to
copy radio's Paul Harvey: "And now you know... the rest of the story!"

Surprise endings have no place in serious reporting.  Saving the punchline
for the end is only appropriate for a joke.  Sadly, there's no better
word to describe this pitiful attempt at journalism.