Statement on coverage of Seth Rich murder investigation
Published May 23, 2017 Fox News
On May 16, a story was posted on the Fox News website on the investigation into the 2016 murder of DNC Staffer Seth Rich. The article was not initially subjected to the high degree of editorial scrutiny we require for all our reporting. Upon appropriate review, the article was found not to meet those standards and has since been removed.
We will continue to investigate this story and will provide updates as warranted.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 23 2017, @07:44PM (1 child)
I'm surprised it took a whole week for them to retract. The investigator changed his story within a day.
For people still into the story, a Seth Rich Reddit account was supposedly discovered, with some posts edited soon after discovery, and a gmail account supposedly linked to Seth was found.
(Score: 2) by butthurt on Tuesday May 23 2017, @11:07PM
I didn't see the video of the story, only a textual version of it which didn't mention Reddit or Gmail.
https://www.webcitation.org/6qVNB9e1q [webcitation.org]
Was it said that Mr. Rich's Reddit account was being used after his death?
I made a journal entry about the story, before the retraction. The Fox station in Washington had made an "important clarification".
/~butthurt/journal/2356 [soylentnews.org]
Here's a link to an archived copy of the retraction.
https://www.webcitation.org/6qgWVVKDH [webcitation.org]
(Score: 3, Informative) by takyon on Wednesday May 24 2017, @02:25AM (1 child)
We’re Seth Rich’s parents. Stop politicizing our son’s murder. [washingtonpost.com]
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by kaszz on Thursday May 25 2017, @12:37AM
Or.. He was smart enough to not use his personal email or computer for sensitive stuff. The detectives would have erased any compromising information, had they found such. While his role at work were alright. His work may inadvertently given a peek into more shady business. Other people may simple not know, at all what he knew or gotten access too. As another person that got chased pointed out. If the organization at any point had figured there was a window of opportunity to take one person out to put an end to the distribution of the information. They would have taken it.
And the retraction just smells vested interest having a little chat with the director.