Not sure why, but MaplewoodOnline keeps censoring discussion of the St. James Gate bartender accused of assault, even though the police issued an official update on it. See HERE. We have the info HERE.
At least the sixth thread has stayed, even as Dave declares that "it's not to be discussed."
It's more than you can say for Patch, which hasn't mentioned anything at all, despite a police report being filed. Mary Mann and Carolyn Maynard-Parissi should change their job descriptions to "Advertising Executives."
It is all a bit odd, especially as the police have issued a report on facts. Some get nervous about being sued, but a lot gets posted on MOL that is more potentially libelous and slanderous than this.
Unfortunately , ken, you are the most accurate person to ever describe patch.
-Joe, you are not only correct but on the verge of some heavy truths it seems.
For far too long has maplewood patted itself on the back for being an accepting community, but in the wake of a travesty, in this case- a potential hate crime in Maplewood, some locals have done everything they can to hide the dirt. perhaps the committees which orchestrate this events that celebrate "Maplewood's diversity" should step up to the plate and show REAL support.
It will be interesting to find out if St. JAMES Gate's security footage will be voluntarily given to the police/court or if a subpoena will be in order. -a maplewoodian (the previous postee)
To point this out, the incident occured 1-8-13, and yet, Maplewood Patch, Maplewood Online, or even, Maplewood's Police Blotter have nothing written on this. It is 1-15-13 and the blotter was last updated 1-7-13, with reports on 'incidents' dating six days prior to their 1-7-13 posting. This too will get SWEPT UNDER the RUG. Our disillusion of St. Jame's Gate and the Maplewood community will continue and grow. Hate mongers are permitted in Maplewood so long as they serve us alcohol? -fed up
6 comments:
At least the sixth thread has stayed, even as Dave declares that "it's not to be discussed."
It's more than you can say for Patch, which hasn't mentioned anything at all, despite a police report being filed. Mary Mann and Carolyn Maynard-Parissi should change their job descriptions to "Advertising Executives."
It is all a bit odd, especially as the police have issued a report on facts. Some get nervous about being sued, but a lot gets posted on MOL that is more potentially libelous and slanderous than this.
Unfortunately , ken, you are the most accurate person to ever describe patch.
-Joe, you are not only correct but on the verge of some heavy truths it seems.
For far too long has maplewood patted itself on the back for being an accepting community, but in the wake of a travesty, in this case- a potential hate crime in Maplewood, some locals have done everything they can to hide the dirt.
perhaps the committees which orchestrate this events that celebrate "Maplewood's diversity" should step up to the plate and show REAL support.
-Maplewoodian
It will be interesting to find out if St. JAMES Gate's security footage will be voluntarily given to the police/court or if a subpoena will be in order.
-a maplewoodian (the previous postee)
Expect an updated story on this here later this morning
To point this out, the incident occured 1-8-13, and yet, Maplewood Patch, Maplewood Online, or even, Maplewood's Police Blotter have nothing written on this. It is 1-15-13 and the blotter was last updated 1-7-13, with reports on 'incidents' dating six days prior to their 1-7-13 posting. This too will get SWEPT UNDER the RUG. Our disillusion of St. Jame's Gate and the Maplewood community will continue and grow. Hate mongers are permitted in Maplewood so long as they serve us alcohol?
-fed up
Post a Comment