The Eric Bodenweiser Rumor, and now the Eric Bodenweiser Police Investigation
The News Journal is out with a story by Jonathan Starkey and James Fisher concerning Eric Bodenweiser’s continued absence from the campaign trail and the confirmed existence of a criminal investigation into Bodenweiser personally. Here are the relevant details from the story about that investigation:
The focus of the criminal investigation remains unclear, according to those questioned by state police, including Bodenweiser’s brother. But some Sussex County Republican leaders say they are concerned that Bodenweiser has skipped out on campaign events after hosting a high-profile fundraiser that featured an appearance by O’Donnell, the 2010 GOP Senate candidate. Some have called his recent behavior “bizarre.”
Bodenweiser’s brother, Paul, who lives in Kingsport, Tenn., said he was questioned at length last week by a Delaware State Police detective seeking information on his brother. He would not disclose the nature of the conversation, but said that “there is absolutely nothing concerning my brother that would surprise me.”
The brothers’ relationship has soured to the point that Paul Bodenweiser maintains a website to campaign against Eric Bodenweiser’s 2010 and 2012 state Senate campaigns. Paul Bodenweiser had disclosed on his website that he was questioned by police about his brother, but removed the item in recent days.
The News Journal spoke to others familiar with the investigation, including another person questioned by state police. They asked not to be identified.
Bodenweiser has not returned telephone messages left by The News Journal since late last week. He said in a telephone interview earlier last week that he was not aware of allegations that would warrant a police investigation.
Delaware State Police does not discuss whether they are conducting criminal investigations “as to not compromise the integrity of any interviews or investigative measures utilized to thoroughly and comprehensively investigate any crime,” spokesman Sgt. Paul Shavack said Thursday.
Over the past few weeks we have alluded to a big secret about Eric Bodenweiser that would upend his race in the 19th Senate District. And when we alluded to it, we warned though that we did not want it discussed explicitly. And shockingly, most of our wonderful commenters, especially those downstate, already knew about the secret (it is a pretty well known open secret downstate in whispers here and there) and agreed that the details were too horrible to mention publicly if we did not have confirmation of anything. And back when we heard this rumor, we did not have confirmation that there was an actual police investigation.
Now we do. And we have two weeks of “bizzare” actions by Eric Bodenweiser. As a candidate, if rumors and accusations of certain horrible actions were swirling against you so frantically that even an upstate liberal blog hears of it, and you as the candidate knew it was untrue, what would be your response? Would you play the conservative victim and angrily hold a press conference denying the rumors and lambasting the evil liberal blog and evil liberal media with their disgusting smears? Or would you simply go to ground never to be seen or heard of again?
Eric did the latter. In fact, the only person it seems that Mr. Bodenweiser has talked to over the last three weeks in WGMD conservative talk show host Bill Colley, who afterwards noted on his Facebook page, “After speaking with Eric Bodenweiser I get the impression he may withdraw from his Senate race.” And now we have David Anderson of the radical right’s Delaware Politics blog saying that Bodenweiser has effectively suspended his campaign, and thus, in response Mr. Anderson is wholeheartedly and enthusiastically endorsing former Georgetown Mayor Brian Pettyjohn. Indeed, the last second write in Plan B candidacy of Mr. Pettyjohn is further confirmation that all is not right in Bodieville.
So, what is this open secret and/or rumor that has driven Eric Bodenweiser from the race and the public eye? I was ready to post the rumors today because in my mind we have enough confirmation that the rumors are at least now a story, so long as we published with the vehement disclaimers that we had no idea if the rumors were true or not, much as we did with the Vance Phillips story when an anonymous person sent a letter detailing Vance’s alleged actions with an underaged (at the time) intern. But the overwhelming (i.e. everyone but me) majority of my colleagues here at DL want us to be as careful as the News Journal, which did not even sniff at what the rumor could be. So it will remain an open secret for now. Please commenters, continue to not post any explicit or detailed information as to what the allegations might be.
Even though Eric Bodenweiser is as odious a politician as I can imagine in that he represents everything I cannot stand about the radical religious right that has consumed the Republican Party and destroyed our politics, I would not post on these rumors unless I had something more that indicated these rumors are true. As I said, I was ready to post on it today, but my colleagues want to follow the News Journal’s example of caution. For these are the type of rumors that are so horrible that even the mere mention of them can destroy a man’s political career. But Mr. Bodenweiser seems to have ended his political career himself. We now we have confirmation of the police investigation via the News Journal article, and the subsequent bizarre behavior of Mr. Bodenweiser, Mr. Pettyjohn, Mr. Colley and Mr. Anderson, all of which would not happen if this rumor were completely false. There is something there. But we will have to wait for something more.
Hopefully these rumors are false. My God, I pray that it is not true. And if it is not true, then Mr. Bodenweiser must deny these rumors and resume his campaign. If he is not in the position to do that, then he should do the right thing and resign the nomination and withdraw from the race so that he can deal with the expected charges should they be filed.
I thank you for holding your fire till there are facts about the allegations in the public domain. I live down here, and am sick to my stomach of all the rumors flying because, as you alluded to — they are horrifying and repugnant. No matter how it turns out, it is horrible. Horrible if true, and horrible if not true and such hideous allegations were made. Perfect storm of horror. This could affect the R’s and give the D’s a big advantage — but to gain off a tragedy like this is very sad. I prefer to see a side win big due to logic, reason and a better plan for our County and State. The R’s were doing bad enough without this scandal, in my opinion…
It is a Perfect Storm of Horror. Perfect term for this whole thing.
.
You’re doing the right thing.
is this the type of news story that when it breaks in detail will be picked up regionally or even nationally?
I would think so.
Regionally, yes. Nationally, for a while, especially given the COD link.
I’m puzzled about why the [person] making the allegations wasn’t interviewed. There’s no indication that even an off-the-record conversation took place. There’s not even any indication that TNJ knows what the allegations are, which IMHO is dishonest, as they surely know the content of the rumors.
Geezer, I edited your comment only slightly just to protect a detail of the rumor.
Now, here is what I will reveal: I am told that the person has been interviewed off the record. And I am told that nearly every news organization, including the NJ and WDEL, know the details of the rumor.
All are still proceeding with caution, which, in my own hindsight, is probably the best course given the details of the rumor. If you want to email me privately we can discuss it further.
Geezer:
It sounds to me like they went as far as they could. If the sources they spoke with were not able to state that police were investigating allegations by Person X, then you really can’t mention Person X, even if you don’t give his/her name – unless Person X says he/she was interviewed by cops and is the source of the allegations, and you find him/her credible. There’s no clear line from Person X to the investigation, apparently. Or he/she may not be answering the phone now. It may seem logical that police are investigating those allegations, but there’s always the outside chance they are looking at an allegation from Person Y. Just because something is rumor does not mean the rumors are the allegations. Plus you’ve got to consider that in a case like this, the lawyers and top editors are in charge, and they’re always cautious.
And you know as well as anyone that an off-the-record statement cannot be used in print. If Person X wanted to speak anonymously, that’s another thing, but off-the-record is just that.
Maybe unrelated: The News Journal was delivered without Section 1 today. I called and apparently there was a printing problem, and delivery was late overall. (I’m not up early enough to notice late delivery, but I sure noticed that the paper started on page A11.)
I remembered last night’s heads-up about a Starkey article, and ran right over to DL to see what was up.
Now that is interesting.
Off-the-record is a blanket term used for several different approaches to material that is not intended for publication/broadcast. Getting material off the record is not the same thing as not getting the material at all, and for TNJ to fail to acknowledge that it knows about the allegations is, and I stress it’s my opinion, dishonest.
The newspaper knows the names of victims of sexual assault, and acknowledges that it knows but will not publish the names of those victims. This article conveys, intentionally I believe, that TNJ has no idea what the investigation is about. That is not the truth.
You really have been removed from a real newsroom for too long. There is not a single news person I know who would agree with your definition of off the record. Anything obtained off the record is unusable. Background and not-for attribution are the terms you seem to be floundering for.
The media doesn’t disclose every detail of what it knows EVERY DAY. There are some things that you just can’t publish or broadcast without sufficient confirmation. The level of confirmation is up to the individual outlet. You have no idea what the reporters were told, and neither do I, so drop the sanctimony. As I said earlier, just because there’s a rumor does not mean the substance of the rumor is what the police are investigating. Why give credence to rumors in a story, then?
The example of knowing the names of sex crime victims is bogus. That is information from an official source, on the record, not anonymous sources close to an investigation. It is also information not released by police at the time of an arrest, but later in the court process here in Delaware.
“Plus you’ve got to consider that in a case like this, the lawyers and top editors are in charge, and they’re always cautious.”
Tell me about it. Remember when Gordon/Freebery threatened a lawsuit over reporters looking into Freebery’s gift/loan? TNJ folded like a cheap lawn chair. If the US Attorney hadn’t started an investigation, news of that loan/gift would have remained hidden until this day. Good times.
“Cautious” is the wrong word. “Cowardly” is what you’re looking for.
SW: Yes, I know all those are different, but not to people outside the newsroom. You haven’t interviewed many people outside official sources, apparently. Try asking a non-government source about the differences. Most people would have no idea what you’re talking about. And I don’t know which of them would apply to Starkey’s reporting. The only reference to off-the-record was my reference to it, and I meant it in the broad, common-language sense.
I don’t know the basis on which the source of this rumor is giving interviews, but apparently at least one media person in Delaware has had a conversation. This individual’s name has been made known, so it’s the information, not the source, that the newspaper is keeping secret.
TNJ printed only information that came from the police. It has, I’m sure you’ve noticed, not restricted itself to official police statements in many recent cases, particularly the soccer-tournament shooting. That it would do so in this case is directly related, IMHO, to Bodenweiser’s threats to sue. For my reasons for that belief, see my comment above.
“Anything obtained off the record is unusable.”
True, but only to a certain extent. If person A tells me something off the record, I can’t use it. But if I go to person B (obviously without revealing person A’s identity) and ask if that fact is true, and person B confirms it is, then I can use it.
When the broad, common-language sense of a phrase is fundamentally incorrect, it’s incumbent upon the people in the know not to misuse it.
All I’m going to add is that you have no idea what conversations went on with this story. So unless you’re willing to hold all media outlets – including radio talk show hosts – to this same disclose-everything standard, please stop wagging your finger at TNJ. I’m sure the reporters wanted to print more.
And how do you know that Bodie threatened to sue? He hasn’t returned phone calls.
Correct, Another Mike. The information is not unusable; the information from a specific person is. But if Person X says something is off the record, you can’t use it in print attributing it to Person X as a “source” or any other such term. There is no flexibility. That’s why quite a few reporters never go OTR.
The nature of the rumored investigation has been revealed by a caller on a local (Sussex County) radio station (105.9) just moments ago, and was being discussed.
Interesting. I have heard that a caller was cut off before on 105.9 when he or she attempted to discuss the details. Now they are going with it.
I wonder if something has changed or if they are just throwing up their hands to the sky
Look, sometimes a rumor is the news. I think that is an appropriate assessment here. When that happens, whether it is true or not, the rumor needs to be reported, along with the qualification that no verification has been made. I think you have done well on reporting the rumor, without disclosing it. But, I can see where the throwing up of hands will soon come… The story is too big, and it is taking way to much effort to keep it little, and face it, we don’t have enough strength to keep this one in its box.
I mean, I still hear feedback from some Arizona hillbilly’s rumor that our President was born in Kenya.
🙂
“When the broad, common-language sense of a phrase is fundamentally incorrect, it’s incumbent upon the people in the know not to misuse it.”
It’s not fundamentally incorrect, and it’s not incumbent upon me when making a point to insert a paragraph of definitions. It’s incumbent upon you, on the other hand, to stop playing dumb.
A certain talk show I’m very close to has been far more forthcoming about this, mainly by not pretending that he doesn’t know what’s going on. And you don’t have to work at a “real” newsroom — and I’m ROFL that you would put TNJ in that category — to have heard the lawsuit threats. It’s the main reason the blogs are being more forthcoming.
As to not knowing what conversations went on, I don’t have to know. If no conversations went on, TNJ is incompetent. If conversations did take place, they’re dishonest. It’s one or the other.
BTW, Colley is not the only one to talk to Bodie. Gaffney did too.
I don’t normally listen to the station, and was walking a radio by when I heard the talk show host say the rumor had been disclosed by a caller. When I was able to tune in, the host said the topic was still “on the table”, along with other topics (Bodenweiser, Pires, and the debate). Surprisingly, I haven’t heard it mentioned since, and she is now talking about beer.
That is what I was considering this morning Kavips. My first thought this morning was, at this point, the rumor is news given the News Journal story, and that we should report what we have heard with the strong disclaimer that we did not know if it was true. But I changed my mind after unanimous feedback from my colleagues saying we should show caution.
Look, the rumor is horribly damaging and so vile that lives will be destroyed by the airing of it. We, and the news organizations throughout the state, are mindful of defamation. If it turns out that the rumor is false but we reported it any way, then we, and other news organizations could be liable for defamation. You can argue that placing vehement disclaimers absolves us of liability, but it is still a concern.
But I suspect the details of the rumor are going to enter the public domain today and discussion of them will be inevitable. Eric Bodenweiser is on the ballot, and god forbid, if he gets elected and these rumors turn out to be true, then … well it is a horrible scenario. There is now a time crunch and luckily the Republicans have secured for themselves a Plan B in Pettyjohn and it looks like the powers that be down there are now lining up behind him.
I am actually suprised that something of this magnitude which is known by so many has not yet become public, or at least public in the sense that that the media has not reported exept the TNJ in an article devoid of details. Additionally, the restraint exhibited on the blogs (DL and DP) is nothing short of remarkable.
Some of the restraint is legitimate concern for someone’s reputation. Some may also be concern about possible legal repercussions. Still all in all I am amazed “that which cannot be discussed” has been discussed so much in such an oblique manner that I bet there are still readers who haven’t a clue what the rumor really is about.
Go JANE HOVINGTON go . Jane joined us on the circle in Georgetown this morning at 7 am as we did”wave” for Beth Mcginn and Gary Wolfe .VOLUNTEER for these candidates .
over at DP they handled it by someone setting up a blind email account accessible to everyone.
gmail: username:
password:
I’ll let whoever is watching this thread decide if posting that^ is appropiate.
Well, I am going to delete the username and password as in my opinion that is just another way to post the rumor.
fair enough.
But not soon enough. Don’t worry about me.
[edit to add:] FYI, looks like the account was started on Oct. 7.
Something might have just happened to blow this thing wide open. Waiting on confirmation.
Mongo patiently waiting and hitting refresh for this breaking information.
Speaking of which, condolences to Mongo on death of Alex Karras.
I am not-so patiently waiting and mashing my keyboard. Mongo better person than me.
according to a tip to the blind email referenced above, the accuser himself already made the allegation publicly. even signed with his name. its still on the news website he published it to.
To Deldem. Sometimes when making complicated and futuristically complicated decisions, it is best to follow one’s heart. When the time is right; you will know.
Phil: If the accusation is false, having the accuser’s name attached won’t protect a blog or news organization from potential legal consequences. Hence the caution.
Geezer, as we wait, here’s a tangent about Alex Karras, who was a class act.
How many other successful pro football players ended up having such a long acting career? And, no, OJ doesn’t count.
My parents watched him play when he was the star of the Iowa Hawkeyes. When I was a kid, and “Webster” came on TV, my Dad would talk about seeing Karras play.
Here’s a photo from his Hawkeye days: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e1/Alex_Karras_%281958%29.png
Actually, it feels weird, and perhaps wrong, to keep the monicker, “Mongo,” since the real Mongo has passed.
Perhaps I can switch to that other comedic genius from “The Blazing Saddles,” Slim Pickens. Thoughts?
i’m just saying that its already out there.
is providing a link to a legitimate news site wrong?
Ok. Sorry to let you all down, but we have determined that the certain happening I referred to is not yet enough for us to break this story. Suffice it to say that the whispers are now being spoken through microphones at various events.
At the Yankees/Orioles game?
LOL. No.
Mongo not gone. Memory of Mongo live forever.
Remember, Mongo just pawn in game of life.
If a statement is made publicly by the accuser(s), news sources can, and should, report it.
I accuse SussexAnon of buggering a sheep.
So if I were to say that, with our real names attached, you think that should be reported as a matter of course?
I hate it when the Sussexes fight 🙁
To be fair to this site, Delaware Politics hasn’t posted it either, but they’ve allowed the folks there to point you in the right direction.
I wonder how long that news organization will allow the accusers comment to stay up? its been there since mid september.
Was the sheep underage? Was it consensual?
Your hypothetical is not analagous.
Yeah, we arent talking about vance here…
“Your hypothetical is not analagous.”
Analagous, whatever. Who cares what position the sheep was in.
– rimshot –
why do all animals do it doggy style?
This all makes me wonder what it is about those who wear their religion on their sleeves and rush about to events so that they can fall on their knees to praise the Lord.
I know many deeply religious folks who do not do that and it always makes me wonder about those who have the need to publicly proclaim their faith to any and all. The Swaggart’s, Haggard’s, Long’s and others who profess their faith and Christianity, whether at school board meetings or council meetings, or wherever, always seem suspect to me as if God can’t hear them without a microphone. I guess I am more aligned with the quiet Christians, who don’t need a bullhorn for God to hear them.
That news organization shortly thereafter took its site down and replaced it with a temporary Twitter-driven site while a new one is being developed. It only came back up after a station employee passed away and they put up a memorial.. (the item in question was still available cached in the interim if you knew what to look for, of course)
Ooh, rimshot. I get it now.
It is one of the unintended consequences of religion, Dave.
And it is unfortunate because quiet Christians get grouped in with the whack-a-doos.
Are Twitter driven sites the new future of radio stations now?
So why is my hypothetical not … whatever? Same situation, roughly. What if I accused Jeff Cragg of buggering a sheep? Should that be automatically published?
Your notion is utterly ridiculous.
no, but if a sheep came forward and accused cragg of banging him, then we would have an analogous situation.
Tell me you have never read a headline “Police are investigating an alleged (insert crime here). Mr/Ms/Mrs X accuses Mr/Ms/Mrs Y of commiting such an act.”
If it is your opinion that that is out of bounds and irresponosible journalism, then it is common practice in the industry.
Dave, in full agreement with you on your observation.
If police are investigating, then that is the story. You advocated that the newspaper publish Person X’s accusations outside of confirmation that they are the subject of an investigation. If that is the standard to be applied, then I could accuse you of buffering said sheep, and the paper should print it, absent any corroboration or official action whatsoever. In Reality World, that type of story, if untrue, would open up a publication to an instant libel suit.
If you actually bothered to read those articles you cite, you would find that in the vast, vast majority, those accusations are taken from official records, either police or court records or statements. Those sources generally give the press a little bit of cover. Very, very few are based upon a random Person X calling up and telling a story that may turn out to be horseshit.
So now you know what I have and have not read, SW?
If police go on record (corroboration) that they are investigating and the acuser goes public, THAT is the story.
Perhaps we aren’t there yet. The DSP is being cagey by saying, “yeah, we are investigating someone for something and conducting interviews.”
Perhaps a little investigative journalism could connect the dots and shed some light on whats going on. But investigative journalism is an endagerd species. Journalism today it pretty much compiling press releases and talking points into a format to match a necessary word count.
I was speaking to where we are right now, not advocating publishing gossip.
That being said, the Vance Phillips story went public pretty quickly compared to this one. Anonymous accustion and all.
Let me clear up a few things:
Who am I? Mongo spent several years as newspaper reporter, in a few different states. He’s been sued unsuccessfully for slander and libel, and won awards for investigative journalism. Mongo is no longer a reporter.
Please don’t read this as being arrogant–this is just one of those rare areas where Mongo has a lot of experience.
First, even if law enforcement confirms the rumors off the record, it’s still not enough. Look at the Richard Jewell case. He successfully sued NBC and other media outlets for millions for reporting off-the-record confirmation from law enforcement sources.
Second, please note that the DSP has not confirmed that they are investigating. The PIO only said that they do not comment on ongoing investigations. That’s neither a confirmation, nor a denial, but a statement about their policy. That alone is not even close enough to publish a rumor.
Third, “off the record” means nothing legally. If what the person says is really awesome, a reporter can name the source. Happens all the time, most reporters have done it once or twice in their career.
“Background” usually means that you won’t even be quoted at all, but just pointing the reporter in a particular direction to find the information.
But these terms are different for every person, so the source and journalist has to negotiate this stuff.
Lastly, even though Mongo would love to hear everything, the DL admins, and journalists, are right on this one.
In other circumstances, it might be worth the risk to report the rumors, but in this case, it looks like the information will come out in within a day or two. By waiting, there is no real loss.
If they were to report the rumor, then the investigation goes nowhere, and is dropped, Bodenweiser could end up owning the News Journal, and the admins at DL could be on the hook for millions, or certainly huge legal fees. Just imagine if Bodie became a media tycoon in Delaware, owning newspapers, radio stations and having loads of cash. Imagine that nightmare scenario.
Hope this helped.
Have a great weekend. Mongo is taking Mrs. Mongo to Rehoboth Jazz Fest this weekend. Mongo likes jazz.
Asdf
Bodie is officially suspending his campaign.
http://delaware.newszap.com/home/117166-84/bodenweiser-suspends-campaign-delaware
Say whaaa-???? Hope every able-bodied Democrat in Sussex is out pounding doors for Hovington this weekend.
if a sheep came forward and accused cragg of banging him, then we would have an analogous situation.
Did you know that sheep count Jeff Craggs when they have trouble falling asleep?
how far does this have to go before drudge picks it up?
i mean, this cant be a common occurrence.
The details will have to come out. A candidate quitting isn’t huge news; a candidate being accused of X is.
On the gmail account set up @ DP- the victim is speaking.
I was at a political meeting last evening and the word was if the rumors are true it is surly a disgusting incident everyone there seemed to know what the truth behind the rumors is. However no one was willing to confirm except one person in the know stated that the State police and the AG were taking the charges to the Grand Jury.
Sorry, Deedee, but I moderated your comment. We’ve decided not to print any rumors. Thanks.
No sweat pandora, that pretty much confirmed it.
If you needed it to be confirmed in such a roundabout way, you aren’t trying.
Not so, kimosabe. Not so.
I happen to personally know the person accusing Bodenweiser. Its absolutely true and everything happening to Bodenweiser is LONG overdue! His past is coming back to bite him in his a**. Sad when something this disgusting is a “known secret” and NO ONE SAYS ANYTHING? Sick!!!
Bodenweiser has withdrawn.
I just want to know what are the rumors? I have not heard anything!!!