Some people should not be allowed to wield pens (part I)

Stop, before you go on, I just have to say, this is *mostly* being posted because of the horrible writing contained in this story, not so much the subject. I just have to ask (again), why is it I struggled to find a job for six months out of college, and another 18 months after I got laid off – being turned down by the Herald-Leader both times, when they have people who can’t write their way out of a paper bag?

/pity party

Georgetown woman who allegedly was making meth in car charged with 13 counts

A Georgetown woman was charged with 13 felony and misdemeanor offenses early Thursday after she tried to run over two police officers and was found to be cooking methamphetamine in a car, police said.
Well, of course she tried to run over police officers, you get more points for cops. Duh.

Elitist reporter note: Woohoo, passive voice, here we go. “… was found to be cooking …” AWKWARD. How about “ … after she tried to run over two police officers who found a working methamphetamine lab in her car.” Still awkward, I admit, but better than the original.

Amy Whisman, whose age was not listed, was charged with two counts of first-degree wanton endangerment, one count of manufacturing methamphetamine, fleeing or evading police, and resisting arrest, among other charges, said Georgetown Police Lt. Robert Swanigan.
Elitist reporter note: Look, we don’t have to list people’s ages. A lot of times we do, but it’s really not necessary. I mean, did you list the ages of the cops in the story? Nope, sure didn’t. So, it’s really quite superfluous to say “whose age was not listed,” instead of just skipping it all together.

As a general rule of thumb, we use “according to” or something equally wishy-washy when we’re not using direct quotes. We only use “said” when we can attribute an actual quote to the person. Again, general rule of thumb, not really hard-and-fast. But you have to admit, it reads kind of funny to see that someone “said” something but having nothing actually attributed to them as far as quotes.

Police responded to a call of a suspicious person at 725 East College Street and found a woman sitting in the passenger seat of a Toyota Corolla. When police questioned her, she provided what was later found to be a false name and Social Security number, Swanigan said.
Elitist reporter note: Maybe it’s just me being picky, but I would have said, “When the officers questioned her…” instead of “police” because the term “police” is more of a term for the collective whole, and we’re actually referring to the officers who responded here.

Elitist reporter note: Of course it was "later found" to be fake. It's not like she could give it to them and they could find it fake in the past. It's like that Mitch Hedberg joke: One time, this guy handed me a picture of him, he said,"Here's a picture of me when I was younger." Every picture is of you when you were younger. "Here's a picture of me when I'm older." "You son-of-a-bitch! How'd you pull that off? Lemme see that camera... what's it look like?"

Elitist reporter note: And why is Lt. Swanigan the only one who has anything attributed to him? (And note even anything directly. There are no direct quotes whatsoever in this story.) The names of the officers who responded were available, why not talk to them directly? Why not get quotes from someone else? The fact you only have one source, and no direct quotes whatsoever really kind of eliminates credibility.

When officers asked her to step out of the locked car, the woman refused and slid over to the driver's seat and tried to drive away, nearly striking officers Shannon Miller and Chris Zirbes, Swanigan said. Neither officer was hurt because they got out of the way, but the Corolla then hit the front of Miller's cruiser.
Elitist reporter note: Not that it really has bearing on anything, but I think we need a “the” between “when” and “officers.”

Elitist reporter note: That’s good they weren’t hurt, but logic would say it’s because they got out of the way. Or she’s a really bad driver. That’s not really important, it seems to add unnecessary verbiage to the sentence.

Couldn’t it work just as well like this – “When officers Shannon Miller and Chris Zirbes asked her to step out of the locked car, she refused, slid to the driver’s seat and tried to drive away, nearly running over the two officers. Neither officer was injured, but one of the cruisers was damaged during her attempted escape.”

The officers then broke out the Corolla's windows with their baton/flashlights and used a Taser to immobilize the woman. She still climbed out of a passenger side window and tried to run away, Swanigan said.
Elitist reporter note: This is my favorite. The way this is written, it implies they used a special device, a hybrid baton and flashlight. Maybe a batashlight? Or a Flashton? Yeah, I don’t think so. How about this instead: “Using a baton and a flashlight, the officers broke the windows out of the car and used a Taser to immobilize Whisman.”

Elitist reporter note: Why the hell is her name only used once? It’s always pronoun her or she and it doesn’t have to be.

Elitist reporter note: They Tasered her but she still managed to climb out the window and run away. Then obviously they blow with a Taser, and I would amend the previous sentence to read, “… used a Taser to attempt to immobilize Whisman.” After all, the way it was written makes it sound like they were effective when, in fact, they were not.

After she was under control, police found a working meth lab in the car, and Swanigan said the woman had been cooking it as she sat in it. A Kentucky State Police team was called to the scene to dispose of the hazardous, flammable materials, Swanigan said.
Elitist reporter note: Okay, here’s my second favorite. “…the woman had been cooking it as she sat in it…” So, the way this reads, I have a mental image of her sitting in a pot stewing along with some meth. Mmm, cannibalistic meth. How about this instead: “After Whisman was under control, the officers searched her car to find a functioning meth lab.” Because, to say it was functioning infers it was actually working, and it eliminates the mental image of her turning herself into a hallucinogenic drug.

The woman was later identified as Whisman, who also was charged with third-degree assault, possession of methamphetamine, possession of marijuana, a prescription drug not in a proper container, first-degree and third-degree criminal mischief, providing a police officer a false name and address, and improper registration.
Elitist reporter note: Well, of course she was identified as Whisman, after all, that’s part of the second paragraph of the story. Thanks for clearing that up, Captain Obvious.

She was lodged in the Scott County Detention Center, where she remained without bond later Thursday morning.
Say it with me now, awwww.