Today's story on the Joseph Edward Duncan III sentencing proceedings should go to page A1 or B1, some editors said, but they agreed that all Duncan coverage will come with a disclaimer for explicit content.

Editor Steve Smith and assistant managing editor Carla Savalli suggest giving Duncan a more prominent story spot, because of how widely read these stories are (This is also backed by statistics of online viewer count). Features editor Ken Paulman brings up the other point: "I think there's also a lot of fatigue" about the Duncan case too, he said.

• ADVISORIES: Expect an advisory message for explicit content in Duncan content from now on: This applies to the print version, to Twitter's sidebar (individual posts cannot be advisoried) and to online blog posts and news stories.

• CHOICE:We understand that stories like this will turn many people away, Smith said. People can also choose not to read this coverage, Savalli said, but it's better to make the information available. Editors can think of a small handful of regional cases that people would have this much readership, namely Kevin Coe, Robert Yates and Ruby Ridge - the Duncan case being a particularly heinous crime.

PROCESS: In the first of two phases in the sentencing trial, witness testimony and cross-examination occur, and the jury decides whether Duncan should put to death or imprisoned for life. If they choose death, it goes to another phase before he can actually be given death. The second phase is for the government to present more factors and victim impact statements, while Duncan would have the opportunity to present evidence of mental illness or other relevant history if he wishes. In total, the jury will also consider variables like whether the victim(s) was particularly vulnerable, and whether there was vicious intent. More details at Betsy Z. Russell's blog

<» Betsy Z. Russell was on the radio show just now:

This was during the court recess for lunch. Just a handful of onlookers and court personnel and media were present for the video. Courtroom had been cleared. Steve Groene gestured at the onlookers to leave, Russell is saying on the radio with Rebecca Mack, 790 KJRB. Jurors pressed tissue over their mouths, she said. What about you, Mack asked Russell, how are you doing?

"I'm a little shaken but I'm ok. There were no outbursts in the courtroom. The judge did advise everybody in the courtroom... to keep their emotions in check."

But why was it necessary to show the video? To show the eerie comparison of level of violence in both cases, Russell said, and that the video was the best possible way - for lack of a better phrase - to illustrate that. There was another witness, an adult male, who testified about being a victim to Duncan in 1980, Russell said.

» Steve Smith on Mack's show:

There is no such thing as good taste in this grotesque case, Smith said, but the goal of the S-R in this case is to "report what's happening in the courtroom so that citizens can decide for themselves whether justice is done in this case." Namely, because "if they do give him the death penalty there will be no question as to why" and vice versa. The notion of open court classifies people in the media as equal to the public - Journalists have no special privileges that the public does not.

"We don't want to repulse our online readers - our online readers - our followers on Twitter...We have determined that we will not provide great detail," Smith said on the air.

There has been impact on the journalists as well - One reporter said it was one of the worst things he has ever seen, according to S-R reporter Meghann M. Cuniff.

---

---