Lynch speaks out

Jack Lynch had plenty to say yesterday about our story outlining questions surrounding his absence , and some editors asked last night if we should include a response from the newspaper. Managing editor Gary Graham said this would be inappropriate.

“It was our turn to let Lynch say whatever he wanted,” he said. “I wasn’t interested in being part of the story.” (Which, incidentally, is the topic of a discussion at News is a Conversation )

“If he’d said these things before, they would have been a part of our original reporting,” Steve Smith added.

Assistant city editor David Wasson noted that apart from talking about the newspaper, Lynch hasn’t done much to shed light on his departure. “If you were to remove the criticism of the coverage, he didn’t say anything.”

A couple of details in today’s story were in need of further clarification, Graham, Wasson and Smith said. First, the bicycle wreck Lynch blames for his injuries was stated without attribution. “There’s still some questions around that,” Smith said.

Also, Smith responded to Lynch’s statement that he and the city have been forthright in providing information to the newspaper.

“Any assertion that the city is attempting to be transparent or that Mr. Lynch is being transparent is beyond absurd.”

Smith said he stands by the original story and the reporting that went into it.

“I’ll go to my grave disagreeing with public officials who say things like medical leave are none of your, i.e. the public’s, business,” he added.