Daniel Marsh Case Draws Media Scrutiny While Horrific Elder Abuse Case Draws None – The Yolo County District Attorney’s Office has a page where they have compiled the latest “high profile cases.” It’s a nice tool for the public and those interested in keeping track of the high profile cases – it has the name of the defense, the case number, the charges, and of course the next hearing date and where the case stands.
But it does raise the rather interesting question, in listing 15 cases – why are those cases high profile, covered by the media, while other cases are not? Why does the media cover some cases and not others?
This is actually a surprisingly random exercise, and in some ways it is troubling. We are approaching four years of court coverage, and what we have found is that the most troubling cases in Yolo County are often the ones no one is covering. I remember everyone lined up to cover a hearing for the Topete case, while there was a five co-defendant gang case involving 14- and 15-year-olds who were mainly acquitted after eyewitness identification issues surfaced.
On Friday Judge Tim Fall’s courtroom was packed with friends and relatives of the deceased and the defendant in the Daniel Marsh case. No one would question whether that should be a high profile case – a double murder in Davis is a newsworthy event, then you add in additional elements of the defendant’s youth and youthful appearance and the horrific nature of the case and this would be high profile in any jurisdiction.
But what troubles me is that Mr. Marsh’s hearing was not first. First on the calendar was the preliminary hearing for Darlene Mattos and her son James Mattos, both of Davis.
Mr. Mattos was charged with murder, elder abuse and embezzlement and Ms. Mattos faced manslaughter charges. The facts that unfolded were just as horrific as those of the Marsh hearing.
A sheriff’s deputy, Dean Nyland, testified that he was called in to Sutter Davis on October 13, 2012, about a possible case of neglect. Cecil W. was a 66-year-old mentally retarded individual who was under the care of James Mattos for the last several years.
By the time Mr. Mattos had gotten Cecil to the hospital, his condition was grave. Deputy Nyland testified that he was largely unresponsive. He was suffering from dehydration and severe neglect, he had severe bed sores, and a body temperature of just 86 degrees. The man weighed just 97 pounds AFTER being administered 6 liters of water – which weighs approximately 13 pounds.
He would ultimately die from a combination of conditions.
Deputy Nyland described for the court the condition of the trailer where Mr. Mattos resided with Cecil. He described it as being in disarray, with a strong smell of feces – both animal and human – along with urine.
Cecil was on a bed with no linen or pillows in his room. There were feces on the floor and the bathroom was extremely dirty, looking basically unusable with feces smeared all over the toilet.
Deputy Nyland said that the other side of the residence was cleaner, but not clean. There was actual bedding on the bed and, while the bathroom was not clean, it was better than on Cecil’s side of the residence.
Cecil had an IQ of about 70. He was cared for by his mother until her death. A trust was set up and Ms. Mattos’ husband watched over him until his death about ten years ago. Darlene Mattos was Cecil’s caregiver until about two and a half years ago, when she decided that she was too old to take care of Cecil anymore and turned over care to her son James Mattos.
From the testimony, it appears that Cecil was a relative of the Mattos’ and had been in their care for well over a decade.
As recently as six weeks before his death, Cecil was able to walk with some assistance and not long before that he had been able to get around town, where he used to ride his bike and dig in the trash can for food – despite being provided plenty of food by the Mattos’, at least at that time.
His condition appears to have gone downhill very quickly.
Under cross-examination from Jeff Raven, a defense attorney representing Darlene Mattos, she had not visited her son in six weeks. She acknowledged that James Mattos was a terrible housekeeper. However, as he was a former worker at a convalescent hospital, she believed that whatever care James Mattos was providing was better than Cecil going to the hospital.
Former Chief Deputy Coroner Robert LaBrash would testify regarding the cause of death and the medical autopsy.
He testified that Cecil appeared significantly older than the stated age. He was poorly nourished and had numerous bedsores.
The cause of death was complex. It was septic shock – infection of multiple internal organs, aspirational pneumonia (infection of the lung), urosepsis ulcers due to a combination of malnutrition and hypothermia, with the contributing factors of mental retardation and hypertension.
He testified that the onset of death took days, but under some further examination allowed that it could have been as long as weeks – but not likely months.
Mr. LaBrash added that the manner of death was homicide due to neglect.
Judge Fall would hold both Mr. Mattos and his mother Darlene Mattos to answer for all charges. However, he allowed Darlene Mattos to be released on her own recognizance.
In his impassioned closing argument, Mr. Raven argued that Darlene Mattos did the best she could until she was too old to care for Cecil. He argued that Ms. Mattos was not a risk to society nor did she possess a flight risk.
She had family who would get her to court and she has been a resident of Yolo County for over 50 years. It will be left to a jury to decide if Ms. Mattos should have known about the dreadful conditions that Cecil was living in and could have done something to prevent his death.
This is one of the worst cases of elder abuse we have seen. It occurred in the city of Davis and led to the death of a man who was just 66 years of age.
Some of the media, there for the Marsh hearing, took notes. Some walked out of the hearing when they realized that Marsh would not be heard until the afternoon, despite the fact that this case seemed worthy of coverage, especially for a reporter that covers crime in Davis.
While I can certainly understand the interest in the Marsh case, the lack of interest in the Mattos case is a bit perplexing.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
David
Thank you for the story presented in a concise informative manner.
You raise an interesting question. What makes one case newsworthy and the next one not-so-much so. Since this was just a preliminary hearing less than 48 hours ago, maybe the case will get picked up by more than the Vanguard before it goes much farther.
Just as the Marsh case raises many issues, this one has to draw attention to questions about who is looking after the welfare of elders who have difficulties fending for themselves. It is, indeed, troubling.
Although we don’t know what holes the defense will poke in the prosecution case, it seems clear from the graphic descriptions you’ve selected from the deputy’s one-sided testimony that you’re probably correct when you point out that “this is one of the worst cases of elder abuse we have seen.”
It certainly made my stomach turn when I woke up to face the lurid details you’ve emphasized about smeared feces, urine, someone down to 97 pounds AFTER hydration efforts and the lengthy suffering that “Cecil W.” (known in death only by a pseudonym?) suffered at the hands of his caretakers.
Yes, there are many comparisons about how these two cases have been reported and commented upon. I’m most fascinated that you and medwoman cannot see the incredible irony at play here.
David wrote:
> why are those cases high profile, covered by
> the media, while other cases are not?
The media (both right and left leaning) cover stories that support their agenda. The right leaning press will cover the fact that hundreds of black kids kill each other year after year in Detroit, Chicago and Oakland but the left leaning press will ignore every one of these shootings and only cover the handful of black kids shot by white guys (or cops or white-hispanics).
It is also “high-profile” (for both the right and left) when cute kids are kidnapped or killed. No one ever covers the daily shootings at and around schools (usually with metal detectors) in poor areas, but when a cute white kid is killed at a school we will hear a lot about it and if the dead kid is a child beauty queen the media will cover the killing for 20 years:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_JonBenét_Ramsey
“The media (both right and left leaning) cover stories that support their agenda.”
There certainly is significant truth to this, SoD. In addition to the selection of stories to cover, many media are quite obviously engaged in different reporting of even the same cases, based at least in part on their political leanings.
Everything SoD said.
And it’s not just WHAT they cover, but also how. In another thread some lamented the use of an image of a shackled teenager and called it lurid and sensationalistic…the image was selected to elicit an emotional response and tell a story in and of itself. I was reminded of the decision that most news networks made to use four year-old photos of Trayvon Martin at a prepubescent 13 rather than a more man-ish looking 17.
So true Ginger. In a lot of cases I think David is just as guilty of letting his politics decide which stories are more important. It’s just human nature.
JustSaying09/16/13 – 08:41 AM [i]…Although we don’t know what holes the defense will poke in the prosecution case, it seems clear from the graphic descriptions you’ve selected from the deputy’s one-sided testimony that you’re probably correct when you point out that “this is one of the worst cases of elder abuse we have seen.” …[/i]
Perhaps his defense team could call it “juvenile abuse” to try Daniel Marsh, a fifteen year old, as an adult.
“The media (both right and left leaning) cover stories that support their agenda”
since david brought up a specific comparison point, it might help if we stick with that and attempt to understand why one case heavily covered and another, equally horrific in its own ways, not covered.
It’s an interesting question and no doubt the factors are complex. I believe the bottom line is the bottom line: It’s based primarily on what will sell the most newspapers or generate the greatest readership or viewership—so-called “market-driven journalism.” What sells is a function of a number of factors, including deviation from the norm and situations that result in strong emotional responses. So, coverage is probably greater for homicides involving victims who are female, children and seniors, or of higher status. Multiple victims, stranger-related, minority offender, and robbery-related homicides also tend to get greater coverage.
Eric wrote:
> It’s an interesting question and no doubt the factors
> are complex. I believe the bottom line is the bottom
> line: It’s based primarily on what will sell the most
> newspapers or generate the greatest readership or viewership
I’m wondering if David will comment on why he covered the arrest of Daniel Marsh in Davis but did not cover (as far as I know) the arrest of Rudy Gonzales and Javier Gomarez for the stabbing (in the neck) of a Latino kid in Woodland last year.
Does he think he will get more readership covering crimes committed by white people? (or does covering crimes committed by the “hard working people here to do the jobs white people won’t do” not fit with his agenda)?
Comedian George Lopez had a great line a while back where he said: “Latinos are always told that the white man is keeping us down but it seems like every time one of us is robbed or stabbed it is not by a white guy, but by some dude named Raul or Hector”…
“I’m wondering if David will comment on why he covered the arrest of Daniel Marsh in Davis but did not cover (as far as I know) the arrest of Rudy Gonzales and Javier Gomarez for the stabbing (in the neck) of a Latino kid in Woodland last year.”
Marsh happened in Davis down the street from me.
JustSaying
[quote]I’m most fascinated that you and medwoman cannot see the incredible irony at play here.[/quote]
What makes you think that I don’t see the irony. I think that there is substantive difference in having a huge front page display of a shackled youth which can be seen by anyone even casually glancing at the paper as the son of a friend of mine who was a grade school friend of Mr. Marsh did, and a even graphic descriptions of living circumstances. I could have done without the pressure sore description just as I could have done without the foreign body insertion description since I do not think either of these anything to the need for public information. But, I still see one as being thrown in the face of the unsuspecting vs descriptions that are accessible only by choosing to read the story.
So, medwoman, you’ve come up with another complaint. The use of photographs in newspapers leads to “unsuspectings” recognizing something they wouldn’t if the information was conveyed only in words?
What is the problem you perceive with your friend’s son seeing that his old grade-school friend is in juvenile detention clothing and handcuffed as a cop is accompanying him? If course, the parent involved had complete control over whether the offending front page story was “thrown in the face” of a family member. But, why do you bring up the incident?
My guess that news of Daniel Marsh’s arrest and the allegations against him travelled through the high school community like a shot, far faster that it got to the rest of the town via the occasional Enterprise. Good luck to the parent of a high school student who tries to keep such events a secret. It is the awful situation that’s responsible for a friend being jailed, not the media that carries the news.
The irony to which I refer has to do with the Vanguard coverage of the two hearings and the differences in the stated standards and how they were or weren’t applied.
JustSaying
I am sure that you are correct that this news travelled through the school like a shot. It went through the community like a shot.
So since the community already knew about the arrest and confinement, the informational value of putting this particular picture on the front page would be what exactly ?
It is not the information I object to. No one is suggested attempting to keep anything secret, as I clearly stated in my initial post. It is the manner of presentation with which I take exception.
I guess I don’t understand what your concern was about your friend’s newspaper having a photo that was seen by a family member. I thought you were objecting to the photo being noticible with “a casual glance” when just words wouldn’t have caught any attention unless sought out choosing to read the story.” Why did you mean to convey with this anecdote?
—
“So since the community already knew about the arrest and confinement, the informational value of putting this particular picture on the front page would be what exactly ?”
Photos are ubiquitous in newspapers. I’ve yet to understand why you object them in this story, although you initially wrote about the joxtaposing of them as though it somehow prejudicided readers to see a sweet shot of the victims next to the photo of the defendent.
The “information value” of this photo? It added to to overall coverage. It showed how the accused looks is a much more effctive way than words alone. It revealed a dramatic change in his appearance since the last time we saw him. You divined even more than most readers, that he appeared stunned (which I completely don’t see).
Coverage of this event is like most others. Murders are covered. Arrests are covered. Hearings are covered. Trials or deals are covered. Anniversaries are covered. Comparisons are made when the next killings are covered. Photos and other illustrations get used at every step. You attributed their use hear to all manner of terrible motives on the newspaper’s part when actually such photos are simply basic for covering such an event. I didn’t see the tv coverage, but I’d expect the video versions of the defendent entering the building were broadcast.
The Enterprise story was so routine in the history of coverage about hearings for people accused of double murders, it’s difficult to see how it was worthy of an objection. I’ll note that no one’s complained that the newspaper was not accurate.
JS
[quote]The Enterprise story was so routine in the history of coverage about hearings for people accused of double murders, it’s difficult to see how it was worthy of an objection.[/quote]
It is also very common practice on televised and radio news for there to be an announcement prior to the presentation of what may be sensitive or disturbing images so that parents can decide in advance whether or not they want their children exposed to that particular presentation of the news as can those who may personally feel that they do not want to hear graphic or for some other reason disturbing details.
My point here was that with this splashed across the front page as it was, there was no opportunity for the relatives, friends, schoolmates, acquaintances of either the accused or the victims to avoid images that they may have preferred not to have seen. I believe in full news coverage. I also believe in the wisdom and compassion behind providing some advance warning. Perhaps a notice on the front page that full coverage including photos was available inside the paper might have been an appropriate compromise between
full news coverage ( highly desirable) and an attention grabbing photo that was certainly disturbing to at least one one child of whom I am aware.