Where are all the "legalize drugs" idiots?

unkbd...read Scott Angus's article on the BLOGS...this may help a little in understanding why those comments were pulled

Anyone think that the comments were pulled to prevent the possible contamination of a potential Jury pool? We all know that what we read on these blogs is rumor/speculation especially in crime stories. There are even a couple of regular Sherlock Holmeses posting on here. Taking the chance that this cretan gets off because someone read on such and such a website that he was seen by so and sos 2nd cousins friend and was actually never even in the area of the crimes at the time and believes it, is not worth it.

nvgrf- wouldnt be anything good to say anyway to a rape serial killer

still waiting for them to come and clean up my neighbor hood

Mike Dupre was the reporter..anyone have this link

No the WCCA was linked to A Mike Dupre, not the reporter.

theguyonthecouch..don't take this as a criticism because it really isn't...but I'm having a real problem following that trail...the article was written by Mike Dupre and the suspect was Huber ???

mcs, someone posted a link to a court case on CCAP where the defendant had the same name as the Gazette reporter. I'm pretty sure that's why it was removed. They were trying to imply that the writer had committed a crime, and they were wrong.

I clearly am not a media supporter but this was definitely censorship..I entered the last posting before the comments for the rape article were pulled.. There wasn't anything offensive and everyone was giving their opinion..some stronger that others but all proper. We obviously offended the Gazette gatekeeper....so all you little darlings don't say something too much out of line

Hey, Trent.....I'm telling Mrs Bennett on you. Just kidding. Keep up the involvement. It's good to see!

tnimmo are you not in school at 2:19 in the afternoon? Why don't you try doing your class work instead of writing blogs that make no sense. You should not be using school computers for such nonsense anyway.

If the Gazette wanted to "censor" you, they wouldn't offer a comment section at all.

why the heck are you fools arguing about "censorship" from the gazette? are you all the loonies who think the govornment is going to take over our lives?haha

if you dont like it whyyy dont you create your own paper, with your own website...dert der der

hahahaha

They seem to be allowing you to express your opinion that they stifle opinions despite the fact that this cannot be a desirable statement for them.
I'm not usually one to stick up for censorship but considering the Gazette is a private company (to my knowledge) and someone on staff has to go through potentially objectionable comments and remove them. Considering some of the heated debates and long debates they allow to continue, I doubt it is pure censorship. I myself have been told that I should be killed since I support the right of a woman to choose. Since a majority of the posts on that topic were far less offensive than that one, the topic was allowed to be open. I assume, perhaps incorrectly, that at least some of the fourteen posts made the Gazette feel that they were going to spend way too much time policing the topic to be worth their while.
When the Gazette starts going crazy with censorship, I'll be among the first to start yelling and to stop purchasing their paper.

it's not that someone will "screw it up" bubs. the gazette does not want to really hear the citizens opinions. if our opines are not what THEY want them to be they take them off. unlike many other newspapers that let comments flow as long as vulgar words are not used. not only the rape case but also the story regarding the "changing face of janesville" was dropped as soon as the gazette saw that the people of janesville were not pleased nor empressed with the changing face of janesville. come on........ we want the TRUE feelings of the citizens to come through.

Maybe the fourth time in prison for Billie will be the charm. Whatever happened to the three strikes rule?

It will be gone by 5! Somebody will screw it up no doubt about it, but then again is'nt that cenceorship?

They disabled the comments on the rape story after they had already turned negative.
Give this one a few hours.

It looks like fourteen comments were made before the Gazette disabled the discussion (I clicked on the popular discussions link on the right hand side of the page). Perhaps someone will screw it up for everyone on this topic in the next twelve posts or so.

I wonder why the Gazette disabled the potential comments on the rape suspect, but not here? hmmm?