Last night, late after a long, exhausting day, I got a call from someone. Person A. I called back but in the future this person is going to have to leave a message like anyone else. I called Person A back because I thought it was urgent and news related. This person also appreciates and values my hard work and like my local supporters means well but unfortunately last night, got caught up in the typical Humboldt drama of someone says something to someone, they think it is news and other local media contacted has not done anything to let's call John. That is going to stop. All tips unless it is breaking news must be sent via email or text and then patience for me to respond. No one has access to me 24 hours. If you want that, you better pay for it and support my work and compensate me for my time at a rate I am not negotiating.
Person A did preface and say, check out and see if this is true.
Person A did not have all the information and heard it from Person B so then I had to call Person B. At this time, based on what I was told, I had reason to rush. That turned out not to be the case. Person B was fearful and did not want his name used and didn't have enough direct evidence and finally gave me contact information for Person C.
This is the second time my time has been wasted because instead of just giving me the person's contact information; other people want to be involved and have incorrect information. If that is how you operate, call other media. I don't need what you think is "news", I don't need the hassle and I don't need vague or incorrect information.
That is not a tip. News or tips is not unsubstantiated gossip and some messy Humboldt drama which always end up wasting time and I have to do extra work to determine if valid. This is why I have an email address to sift out nonsense.
Yesterday, I told Person B and C, I will keep them confidential for the initial post. Anonymity is misused in Humboldt. Your coworker, neighbor, former employer and it being awkward for you is not my problem. You don't get to use me, my platform, let me be retaliated against for something that benefits you. That is not going to happen.
I have done investigative, watchdog journalism and news in Humboldt for 12 years. I have done the same and traditional media for over three decades. In other places, I did not deal with cray cray, retaliation and I made enough to pay my bills.
Many have and continue to try and use me and are confused about constitutes "news" in Humboldt because Humboldt is used to other media spinning and presenting agendas and what certain people want heard and stroking egos. Go to the other media. Other than a lot of noise and distraction; how effective are they? That is a rhetorical question.
The kind of investigative reporting I do is time consuming, risky and if you are not willing to cover my costs, including consultation with a lawyer because of flimsy tips or risk involved due to your missteps; don't call me. Feel free to call other media who have the bucks and can afford lawyers. I have enough work and news to do. Let other media have the "glory" and see what they are willing to cover. If they were standing up to the powers to be and were effective, I wouldn't be inundated with requests.. They are good at fluff and spin.
Certain other local media make the National Enquirer look like Pulitzer winning journalism. It is because of them that there are people in Humboldt with no clue about actual journalism, have no boundaries and think they get to dictate what is news. They are funded by people with multiple conflicts of interests and owners who are part of the good ole boy and gals crowd with no vision, no clue to hire or fund talent and not even worth using for disposing cat litter.
Had I just called Person C, I would be in a better position to evalauate the tip. By the time, I got to Person C, started with what I thought was correct information and possibly some evidence, it was late. I already had concerns about Person C. After initial verification on my own, there were more red flags. Three hours of my evening wasted and another three hours this morning.
The tip was about Shannon Miranda. I repeatedly asked Person A and B if Chrisjenna Moore was involved. I told them about the court case and hearing I covered. They said no. They were wrong. She is. Person C was honest when I asked Person C about Chrisjenna Moore being involved. I decided that at moment that I was going to get some other information and see where this leads.
Read my post on Chrisjenna Moore and Humboldt Superior Court Commissioner Sarah Kaber's ruling. Chrisjenna Moore has no credibility with me. After Person C' response to my post and finding out what lies were told to me; neither does Person C.
Some of what I was told by Person C was easily disproven by me checking the Miranda Rescue website.
I don't know if other people involved or Chrisjenna Moore have contacted other media. Person C contacted Thad Greenson who was hesitant and said he had to talk to his boss. I did not realize Thad was still doing news.
I spoke with Shannon right now briefly and HCSO is on the way there and supposed to arrive at 10 a.m . He had an explaination. And I will be calling him later about the alleged claims. Shannon knows who is behind this and while I did not say anything about Person C, Chrisjenna Moore has no expectation of confidentiality from me. Shannon on his own guessed Person C's name.
Shannon not only has an explaination but he called HCSO himself about some animals. The people claiming Shannon did something wrong didn't even mention the other animals.
After speaking to Shannon and my own research which does not match what was claimed, I cannot guarantee Person C confidentiality. I have been lied to, given misleading information and a lot of my time has been wasted on what seems to be some people including two women with an agenda.
I have no interest in talking to these "animal rescue" people. I am really irritated that there are people who keep trying to smear Shannon without evidence that does not pass the smell test with me; let alone in a court of law.
This "dead dog" claim has now surfaced three times with no verifiable evidence. A lot of speculation and conjecture and some claims and some of "evidence" by Chrisjenna Moore that I have not seen nor would I believe if I did.
Until HCSO, the Humboldt County DA or some organization with the appropriate authority investigates; I would be foolish to repeat the claims by the people involved. Even if HCSO or the DA investigate; that does not make it irrefutable.
There are some other concerns Person C raised which I initially I thought deserved some investigating. Once I discovered the outright lies regatding some claims; I am not wasting my time. Yes, Shannon Miranda is well connected. And, he has also been the target consistently of rumors. Shannon has always spoken with me and he addressed the speculations by Person C and was very forthcoming with me. My call was the same time HCSO was arriving and I got to speak with him briefly.
Chrisjenna Moore I was told contacted HCSO informally. I know who she spoke with and for now, I will not reveal that information. HCSO was supposedly going to look into this by the end of the week. Without an incident number and formal report, there is no way for me to formally follow up with HCSO.
In my exhausation last night and talking to three people; Person A and B talking very fast and calling and texting me while I am trying to write down what Person C is saying; Person A and B who are relaying information to me in "Chinese whisper" claimed HCSO was hesitant and want to take their time building a case against Shannon because they messed up the Ray Christie case. Again, I don't know if HCSO said this and given what I found out in a few hours with my own independent verification; this is a a whole lot of drama from people with an agenda against Shannon Miranda and I have no reason to believe anything they say.
I just spoke with Person A and told Person A exactly what I wrote in this post.
Person C shared me two pieces of information of "evidence" in Person C's possession. After talking to my lawyer, I am not going to include the allegations unless they are a part of a HCSO report or court document or some official record.
Person C claims Person C has a video of Shannon from 4/26 and I am not going to include that information yet based on HCSO doing follow up right now and unless it is included in an official document. What I was told is on the video is just an observation from someone who is not credible and conjecturing. I questioned Person C about the video.
I will be calling Shannon later to complete our conversation but again based on advice from my lawyer and my own gut, there is no need to pursue anything at this time.
3:14 p.m. I just got off the phone with Shannon. I spoke with him off record, at length. As for any on record response, Shannon told me, " I have not done anything wrong. At this time, I have no comment."
From our lengthy conversation, I do have Shannon's permission to share that HCSO came to his property today in response to a formal complaint.
Yet, another lie and misrepresentation by Person C that no formal complaint was filed. As I mentioned Shannon already figured out who Person C was; I received an email from her about this post. I did not respond. Based on my own experience in the last few hours and being lied to which hampered my investigation, my own research disproving certain claims, there is no confidentiality. I am going to name Person C, it is Humboldt Humane's Jennifer Raymond who is Shannon's neighbor.
