As a friend of the family, I attended the funeral for Bob Twitchell on Oct. 25. At the reception I heard about the article in The Herald, coldly headlined “Former sheriff Twitchell to be buried.” Why should his loved ones be spending time frustrated about what was written the day before they laid him to rest?
I read the article that night at the home of my stepmother, Doris Anderson. She was appalled by the article. At a luncheon that day she passed it around to some longtime Everett residents and found they were upset too. Doris, a spunky 83-year-old, even called The Herald to complain.
Why after all these years would the Herald spend the time and space to slur his name? The article contained four paragraphs about Bob’s death and recent life. The following five paragraphs were dedicated to his troubles in life 40 years ago! Did The Herald spend any time researching the good things that Bob had done?
At the funeral they spoke of a donation of cases of his book that were just sent to Bosnia for troops to read to help them understand more about fighting in a war. Was this a part of your article?
Was it really necessary to write this article the way it was written? Would it not have been just as effective to mention his passing? Wouldn’t the people that remember the past and the things that affected his life more than 40 years ago still remember to themselves? Was it really necessary to try to tarnish this man’s image once more?
I don’t think it was necessary – in fact, I think it was petty. And I agree with my stepmother, Doris, when she told the people at The Herald: “This article should have been buried.”
Everett
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
