The 2010 Pulitzer Prize for investigative reporting was awarded to reporters Barbara Laker and Wendy Ruderman for their 10-month Philadelphia Daily News series “Tainted Justice,” which exposes a web of alleged corruption among members of a Philadelphia PD elite narcotics squad.
On this week’s Fresh Air, Terry Gross has a riveting interview with Laker and Ruderman about the allegations they uncovered, the reporting methods and breakthroughs that led to their winning series, the smoking gun surveillance video, and the threats and intimidation they received from certain members of the Philadelphia PD when they first began to report their findings.
(It should be noted that the reporters also talk about the many honest police officers who helped with the story and who want the women to uncover still more wrong doing on the force.)
Here’s a clip from the write-up for the show.
During their reporting, Laker and Ruderman uncovered allegations against officers that included committing sexual assaults, disabling surveillance cameras during drug raids to hide their misdeeds, and filing fraudulent warrants. During several raids, the police allegedly stole thousands of dollars in merchandise and money from small retailers.
As a result of Laker and Ruderman’s investigation, hundreds of drug cases in Philadelphia have been re-examined, and in some cases thrown out.
Listen to the interview here. It’s a terrifc tale of great reporting.
Then, at the interview’s end, we learn of one more sadly dramatic twist to the story: Right after Laker and Ruderman won the Pulitzer, the Philadelphia Daily News was sold to the paper’s biggest creditor and its fate is now uncertain.
Photo: Daily News/Bob Laramie
They didn’t deserve the award.
Sure Fire, did you read the series? It’s my understanding that it was disliked by the union, but a lot of cops liked it, because most officers don’t want guys around who are pulling stuff like these guys allegedly were. Obviously, I’m just going on what I read as I have no direct knowledge.
Maybe you did read it, but if not, I’d be interested to know if you had the same take after reading the whole thing.
I read it, it was very well done and I hate dirty cops, but the award should have gone to The National Inquirer for breaking the John Edwards affair/baby story. It not only knocked him out of a presidential run but a shot at v.p. on the Obama ticket.
How many people on thos coast ever knew of the narco unit story Celeste? The Inquirer should have been given their due.
Yeah, okay, agreed.
The LA Times had the best take on that whole issue, which was that—if they weren’t going to give the Enquirer the prize (The Pulitzer had all kind of technical reasons. Most of the significant reporting was done the year before, blah, blah, blah.), then they should have created a special award to recognize the importance of the Enquirer’s work.
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/apr/14/entertainment/la-et-onthemedia-20100414
Ordinarily, I like it, frankly, when the Pulitzer committee ignores the WaPo, the NYTimes and the LA Times and gives it to a smaller paper like the Philadelphia Daily News. But in this case, when it meant NOT giving it to the Enquirer….
It was less high profile and significant, but the Pulitzer committee also did a whole stupid and irritating thing when it came to its best play award.
http://theenvelope.latimes.com/la-et-pulitzer-mcnulty-20100413,0,3224899.story