Last week I wrote of about a St. Paul man being shot allegedly by his son outside their home. This week I wrote about that same story, yet with the huge gap in information being told between the two, I didn't even recognize them as the same story.
The first story had the ages of the subjects, the address, general information that happened, and quotes from neighbors. That's all.
In the second story, written two days later, the story had the names of subjects, a history of past abuse from the father, a background story about the family, details about the gunshot wounds, quotes from siblings, and a chronological account of events leading to the murder.
The two stories varied greatly in the amount of detail presented, but the tone of the pieces did not change.
Both stories began with similar non-descriptive leads: "A family dispute turned violent Saturday in St. Paul, leaving a father shot to death and his son arrested," "His parents were arguing. He tried to intervene." But the later story immediately jumps into more details, "Then, Aramis Gaither, 18, grabbed his gun and held it out toward his father at their St. Paul duplex. "I want you to shoot me," the older man reportedly said."
The news is summarized in the same hard news fashion but the second story follows more of a martini glass shape as it has more information about the events leading to the crime.
Both articles were printed in the Pioneer Press but had different authors. It's likely the two shared information, but the shape of the first does not directly effect the second story. There are no grafs that are the same wording.