An employee of Dunbar-the "Most Trusted Name in Security" was caught stealing several thousands of dollars from the company between May and September of this year.
Upon review of video survielance the company discovered that Cindy Vang, of Saint Paul, had stolen $7,940 since July of 2007. Apparently Vang had been covering up something with a towel and then sneaking it into a bathroom in order to steal the money.
Once confronted by the company's Vice President, Thomas Fischer, Vang agreed to sign a written statement admitting to the theft. An additional $3,460 in twenty dollar bills was found inside Vang's car.
Vang is being charged with a felony for theft over $5,000. She is currently in custody.
This story appeared in the Star Tribune on September 19th, 2007
Analysis: Cops
This story was first posted on September 19th at 2:20 pm, followed shortly by an updated version at 3:01 pm of the same day.
The story was based on public documents and an Interview of Sgt. Tammy Dietrich. However no where on the criminal complaint is her name used.
The first story was pretty basic with not very many details. It also only included one monetary figure-the amount found in her car-which is a rounded up version of the amount listed on the criminal complaint. No where in the first article does it mention the grand total of $7,940 stolen. The second updated article does include the total amount stolen-but again the number is rounded to $7,900. I'm not sure if this is a mistake or if they just wanted easier numbers. Is this practice normal is journalism? Is the exact cash amount important? I suppose its not entirely important, but it doesn't seem like good journalism to just round up or down so that its "easier."
Both the first and updated stories were very brief with little description. The criminal complaint included a little more detail than either of the stories. Both stories included one source-the Sgt. Tammy Diedrich and the court complaint. Neither story included comments from the District Attorney.