In the Star Tribune article, "Rail Crewman Spots Man's Body on Tracks," the reporter, Chao Xiong summarizes the elements in order of importance. The lead includes the elements of who, what, where, when, and why the event occurred, though with little detail and in as few as 14 words.
The second paragraph summarizes the story the rail crewman who found the body, omitted in the lead, and explains what is positively known about the event or the "how." This paragraph explains how the body was found and how the authorities eventually learned about the body.
The third paragraph explains the who and what in greater detail, typically the most interesting points of a story. This paragraph explains who this unidentified victim is (apparently in his 30s) and what happened to him (nothing suspicious about death).
The fourth and fifth paragraphs take a quote from the police and explain the "why." In other words, why was the man dead on the tracks and why was he on the tracks to begin with.
I find this structure sound because it puts the most newsworthy information first, then includes the process of the events occurring, and finally suggests what news is to follow (such as who the man is and why he died). If anything could change in the article, I believe it would be that parts of the process of the events occurring could be lowered in the article. The matter of who this man is might be equally important to how he was found. Simply because the man has not been identified does not make the "who" information less important. As soon as he is identified, though, it is likely that this information will precede the "how" section.
Xiong, Chao. "Rail Crewman Spots Man's Body on Tracks." Star Tribune: February 15, 2009. http://www.startribune.com/39642157.html?elr=KArks:DCiUHc3E7_V_nDaycUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aU7DYaGEP7vDEh7P:DiUs