Ten paragraphs of unadulterated spin from an advocate of a family who likely intends to sue the government (although speculation about any intended lawsuit or possible financial motive was conveniently left out of the story,) and one small carefully constructed paragraph at the end to present the alternate view.

This is blatant, dishonest, narrowly focused advocacy journalism.

If reporting is about getting to the truth, this isn't reporting. It's source directed PR aimed at a potential jury pool.

(20 years of criminal investigations? Who the heck is Rob Selevich anyway?)