Look at the details they use on the father’s personal life to attempt to try him in the media.  Unfortunately, their plot worked, and as a result of the stress of being tried in the media, this man died of a stroke before his real trial.  This irresponsibility is close to third-degree murder, and the criminal aspect of it is highlighted by the laziness of including only a broken link to the original article:

http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2003/11/corr-n26.html

The broken link:  http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2003/11/nj-n18.shtml

As for the 4 factual errors pointed to in the letter:

1.  This is a name mix-up and not a factual error.  The article is clearly referring to the father, and the article introduces the father as Raymond.  This is the only thing close to a factual error, though more of a typo, discovered in the article.
2. The authorities reported that the refrigerator was locked with a pad-lock.  The letter-writer introduces factual error by claiming that they did not.  The journalist has to report the facts, not begin a trial in the media which is outside the law and potentially a real lynch-mob and death for the suspect.  This is cross-examination of testimony and not journalism.
3. This is further irrelevant cross-examination and out of order in the media.  The state logged the visits and did not record anything amiss.  This points to the facts, uncovered later in the real trial, that the state was responsible.  The victims were awarded millions of dollars for their suffering.  9 employees were fired.  The response by the WSWS appears to be to join in the lynch-mob murder to hide the real facts to protect the state from liability.
4. This is another factual error added:  Bruce Jackson was removed from public school because of signs of abuse.  That is why they didn’t attend.  No criminal investigation into their home followed their leaving school, even after the reported abuse.  So to say that they did not attend public school is accurate; they once attended and no longer attended public school at the time of their discovery.   The comments on private school seem strange to say the least; both private school and home-schooling fall into the same category, they are not part of compulsory public education.  Who is responsible for these children’s welfare and behavior?

There is a further factual error brought in by the media prosecutor, when he/she claims that they had three adopted daughters when they only had two.  How does introducing more factual error help their “case”?  Is it because the facts don’t matter but just the act of cross-examination and the re-framing of the report as a trial by media of the father of the family?

It is an outrage how this letter was phrased and printed, and appears to be a form of trial by media which led to the untimely death of Raymond Jackson.