Tragedies made even more tragic

A bullet burst through the first-floor window of a Bronx home on Tuesday evening, striking a 92-year-old woman in the back and killing her, the police said.

That’s the opening line/paragraph or “standard lead” of the New York Times article “Shot Kills Woman, 92, in Her Home” from October 21, 2009—and it’s all you need to know to understand the story, basically (Surette 53). The killer was not identified, but the police said “it appeared some youths had gotten into a fight on the street.” This makes the story interesting because there are no suspects and no arrests were made that night.

Rather, the story reveals more information about Sadie Mitchell, a 92 aged widow. With the victim unable to speak for herself, “neighborly bystander accounts” fill the story, told by Mary Fields (Lambaise 75). With her narrative, we know that Ms. Mitchell was a “devout Catholic” who “prepared food and purchased for the homeless” at a convent every Thanksgiving. This is a story “based on the speculation of authoritative police sources and, for balance, include the perspectives of acquaintances” (78).

We gain instant sympathy as immediately as when Lambaise’s article discloses the death of two “all-American” girls because of the tragedy of a sudden death. Another stereotype of the youth getting into a fight on the street add to the speculations of answers. In a utilitarian standpoint, these positive conditions helps make the news article make sense (78). With no answer to the question of why?, the main idea of the news report is not only was a woman shot (accidentally) but she was an innocent 92-year-old, community-service-giving, nice lady.