While I respect The Daily Northwestern’s effort in its May 4 edition to shed light on issues that some have raised about the Medill Innocence Project and Prof. David Protess, I am troubled by the way you have done so, especially with respect to comments attributed to me.

First let me say that I was quoted accurately in your article. But a very pertinent comment was left out, and other comments were put in a context that would inaccurately make it appear that I know for a fact what techniques were used in these classes and that they were indeed unethical.

For example, your story indicated that I believe Prof. Protess or his students crossed the line ethically. I did not say that. I said the generalized examples you provided me crossed the line.

I do not know what these students or David Protess did or did not do, and I specifically told your reporter that, adding that I did not want to be put in the position of criticizing Prof. Protess or his students over issues I had not looked into myself.

Perhaps you plan on doing so later, but may I suggest you also look a bit deeper into why there have been attacks on the program, who is behind them and what their possible motivations may be.

Given that the ethical complaints appear to come from mostly anonymous sources – another technique I find ethically troubling that may be the better story.

-Mike McGraw

Reporter, Kansas City Star