Why don't reporters probe deeper? Deadline pressure? Inability to think on their feet? (i.e.: lack of experience?) Another question: aren't they taught this in journalism classes/lectures?  Yeah, I know: Ms. Doolittle spent 20 months on this "file," Lots of experience! (A "learning" experience, I suspect, missed opportunities all along the way.) Another question: where were her senior editors' "oversight" on this particular "file"? The tone of many pieces was "Aha!  And what does THIS nugget suggest to you, dear readers?"  Suggest it's the reporter's job to investigate that, not readers'. 

So: the Minister of Justice thinks the Philly third-party "external advocates" is terrific and Canada should adopt it-- the unfounded rate went from 18 per cent to 4 per cent.  To what effect? Are complainants happier? Anybody check with prosecutors?  Judges?  Are courtrooms clogged with unwinnable cases?  What's the CONVICTION rate now?  

There you go, Ms. Doolittle...onward, please.  Thanks.