Their recent editing is quite an improvement, but there are still some areas of irrelevant information and/or omission present that provide a slant to the article. For example Apr 1st article
"Rodriguez said she didnt believe Trammel knew Ryals had leased the horse, and didnt blame Trammel because she no longer had possession of the animal."
While this statement may be factually correct as of the Dec 17th article, it is out of context in that article giving it an implication that is untrue. It is repeated in the Apr 1st article where it is completely irrelevant, no longer accurate and once again without proper context which continues to give it untruthful implications.
Their public as well as private responses are riddled with contradictions and completely unprofessional. Their "news reporting" style is better suited to a blog. Their response to the interest this story has attracted has been extremely bizarre and they have not handled it in any of the ways deemed acceptable by their alleged profession.