Communications between Big Bend Times publisher David Flash and staff at the Big Bend Sentinel, along with editorial decisions surrounding the Sentinel’s August 2025 coverage of legal disputes involving Flash, are raising questions about whether a competing publication applied neutral standards when reporting on a local media rival.
The legal outcome itself is not disputed. A harassment charge against Flash was dismissed by District Judge Genie Wright. Other charges and investigations connected to disputes between Flash and Jeff Davis County officials were also reported dismissed, declined or not pursued.
Despite that outcome, the Sentinel article published Aug. 13, 2025, continues to lead with the existence of charges rather than the dismissal, using the headline “Harassment charges against Big Bend Times publisher dropped.” The article also remains categorized under the publication’s “crime” section.
Other outlets covering the same development used headlines centering the dismissal itself.
Flash said the difference in framing continues to create an association with criminal conduct despite the legal resolution.
“When the outcome is dismissal, that should be the focus,” Flash said. “Leading with accusations instead of the result changes how readers understand what happened.”
Communications Show Limited Revisions
Emails reviewed by Big Bend Times show Sentinel personnel acknowledged certain corrections after Flash requested changes but declined broader revisions.
In an Aug. 15, 2025 message, Sentinel editor Rob D’Amico wrote that the article had been updated to clarify attribution of allegations involving a photograph and to add Flash’s denial, and to clarify a dispute over whether Flash was described as “banging” or “knocking” on a courthouse door. He wrote that the publication was otherwise standing by the story.
In another exchange, D’Amico wrote, “Good luck on a lawsuit. It will be interesting to see if you’re viewed as a public person.”
Flash said that response reinforced his concern that the publication was approaching the matter adversarially rather than neutrally.
Prior Reporting Addressed Allegation Timeline
Flash also disputed how certain allegations were presented in the Sentinel article, particularly claims involving a photograph and alleged presence near the residence of Justice of the Peace Mary Ann Luedecke.
Flash said the Sentinel narrative drew in part from his own prior reporting but presented the allegation without fully explaining the context that had already been publicly addressed.
In January 2025, Big Bend Times published details from a recorded interview between Luedecke and prosecutors with the Texas Office of the Attorney General in which Luedecke claimed Flash had taken photographs from her driveway.
Flash disputed the claim in that reporting, stating the photo referenced was a wildlife image taken from a public roadway after spotting an antelope.
“I don’t know where she lives,” Flash said in the earlier article. “I saw an antelope from the road and took a picture. That’s something I do when I see wildlife.”
Flash said the image was likely taken in late 2023 or early 2024, months before the period Luedecke referenced and before he relocated from the region for safety reasons connected to disputes with county officials.
Flash said the Sentinel article referenced the allegation but did not fully explain the prior reporting examining the timeline and dispute.
“The allegation had already been addressed publicly,” Flash said. “There was reporting available showing the timeline didn’t match.”
Mano Prieto Reference and Location Dispute
Emails reviewed by Big Bend Times show Sentinel reporter Sam Karas referencing Flash’s prior reporting mentioning the Mano Prieto area and questioning Flash’s statement that he did not know where Luedecke lived.
Flash said his knowledge was limited to the name of the neighborhood from unrelated reporting and did not include familiarity with its location or with Luedecke’s residence.
“I knew the name of the neighborhood because it came up in another story,” Flash said. “I didn’t know where it was, and I didn’t know where her house was.”
Flash said his work often involves scanning the landscape for wildlife while traveling between communities and that he does not track neighborhood signage unless it is directly relevant to reporting.
“I scan for wildlife when I’m driving,” Flash said. “I’m not studying every roadside sign or trying to map out where people live. Knowing the name of a neighborhood from another story is very different from knowing where someone’s home is.”
Tone and Characterization Disputes
Emails reviewed by Big Bend Times also show tension over how Flash was characterized during the reporting process.
In one exchange, Karas wrote that Flash claimed to be “a journalist in Jeff Davis County — better than any other journalist who works for any of the area outlets,” a statement Flash disputes.
“I never said that,” Flash said. “I didn’t even refer to myself as a journalist until the Texas Tribune and other outlets started calling me one.”
Karas also referenced what she described as gender dynamics in the situation, writing that certain interpretations of events could “play into the gender dynamic that I think you should be very sensitive to.”
In a separate email, Karas wrote that people who have “nothing to hide — and who deeply value press freedom — don’t try so desperately to control the narrative.”
Flash said his requests focused on correcting inaccuracies rather than controlling coverage.
“Asking for accuracy isn’t controlling the narrative,” Flash said. “It’s asking for accurate reporting.”
Transparency During Reporting
Text messages reviewed by Big Bend Times show Flash informing Sentinel staff when prosecutors filed a motion to dismiss charges before the judge formally signed the order and indicating he would prefer another outlet report the development independently so questions could be asked outside his publication.
Flash said he believed he was being transparent while encouraging independent verification.
“I was open with them about what was happening,” Flash said. “I provided information and encouraged them to confirm it themselves.”
Flash said some of the Sentinel’s conclusions appeared to rely on interpretations of his own reporting rather than independent sourcing.
External Website Link Later Removed
One of the most disputed editorial decisions involved the Sentinel’s inclusion of a link to an external website the article described as a satire or spoof site that emerged following events involving Flash.
Flash said the site contained numerous statements he considers false and harmful not only about him but about other journalists, businesses and individuals connected to him.
Communications reviewed by Big Bend Times show the Sentinel later removed the link after the site posted content encouraging readers to contact a business employing Flash.
In one message, D’Amico wrote that the editorial team agreed to remove the link after the site had “went too far asking people to call the company.”
Coverage Volume Criticism
Emails also show Karas criticizing the number of articles Big Bend Times published about disputes involving Flash and Jeff Davis County officials.
Flash said that characterization lacked context.
“At the time, I was the subject of ongoing legal actions,” Flash said. “Documenting events and timelines was necessary both for reporting and for creating an accurate record.”
Big Bend Times publishes significantly more content overall than the Sentinel, routinely posting more than 100 stories per month across multiple communities, according to site archives.
Additional Example of Editorial Decisions
Flash also pointed to other editorial choices by the Sentinel that he said reflected inconsistent presentation.
He cited coverage of a courthouse event involving prominent defense attorney Dick DeGuerin in which a published photograph included DeGuerin while partially cropping another local attorney, Rod Ponton, who was present at the same event.
Flash said he raised the issue with Sentinel staff, who responded informally in private communications.
Flash said the exchange reinforced his perception that editorial presentation sometimes reflects subjective choices rather than neutral documentation.
Federal Lawsuit Filed
Since the Sentinel article was published, Flash has filed a federal lawsuit against Jeff Davis County and others, styled Flash v. Jeff Davis County, alleging violations connected to the same underlying disputes.
The Sentinel has reported on the federal lawsuit. Flash said that coverage did not list all defendants named in the complaint and that the publication has not updated its earlier article about dismissed charges despite subsequent legal developments.
Broader Concerns
Flash said the broader issue extends beyond any single article and reflects what he views as uneven treatment of individuals outside established professional relationships in the region’s small media environment.
“When a competitor writes about you, the standard should still be fairness,” Flash said. “Dismissed charges should be reported as dismissed charges, not framed in a way that keeps suspicion alive.”
