It’s a situation that no reporter wants to be faced with. Trusting your sources, you go ahead and write what seems like a good story, only to find out months after publication that at the bottom of the story was a lie.
This one was impressive in its brazenness, and I would venture to say that is the reason that I and a number of other people were taken in.
In May, I had the chance to interview and photograph some high school students as they were creating a mural on a downtown wall to earn some of the volunteer hours they needed to graduate.
As their medium was spray paint, the story seemed a good follow-up to an earlier story about graffiti in the city, and I was pleased to discover the story by happening upon the work in progress one day.
I talked to the boys and I took photos of them as they spray-painted the wall in broad daylight. They were proud of their work and only too happy to pose for pics.
They even told me an interesting story about a run-in with police, who mistook their art for illegal activity. But when they produced a letter of permission from the building owner, police let them be, they said.
But it seems the letter was phony. Now, I question if the story about the police is true; although, I am still inclined to believe it, at least in part.
Unfortunately it is the nature of our business that there isn’t always time to check and recheck a story. Sometimes you have to accept things because it is reasonable to believe they are more likely true than not.
What I know to be true in this case is that I was not the only one fooled.
The boys were not my only sources. I also spoke with one of the boys’ teachers, and corresponded with a reliable source at the Downtown Guelph Business Association. It seemed an unnecessary step to contact the building owner to check up on their story.
But if I had, what a different story I would have written.
I’m still not certain how their lie came to light. I learned of it when I noticed their artwork had been painted over and I made inquiries about why.
Apparently to avoid embarrassing a number of people, the mural was quietly white washed without  public explanation.
The matter leaves me with a number of questions, not the least of which is: What were the boys thinking? And what did they think would happen when their deception was discovered?
Perhaps they thought their artwork – a tribute to John McCrae – would be allowed to stay once people saw its beauty.
Maybe it’s fitting punishment that the work has been obliterated.
Or maybe as graffiti artists (they admitted to doing other illegal graffiti in the past), they are used to watching their work disappear at the hands of a power washer or a paint roller.
For my part, though I’m a little ticked at being included among the duped, I’m also sort of impressed. It was bold, and they got away with it, if only temporarily.