There has been so much official disinformation, distortion and misdirection surrounding the case of convicted child molester Bobby Clark Brassell that we've lost any confidence that the principals are telling us the truth.
In particular, we're not sure what to believe anymore from the mouth of District Attorney Danny Craig - who ended the week admitting that he had concocted a story to cover up involvement in the case by state Sen. Don Cheeks, D-Augusta.
We are sure of this, however: Mr. Craig was right when he wrote in an apologetic e-mail to The Chronicle and several other media representatives that his half-truths and obstruction of the truth had "hurt my family, my staff and friends, and seriously eroded the public's confidence in their district attorney's office."
After a week of deception, that's all we're sure of.
The ultimate question, of course, was who decided - contrary to Georgia law - that Brassell would not have to register as a sex offender.
It was a boneheaded move. An elementary school student could easily conclude from the language of the law that those, such as Brassell, who are convicted of sexual conduct toward a minor must register as sex offenders.
Yet, after phone calls to various court officials from the powerful Sen. Cheeks, Brassell's explicit sentencing order was changed after the fact to allow Brassell to avoid registering - despite the fact that the state's sex offender registry is full of the names of Georgia men and women convicted of the same crime - sexual battery.
Early last week, District Attorney Craig was insisting that a mere handful of calls from Cheeks hadn't influenced him; instead, at the time, Craig said it was his decision, and he cited a particular portion of the sex offender registry law that he claimed left Brassell out of having to register.
Craig's argument, made to a Chronicle editorial writer, seemed bizarre and wrong at the time.
Only because it was.
Late Thursday, Craig admitted he had "made a bad mistake by trying to cover for a judge and a senator." He said that was wrong to do, and apologized for having "betrayed" his questioners from the media.
Of course, he didn't betray the media. He betrayed the public. It is you he should apologize to.
And it is up to you whether that apology is good enough - or if he should in some other way be held accountable.
Craig now maintains that Sen. Cheeks called not once, twice or three times, but "at least a dozen" times on behalf of Brassell, a friend, over the course of several years (the case involving a 3-year-old first arose in 1999).
Cheeks' supporters early on bristled at The Chronicle's suggestion he had "intervened" in the case. Perhaps they're right that there may be a better way to put it.
The words "relentless campaign" come to mind.
And on Friday, Craig acknowledged that Cheeks' involvement did indeed alter the course of the case: "If I'd been left alone," Craig said, he would have left intact the initial order by Judge Brown that Brassell register as a sex offender.
Instead, Craig says Sen. Cheeks actually called Judge Brown to see if Brassell could get out of the registration requirement. Craig says Cheeks then called Craig's office to say that the judge would go along with that.
Like an automaton, based solely on Cheeks' communication, the DA's office wrote up an order relieving Brassell of the registration requirement and took it to Judge Brown for signing.
And that was that.
At least until The Chronicle's Sandy Hodson kept after the truth.
The truth isn't pretty, either.
Even now, Craig wants it to appear as if it was all Sen. Cheeks' and Judge Brown's doing - that both were hell-bent on letting Brassell off the hook. In truth, the judge said, the DA's office simply brought him the order and he signed it. Had Craig opposed it, the judge would not have done it.
Certainly Sen. Cheeks was wrong to intervene. He was foolish to seek to alter the course of this case, time and time again.
But it gives us no pleasure in concluding that the lion's share of responsibility for what has occurred - from the outrageous order to its cover-up - belongs to District Attorney Danny Craig.
His office's handling of the registration release was indicative of an office that has taken its eye off the ball, at best; they cavalierly allowed a sex offender - against a child, no less! - to be released from a clear legal obligation to register in order to protect the public.
At worst, it's a case of the DA wilting in the face of absolutely shameless cronyism and undue political influence - on behalf of a convicted child molester! - and of a cynical, bald-faced cover-up by Danny Craig.
Why the cover-up? Craig says he is insanely busy, and didn't want to take half a day messing with media questions about the case. So, he's saying he has no time for justice? For holding sexual offenders accountable to the full extent of the law? Outrageous!
Craig admits it took a hard-hitting editorial cartoon by The Chronicle's Rick McKee on Thursday to get him to see the harm he has done.
It remains to be seen what can be done to repair that damage.
Or if Danny Craig is even the person who can do it.
Have a thought? Go to the 
