No, the New York Times did NOT publicize Darren Wilson's home address.

[alp227]

Wow. Another right wing meme goes down in flames, as Snopes explains:

When the article drew scrutiny, the Times removed the image of Wilson and Spradling's marriage license and appended the following editor's note:

An earlier version of this post included a photograph that contained information that should not have been made public. The image has been removed.

That redaction led many readers to mistakenly believe that the Times had published Wilson's current residence address and then withdrawn that information due to public protest, but the address published by the paper in the since-edited article was for a law firm and not for the domicile in which Wilson is currently living.

[alp227]

1. And my apologies for posting an article earlier implying otherwise.

I self deleted it.

[ncjustice80]

2. So what if they had?

There should be protesters on his doorstep, day and night, not giving him a moments peace.

[KingCharlemagne]

4. All due respect, the protesters need to be on McCulloch's doorstep morning, noon

and night and making his every waking moment a living hell. (Presumably McCulloch's home address is known.) McCulloch is the figure most responsible for enablig the actions of killer cops like Wilson. As such, McCulloch should not know a moment's peace until he recuses himself and allows Governor Nixon to appoint a Special Prosecutor to put the case before a new Grand Jury.

[ncjustice80]

5. Why not both?

[Quixote1818]

3. Not only that, the ass-holes turn around and post the NY Times reporters addresses

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025892483