In-Laws Charged With Murdering Trans NYT Executive
Left 50%
Center 0%
Right 50%
1 left · 0 center · 1 right
What happened
On September 26, Jonathan McKinsey, a 40-year-old New York Times executive, was shot and killed in the parking lot of Dublin Sports Ground in Dublin, California, while there for a supervised visit with his children. Witnesses called 911 around 3 p.m.; police arrested his 77-year-old in-laws, Shili Chen and Shouyong Zhang, after a black Honda fled the scene, and Zhang later admitted shooting McKinsey. McKinsey had been in a contentious divorce and custody fight with their daughter, Candice Jang, faced pending misdemeanor charges of child cruelty and corporal injury to a child, and was limited to supervised visits. Chen and Zhang, who were each armed when arrested, pleaded not guilty to first-degree murder; Chen’s attorney said they bought firearms in March after McKinsey allegedly threatened Chen’s life through a hit man and that they did not premeditate the shooting. Prosecutors say the couple watched and waited in the parking lot to attack him, and conviction could mean life without parole.
Sourcing check · Fully on the record · 2 articles
2 of 2 articles cite a named source for the story. It was on the record from the first report.
What these terms mean and how they're counted
- On the record · names a source 2 of 2
- On the record means the article cites a source by name for the story's main claim: a person, or an institution speaking officially, such as a company statement or a named agency's spokesperson. The opposite is an unnamed source. The count is how many of the counted articles cite at least one such source; the names are everyone named across them, each once however the articles spell it. Here: Curtis Briggs, Alameda County prosecutors, Flagler County Sheriff’s Office and prosecutors
- Primary evidence · cites a document or data 1 of 2
- Primary evidence means the article cites a record you could check yourself: a court filing or ruling, a dataset or report, a recording or transcript, an official statement or press release, market data. A quote is not a document. The count is how many articles cite one. Here: court hearing, court filing, arrest report
- Credits another outlet 0 of 2
- The article says the story comes from another outlet's reporting (“first reported by Reuters”). Those articles relay the story; they are not independent confirmation. Here: Each article presents its own reporting.
- Unnamed sources 0 of 2
- The main claim is attributed to people who are not identified: “people familiar with the matter”, “officials said”. The count is how many articles do this.
- How it developed
- When the first report landed and whether it named anyone; when the first named source and the first document appeared. Here: First report Oct 20, 04:00 UTC by New York Post, naming its source. First document in the first report, from New York Post (court hearing).
- Not counted 0
- Opinion, analysis and video pieces, and articles too short to assess. Every count above is out of the counted articles. An article republished under a new headline is one article.
This is about who is cited, not whether the story is true. Each source below says what it names. How we count
Omitted — what each side leaves out
Unpacked
Right-leaning coverage omits the pending child-abuse case that is why McKinsey was on a supervised visit when he was shot. Left-leaning coverage at NBC News reports he had been charged with cruelty to a child by endangering health and with corporal injury to a child, and was seeking a mental health diversion that could dismiss the case. That charging history never appears in the New York Post, which treats the park meeting as a supervised visit in a divorce and does not say why visits were limited.
Right-leaning coverage leads on gender identity; left-leaning coverage never mentions it. One side opens by calling him a "Trans New York Times exec," while the other leads with the not-guilty plea and names him only as a Times executive killed by his in-laws.
What did the in-laws tell investigators they saw during the visit that, in the defense telling, caused them to shoot?
Bottom line
If you read only the New York Post, the supervised visit looks like a custody meetup, not a court limit after McKinsey was charged with injuring a child.
The receipts — 6 facts one side's coverage lacks
- McKinsey had been charged with cruelty to a child by endangering health and corporal injury to a child
- Zhang admitted to shooting McKinsey with his firearm in interviews with investigators
- Prosecutors say Chen and Zhang watched and waited in a parking lot to attack McKinsey
- McKinsey was freed on $50,000 bail
- Witnesses described the pair taking turns riddling McKinsey's body with bullets
- McKinsey had previously threatened to murder his wife and her parents
The Left View
NBC News frames the case around the not-guilty plea and a fight over premeditation, giving substantial space to defense attorney Curtis Briggs’s claim that Chen and Zhang “are not cold-blooded killers,” did not premeditate anything, and acted from concern for Chen’s life and their grandchildren after seeing “something disturbing” during the visit—without specifying what they saw. Coverage details a “deeply troubled marriage” in which McKinsey and Jang each sought restraining orders and accused the other of physical and mental abuse, and notes McKinsey’s open child-abuse case and bid for a mental-health diversion program that could have dismissed the charges. It also reports the arresting officer’s statement that the shooting was carried out “in a crowded park parking lot with blatant disregard for public safety where several children were present.” McKinsey is identified as a Times executive and son-in-law, not by gender identity.
The Right View
The New York Post leads with McKinsey’s transgender identity and describes him as “allegedly executed,” with witnesses saying the in-laws “took turns riddling his body with bullets.” It stresses that the killing occurred during the supervised visit and highlights Briggs’s claim that McKinsey had threatened to hire a hit man to “get rid of” his mother-in-law, plus allegations he had threatened to murder his wife and her parents and had given the children a book about a girl whose mother died. A custody filing from Jang is quoted at length about the family learning “to avoid provoking Jonathan lest he became angry.” The piece treats those alleged threats and the in-laws’ fear as the core context while still reporting the first-degree murder charges and not-guilty pleas.
Our Take (balanced)
Left-leaning coverage’s strongest argument is the prosecutors’ and police account of an ambush in a public park: the couple allegedly watched and waited, fled a crowded lot with children present, and Zhang admitted firing—facts that, if credited, undercut a purely spontaneous self-defense story. Right-leaning coverage’s strongest argument is the documented family-violence record—pending child-injury charges, mutual restraining orders, Jang’s filing about living in fear of McKinsey’s anger, and the defense’s specific hit-man-threat claim—which supplies a fear-based explanation now before the court. The central unresolved tension is whether the shooting was a premeditated attack prepared for by buying guns months earlier, or a panicked response by elderly grandparents who believed McKinsey posed an imminent threat; coverage also splits on whether his transgender identity is material to the case or incidental to a custody-and-abuse killing.
2 sources
More stories
The week's bottom lines, in your inbox
One email a week: the five stories that mattered and what they actually mean. Free.