I understand that my position is different from most here, as from my position - breaking major news stories is understood to be one of the more important aspects of the job, and I would hazard a guess that what Burgess has been told isn't exclusive to him, so he wants to get the story first before anybody else can lay claim to it.
I realise that journalists aren't particularly well regarded (this isn't just a football thing or a Kiwi thing either), which is why there is scepticism over most articles like this where there are serious claims being made. But what I would say is that I haven't known a journalist to go ahead with an article if they aren't 99% certain of the truth of what they are writing. Writers do care about their reputation (that's why they stay off the forums, probably!), and they also (or at least I would) desperately hate to be wrong on this sort of thing. And also, these "sources" (and I believe I know who one of them is), would likely be reprimanded or have a huge loss of respect if they were uncovered, so that's why names cannot often be divulged.I guess that is why I treat such stories with a much larger dose of acceptance of what is said, rather than being sceptical.
Anyway, there is no doubt Tommy Smith will deny the allegations, as they would not be a good mark on his name if they were true, so I'm guessing we will have a word against word scenario sometime tomorrow.