Quality of Leads Questioned

"In August, almost a week after Monte Ruby died, the Green County medical examiner ruled the death was due to 'very serious' injuries to the brain stem.
On Tuesday, the man who allegedly delivered those injuries with a single kick was charged with murder."

This lead is amateurish in nature. My meaning behind that is simply that it could be better. The first thing that is told to the reader is "when" the event happened, not the "who." I realize that this is a second day story, so I'm not positive how harshly I should criticize about what comes first, but I'm fairly sure that stories should for the most part start with "who" all the time. The "who" is presented next in line (Monte Ruby and the medical examiner), and we get the "where" somewhat by the description of the medical examiner (from Greene County). This is followed by the "what" (the death cause) and even "how" (injuries to the brain stem... with a single kick). I included the second paragraph in this lead because it seemed crucial to what the story was digging at. The next "when" is again presented before the who, followed by what happened. It seemed more like a teaser than all of the facts presented in a blunt manner. The details come later, but some were needed to know why this man was accused of murder and what happened in the previous story. The details that typically come later, "where" and "how" are given first in the lead, which seems off to me. Now, to the next lead I chose.

" A new city survey may pave the way for safer sidewalks by identifying problem areas in town.
At least 109 miles of sidewalks need to be repaired or improved to meet Americans with Disabilities Act requirements, according to a survey that is nearly completed."

This lead is also broken into two paragraphs. The first seems to be lacking some information that the next paragraph covers, but I'm not experienced enough in this matter to know if that is acceptable most of the time, or if all the info should always, ideally, be found in the first paragraph. First comes the "what" of the story, which is alright because there really isn't a "who" to talk about yet. The "where" is told in a vague way, because it tells us the survey is "in town." This may be clarified in more detail later, which I'm pretty sure is alright. Next is a bit of the "how" of the situation, telling what is going to be done. We do not get a "when," but this is an ongoing story without a real time - it is currently happening.

" A Drury University freshman was hospitalized for alcohol poisoning during an off-campus party apparently organized in response to tougher enforcement of underage drinking laws during Bid Day on campus Saturday."

This lead, as far as thoroughness, has everything right in the first paragraph. As far as inverted pyramid structure, I think this is the best one out of the three leads that I chose. It is declarative, and in one to the point sentence. As far as how the facts are presented, they're not in the exact right order, but I think that it works. The "who" is first, always a good start, followed by the "what". Next we get a little detail in the "why" and "how," but that's insignificant. "Where" is found first, actually, (Drury), but again later (on campus). Last is "when," on Saturday. I think this is a great example of the structure that is supposed to be modeled in the first paragraph of a story.