My letter to the TC regarding their opinion piece Dear Sir Yes, there was a line crossed and you continue to cross it with your bedroom comments as you attempt to justify your sensationalist spin on a smear campaign against Richard Atwell. Even after it has been revealed that it was not a “bedroom” affair, and after it has been revealed that Richard Atwell was the one calling for assistance, the first line of your justification tries bring the story right back into the salacious tale you wish it were. Your insistence that the story is newsworthy and that you knew about it on Dec 11 along with other details further destroys your argument for the publication of this story. You waited almost a month, had details about who had called, that there were no charges laid, there was no wrong doing by Richard Atwell and yet your headline and story blurred the lines in an attempt to create a sensational story of implied infidelity. Mayor Atwell acted quite responsibly in not divulging information about the incident to the media as he was respecting the rights and privacy of the others involved in the incident. Using a conflict of interest angle based on the mayor`s chairman position on the police board is a flimsy excuse to use this story. Why then, wasn`t Frank Leonard`s endorsement by the police board, as presented during the election, front page news as a conflict of interest? Aren`t police supposed to be impartial during elections? Your other points regarding the CAO and the management position are red herrings to distract from your own irresponsible journalism and further muddy the waters. I am terribly disappointed in your reporting of this incident. Eric Pittman
Posted on: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 02:02:31 +0000