Bad news for former SE

I checked their website last night and he was listed as SE.

 

It'll be interesting to see how this plays out. That'd be a shame if Bristol has to open the search again.

 

And it was rumored to be for the same thing.


The Ann Arbor News' website had a story on this today. The story said he left the AA News, but as people posted earlier, that's not completely true.

The link also has a quote from the Bristol ME, saying Jim is an employee in good standing.

http://www.mlive.com/news/ann-arbor/index.ssf/2009/04/former_ann_arbor_news_sportswr.html

 

A story from the Bristol Web site. Looks like condemnation on this board should be held off a lil' bit. (I know, tough for some.)

http://www.tricities.com/tri/news/local/article/sports_editor_accused_in_child-porn_case/23057/

 

I really don't understand why a majority of the posters on this thread would want to delve into this. Doesn't seem like anyone's business except for the principals.

 

I'm not going to delve into it as far as somebody's guilt, but if a paper has to run a story about the SE facing child pornography charges, I'd think that warrants a thread on this message board.

It's got to be pretty embarassing to run a story in your paper about your SE facing child pornography charges. I wonder how people in the community feel about somebody facing those charges covering their kids? The quote from the attorney in the story also doesn't sound good; sounds like he's talking a lot of legal mumbo-jumbo and not talking about the client's innocence.

I bet the community isn't thinking too highly of the BHC right about now.

 

"Which office do I go to get my reputation back?"

 

Even assuming he's not guilty of viewing child porn, the story says he admitted looking at porn on a computer at work. Not very smart and certainly a fireable offense at most places.

 

I have no idea if he's innocent or not, so I'm not going to comment on any of that. I'd just imagine there'd be some backlash in the community. They're a 40,000-circulation daily with a sports editor accused of viewing child pornography and a story in the newspaper he works at saying all of this. How's that going to play in the community? If he's innocent, good for him. But we all know in these types of situations perception is often more important than reality.

 

Even if it's not child porn, how freaking stupid are you to view any porn at work?

 

Which is why I have to question them running a story about an employee who has yet to be convicted of anything.