I’m expressing my dismay on the extent of story coverage of the May 28 report concerning “Rochester business owner accused of sexually assaulting a minor under 12.”
I had to read this article twice to get the full impact of the over-the-top reporting by your staff and to really appreciate the fact that this incident did not need to be reported and printed in the in-depth extent it was. The items and identities involved were put into this article were important to state, but not to the extent that happened.
This incident will be played out in the justice system by attorneys, judges and corrections systems — as it is supposed to —to be a fair and just conclusion to this matter. But the thought of anyone who read this article not forming an opinion ahead of time who could be a possible jury pool individual is gone.
In all fairness, a lot less information in this article would have helped to get a jury pool that judges everyone as “innocent until proven guilty.” This in-depth story should have stayed with law enforcement and the courts.
The story, as written, does damage to two families, one church and pastor, one business and, to top it off, a very clear picture of the accused.
To me, this style of reporting is how The Chronicle used to be before the Taylors took over. I dislike the crucifixion of anyone by public opinion before a hopefully fair trial can happen.
Enough said. Thank you for everything else — except this story.
Gregory Ruddell
Rochester
