In last week's paper you ran a front-page headline for the Abbotsford teacher who was charged with sexual assault. In the same paper you buried an article, albeit with a small front-page blurb, saying that Tim Bachman was acquitted of his similar charges.
Why is there more attention/sensation given to an individual who, although charged, should be innocent until proven guilty? This tarnishes the individual's reputation as if he is already guilty. Everyone needs a fair chance. These allegations are difficult to recover from even if proven innocent.
This struck a chord with me as we had started using Tim Bachman as our realtor in the spring of 2010, just before his name was tarnished in the media. Regardless, we kept using him as our realtor. I was happy to hear that he had been acquitted, but I know most people won't even realize he was deemed not guilty and will remember him as a sex offender. You helped establish this reputation, you should give at least as much attention to cleaning it up.
I am also well acquainted with the teacher in question. Whether he is guilty or not is not the purpose of this letter. It is to question why the need to publicly shame and humiliate people for speculative reasons. If he is proven innocent, life in Abbotsford will never be the same for his family again. If he is guilty, then justice will be played out. Does naming him somehow provide more safety for the community? He has already been removed from his position at the school. If he is acquitted will that be front-page news? Or should we expect his story to buried even deeper than Bachman's, since he doesn't have the celebrity status?
Ian Harker
Abbotsford