Dear Editor:

A little less than a year ago you carried a front-page article regarding the arrest of John Vick on child pornography charges. As a result of those charges, John spent 10 days in the county jail, spent the better part of 10 months trying to get disclosure information from the District Attorney, and spent many thousands of dollars in legal and other fees to rebut the charges. As a result of this incident, John’s reputation has been severely damaged, and his and his wife’s emotional and spiritual strength have been severely tested.

Last August, all charges against John were dropped by the DA because there was no evidence of any illegal activity. There was no incriminating evidence on any of the electronic equipment (computers, cell phones, etc.) seized by the authorities. Essentially, there was no proof of wrongdoing on John’s part.

You, by your front-page article, and the DA have contributed to the stress, loss of reputation, and loss of income this couple has suffered. Now that John has essentially been vindicated, and you have likely known about it for the better part of two months, when will you give the same coverage to the end of this issue that you did at the beginning? What will you and the DA do to help restore this fine man’s standing in the community?

Ken Koy

Editor’s note: In fact, we have not known about it. The regular sources of information in a case like this are law enforcement and the DA, and the appearance of a case on a court docket — which can often take a considerable length of time. There was no information sent by the DA, nor had the case yet been listed on a docket. A third, and the most common, source of information is an individual who has been vindicated. We did not receive information from the individual involved in this situation. We are attempting to contact the District Attorney and Mr. Vick and, when a response is in hand, an article will appear.

This story was posted on October 17, 2013.