What possible motive could you have for giving all the details of the Todd Jesperson article? He was never convicted, it’s an absolute abomination to Todd and his family.
He has agreed to resign; why couldn’t you have left it at that? This article fails to be objective, only favoring the district’s point of view. Todd was devastated to begin with and when he read the article, it made a difficult situation even worse.
I fail to understand (the decision) to include all the details only to sell a paper and also adding to an already bad situation. — Jim MacGibbon, Mound