Let me begin by saying that I in no way condone child pornography – nor any form of pornography, for that matter. However, I have a question about the article I read in Thursday’s issue of The Signal.
It stated that a man had been arrested because his computer contained 600 pieces of child pornography. What bothered me was that the emphasis was on his place of employment, with a large picture of that location next to the article.
What does that have to do with his alleged crime? Were you trying to implicate his employer? Do all your crime articles contain the employer of the perpetrator?
It is my suspicion that the employer was mentioned along with the picture because it is a Christian business. Is that true?
Charles Babcock
Santa Clarita
