Unmitigated editorial hypocrisy

It is a slow news day. The most important thing on the minds of Journal editors is the relatively inconsequential use of an email address by a candidate for the city council.

"Relatively inconsequential"; it didn't cost nearly as much as say, ripping off taxpayers in the building of a seat of justice.

As a matter of principle of course; the decision was indefensible.

As was Beth Everitt's decision to use the aps.edu email account to taint the jury pool in upcoming civil suit lodged by disgruntled former employee, Gil Lovato.


The point of the editorial (subscription required) was; "...stepping in the public spotlight means people will question what they do. So they should, too."

And then they raised the tough question about the (apparently careless and) relatively inconsequential use of a government email to campaign for city council.

Yet they still have not raised a question about Beth Everitt's use of a government email system to taint the jury pool for her upcoming civil lawsuit.

Apparently, one can avoid questions; if one is a member in good standing of the privileged class.


At least they can avoid being questioned by Journal editors, anyway.