I wonder how many of you that hide behind "Free Speech" have actually read the constitution. How many of you have taken the time to read some of the corraborating papers written by Thomas Jefferson and others of the time.

If you truly understood the meaning then you would know that it was written at a time when speaking out against the "Crown" was a crime punished by death. The writers of the Constitution were attempting to provide the Citizens a means to "Speak their minds" with out fear of retaliation. It was never meant to be used to against one another.

Read this quote from 1789 at a time when the Consitution was being debated in the senate hearings prior to ratification:

"The liberty of the press is indeed essential to the nature of a free state; but this consists in laying no previous restraints upon publications, and not in freedom from censure for criminal matter when published. Every freeman has an undoubted right to lay what sentiments he pleases before the public; to forbid this, is to destroy the freedom of the press: but if he publishes what is improper, mischievous, or illegal, he must take the consequences of his own temerity."

The Citizen reporting in this case is simply "Improper and Mischievous". The Citizen is not a newspaper, it's simply a gossip rag for the most part.

I write to defend the Citizen on the recent domestic violence story. I defend on two bases: (1) our First Amendment rights are too precarious to be stifled in an arbitrary fashion as proposed; and (2) domestic violence is so much more horrific and prevalent than people realize such that the education component of the story substantially outweighs any sensibilities.

All too many people would rather that everything be nice and that we have nothing but peaceful tranquil moments and "nice" news stories. Often, this same criticism is heard whenever incumbent politician or "pillars of the community". Accountability seems to be disfavored. Instead, we want things to appear nice and tranquil. Oddly enough, that is all that Mrs. Ellicott has probably hoped and prayed for, probably for years.

First, let's remember that the courtroom is open to the public and to the press unless for good reason the judge clears the courtroom. Judge English is highly competent and experienced in domestic matters. He did not clear the courtroom. What he did do (after his long career on the bench) speaks volumes----- he denied Mr. Ellicott a bond.

As to the continuing prevalence of domestic violence, yes it is a small handful of abusers but that is no comfort to the victims. And, shockingly, it happens in our very well educated and affluent community and not just in the ghettoes. I remember 20 years ago talking to my wife about domestic violence and she opined that if I ever struck her she would leave. (She overlooked the fact that I would never venture to strike her since she knows how to fire and reload a variety of firearms). But she was (then) incredulous that a woman could stay. Mrs. Ellicott's story teaches. It may be hard to grasp but it teaches.

Don't pillory Cal Beverly just yet.

Much of the information reported by The Citizen in the pilot's domestic violence case came from testimony in open court at a hearing in which the judge was to determine whether the defendant would be granted bond.

For citizens to be able to monitor how well their justice system works, it is important for citizens who want that information to have it available. Nobody is compelled to read the whole article: the caption on top tells you what it will be about.

The fact of the matter is that there is domestic violence in our society, including in Fayette County. It is unpleasant to acknowledge, but it is there, and people need to know about it. Nobody is asked to come to any particular conclusion about the named defendant. You're just told what was said in court. (Be glad it wasn't said about you.)

The Citizen's reporting is just fine. It is courageous of The Citizen to report on the shenanigans of the Board of Education or what goes on in court. I encourage its staff to continue.

If I understand this situation correctly the aggrieved wife is the one who told the story!
Now if she told only the police and they gave the info to the paper then we may have something worth looking into.

Is Cal to ignore all reports of family problems? Those who are reported in the paper every week are news!

I think he said in the article about 40 times, "she said," or something of that nature. I don't know to whom she said it!

Arrests for drunkeness of important people often are kept out of the newspaper, but not when the people involved want it published.

I am afraid there is no way to keep kids of their age free of the information.

Nor, should we propose guilt as some on here have done, with absolutely no proof except what they read!

I totally agree with you regarding the low level that the Citizen has taken on "reporting" about recent domestic violence cases. Stop airing the dirty laundry, Cal. You're better than this.