Sinclair reports misleading

On March 21, The Spokesman-Review ran a story from the Los Angeles Times, “Slap-on-wrist sentence for Army general,” regarding Gen. Jeffrey Sinclair and his sexual affair with a female captain. The captain accused the general of sodomy, assault, and threats to kill her and her family. The article stated that the court-martial sentence was so light it stunned even lawyers because it did not include jail time, and was an embarrassment for the Army and outraged reform advocates.

On March 22, The Spokesman-Review ran a follow-up article “Spokane firm aids Sinclair defense.” Working with attorneys, investigators proved that the association between the captain and the general was consensual, and that the captain later became upset. Evidence and testimony found that the captain’s accusations and honesty had lost credibility. The court found that Sinclair was guilty of mistreating the captain, adultery and violation of military principles and therefore was properly punished by a fine, reduction of grade and retire from service.

Is the Times ignorant of the evidence, or did they intentionally ignore it? Who cares; their reporting is abhorrent and a clumsy attempt at sensationalism.

Tom Boyd

Spokane Valley