The Paper's coverage of Bailey sentencing draws criticism

TO THE EDITOR:

We were outraged and disappointed to read (reporter) Jacob Christopher’s articles in The Paper on Saturday, Dec. 6.

The article with the headline “Ex-teacher receives reduced sentence in child sex case,” was riddled with wildly inappropriate references to the victim in the case.

Mr. Christopher took the editorial position that Mr. Bailey, the former teacher at Patton High School, who was recently sentenced to prison for sex acts perpetrated against his adopted daughter, was the actual victim.

Mr. Bailey’s remorse, evident by his red-faced weeping at his sentencing, was a sign that he was very sorry for engaging in at least nine sex acts with his underage daughter.

Mr. Christopher explained that, because the victim was 16 or 17 years old at the time of the crimes, she was above the legal age of consent in North Carolina.

“In other words,” Mr. Christopher helpfully explained, “if Bailey hadn’t fostered and adopted the victim, there wouldn’t be any criminal charges or court dates, and it would have simply been infidelity in a personal capacity.”

He is in his 40s. She is a teenager.

In what world are Mr. Christopher and the editorial team at The Paper living? Not only is she a child, she is HIS CHILD. She was living in his home. He is her father, not a match on Tinder.

Mr. Christopher went on to fully blame the victim by quoting Mr. Bailey’s defense attorney at the sentencing: “It needs to be known in this, that he is not a predator. She pursued him.”

The next sentence reveals that the sentencing judge did not reference this allegation in Mr. Bailey’s evaluation or sentencing. If the allegation was not relevant to the Court in sentencing, why would it be germane to the reporting on it? Let us repeat for the folks in the back, she is a child and she is his child.

Mr. Christopher’s apologies for Mr. Bailey and his abhorrent behavior continue when he notes that Mr. Bailey did not adopt the victim just so he could prey on her, according to the defense attorney.

Are we giving him credit for not seeking out a child to adopt just to abuse? And, he reports, sure, Mr. Bailey denied the accusations initially, but later confessed because his conscience got the better of him.

Again quoting the defense attorney at sentencing, Mr. Christopher includes the staggering, “They could have been left with a damaged victim. Nobody believed her … He wanted to clear the record — she did not lie.”

Mr. Christopher fails to point out that Mr. Bailey did deny the allegations initially, guilty conscience or no. Perhaps Mr. Bailey’s confession has as much to do with the “electronic evidence” seized at the time of his arrest as his true remorse.

That fact is found in Mr. Christopher’s companion article, detailing the courage of youths, including Mr. Bailey’s victim, in coming forward to shine a light in very dark places, we assume not ironically.

Yes, Mr. Christopher, it is a kindness Mr. Bailey showed his daughter that, after engaging in at least nine sex acts with her, he confessed to it, only after initially calling her a liar.

Yes, Mr. Christopher, it is a kindness that Mr. Bailey’s daughter, with whom he engaged in multiple sex acts (allegedly) at her instigation, did not emerge from this experience “damaged.”

The sexualization of girls in our society is appalling and reprehensible. In coverage of the Jeffrey Epstein files, some victims are referred to as “underage women.”

Underage women are girls. Underage women are minor children. One never hears boys referred to as “underage men.”

The rush to sexualize, and then punish, girls is as damaging as it is pervasive in Mr. Christopher’s reporting on Mr. Bailey’s crimes.

Mr. Christopher repeatedly refers to the “unique nature of [Mr. Bailey’s] crime,” seemingly as apology and mitigation.

Mr. Bailey is a grown man who adopted a child, then engaged in sex acts with her – the repeated implications and outright statement that she pursued him and caused her trauma is insulting and disgusting.

She is a child, and she is his child.

We wonder if the alleged “pursuit” would be framed the same way if she were Mr. Bailey’s biological child, or if she had been adopted as an infant, rather than recently.

How long does a girl need to be part of a family before it is no longer acceptable to portray her as asking for her abuse?

If the victim was troubled and acting out in ways that led Mr. Bailey to think it was okay to engage in sex acts with her, perhaps his first act should have been getting her help, rather than something illegal and immoral.

As a BCPS employee, he received training on exactly how to get help for troubled youth like his daughter. Apparently, he did not, choosing instead to engage in sex acts with his child.

Instead of offering this alternate and accurate side of this very sad story, Mr. Christopher decided to print a quote from Mr. Webster, Mr. Bailey’s defense attorney: “He’s not a predator. She pursued him.”

As an attorney, it’s Mr. Webster’s job to advocate for his client; it is not Jacob Christopher’s.

Shame on Mr. Christopher and the Editorial Board of The Paper for contributing to the shaming of girls and women who are preyed on by older men, only to be called harlots and jezebels.

How different our society and our treatment of young women and girls would be if reporters like Mr. Christopher followed up, “she pursued him” with, “and despite being an adult man – her father, no less – who held every ounce of power in their relationship, he exploited that power and abused her.”

Then stood red-faced and weeping as he learned the consequences of his adult choices.

ELIZABETH C. TODD

RACHEL KELLY DO, MS

LAUREN CARLSON

JAIME MONEY

ANNE GONZALEZ, MD

KRISTI CARRIKER

TYRA LINDELL