Is Ignoring Criminal Activity of Candidate Condoning Such Behavior?

The question I pose to readers today is: When a newspaper does not print an article about the verifiable criminal background of a candidate, should we perceive this as condoning the behavior?
Recent disclosure in the News Press stated, based on police reports, that Jim Jeffers had assaulted a Fort Myers police officer and had been charged with disorderly intoxication, a second degree misdemeanor. Mr. Jeffers replied to this charge, that he had responded "accordingly".
As a former military police officer, I am disturbed and offended that Mr. Jeffers feels that assaulting a police officer is justifiable under ANY circumstances.
Not reporting such an offense, seems an obvious attempt to ignore or hide these actions from the public, because Jeffers remains their candidate of choice.
I was raised to believe that not telling the whole truth, is the same as telling a lie.
The Breeze should report fairly about all candidates, even when such reporting is unflattering to their endorsed candidate, and let the readers decide.
The voters should decide this election, not the newspapers.
Bear

Jeffers Should Withdraw From Race

Today's News Press gave us a startling revelation about Jim Jeffers, candidate for the District 1 city council race, who was arrested on November 1st (just a little over 4 months ago), for Disorderly Intoxication.
See the News Press story at http://www.news-press.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050311/NEWS0101/503110469/1003
Jeffers should have done his own background check, prior to entering the District 1 council race. This candidate, who hails his extensive experience in public service, certainly should know better than to presume there was no arrest record, merely because he pled "no contest". Had he been found not guilty, that would have given his statement some veracity.
Jim Jeffers knew of the arrest, should have been forthcoming with it and evaluated whether or not to run based on the advice of close advisors. No doubt, his supporters and financial contributors now feel deceived and embarrassed for endorsing his candidacy.
And he certainly was not too smart with his replies to the News Press reporter, when he stated that he "knew" he wasn't drunk. Had he admitted he was intoxicated, that would have shown his sincerity in seeking forgiveness. But Jeffers statement that he knew he wasn't drunk, made him sound arrogant and his actions completely inexcusable.
Jim also accused the officers of being agressive and said he responded accordingly. Accordingly? Isn't a law-abiding citizen supposed to cooperate with the police? If we were to follow this line of thinking, then any time someone does not act the way we want, we would have a right to respond in kind! Imagine for a moment, that an angry citizen comes before council with a complaint and Jim, responding "accordingly", flails angry complaints back at the citizen! Based on Jeffers rationale, it would be appropriate.
According the the story, a concerned citizen had tried to keep Jeffers from endangering his own life and the lives of others by driving in his condition, which angered Jeffers and started the confrontation. When the police arrived, Jeffers rebuffed their help by striking one officer and continuing a barrage of profanity.
The story to me, read like an oddball episode from the "Cops" tv show.
Is this the kind of person who should be elected to lead the city? Can Jeffers be trusted to remain calm in stressful situations, that will no doubt arise as issues are hotly debated?
Mr. Jeffers response in the paper, that he intended to stay in the race, is typical in this stage of discovery. But I truly hope that he will come to his senses and realize continuing in the race will only lead to more personal embarassment and disillusion voters.
It is unfortunate that the incident happened. I think the best course for Jim is to withdraw from the race, so that the rest of the campaign season can focus on issues affecting the city of Cape Coral.
Bear