On July 10 I posted on Collin Finnerty’s trial that day in D.C. on an assault charge. I said one of his accusers was gay. While that had been reported by some media, a reader noted the accuser’s attorney said he was not gay.
I checked that out. The attorney, according to multiple press reports, indeed said that in open court. So I updated the post with a correction and apology for my error.
The reader also said that by identifying the individual as gay, I appeared to be “ infer[ing] that [being gay] somehow would taint his credibility or honesty."
I rejected that contention and reminded the commenter gays often demand to be identified as gay in news reports.
You can read more about the exchange here.
BTW – That reader’s comment is a good example of the kind of comment that makes JinC a more reliable place. Thanks, Commenter.
Responses to the two "legal questions" posts, especially comments by J, were all strongly positive except for an Anon. comment which began :
You say: "The newsroom buzzed with talk of Pulitzers and big pay raises." How do you know this information? Did you spend time in the N&O's newsroom? When? For how long?I plan to respond to “How do you know … “ Anon’s comment but right now there are more important things to do.
We’re coming up on Mar. 24, the four month anniversary of the start of what marked the public frame up of innocent young men; a frame up which it's now obvious had begun in the investigative/legal area days before.
Anon. will get a response post I’ve wanted to write for a long time. But justice comes first.
Moving on –
The quality and amount of information and commentary provided in the comments responding to the "legal questions" posts have overwhelmed me. I didn’t have what it takes to respond at first.
But I haven’t ignored them.
Tomorrow I’m going to do two things with those comments:
1) Sift out information and commentary relating to the remarkably strange absence of any composite suspect imagery produced in the weeks following the alleged gang-rape. I plan to work up a post that asks the public what it thinks about the absence of suspect composite imagery for any of the three men DA Nifong and the N&O's "victim" said brutally gang-raped her.
2) Put some of the other "legal" comments/questions material into a seperate post.
More coming soon.
4 comments:
"I plan to respond to “How do you know … “ Anon’s comment ..."
Glad to hear it. As you know, a lot of sites are tossing about information on the lax case. I'm just trying to figure out which ones can distinguish between fact and conjecture. I want to ensure I'm getting accurate info.
In my time here, I've noticed that you've been highly critical of the newspaper in your posts and often pose questions that you want to ask of management there. Yet in the post referenced above, you spoke with authority about exchanges happening in the newsroom. It was puzzling. If you were in their offices, why didn't you attempt to get answers to your questions? If you weren't in the newsroom, why did you write as if you had direct first-hand knowledge?
I appreciate your attention to this matter and look forward to your response.
No composite sketches done? Excellent point! I always thought it very odd that the alleged victim never mentioned that one of her attackers (Seligmann?---the one who was in front of her) was wearing a bright red shirt. You would think that would stand out in her memory of events!
Great site lots of usefull infomation here.
»
I really enjoyed looking at your site, I found it very helpful indeed, keep up the good work.
»
Post a Comment