A commentary and journal site for the author. Topics will include Christian issues, gaming, comics, cartoons, news, and anything else I feel like talking about at the moment.
Send comments to firstname.lastname@example.org
Thursday, June 12, 2003
It's about time
Judge in Peterson case issues full gag order.
Judge has gained faction with TheEmerged!
Tuesday, June 10, 2003
Two crimes are happening here...
FoxNews examines the Peterson defense -- especially the suggestion that a satanic cult may have been involved. Especially relevant quote --
"Geragos might be using the satanic cult theory to elicit sympathy for Scott Peterson in the potential jury pool, said Fox News senior judicial analyst Judge Andrew P. Napolitano. “His initial goal is to neutralize Scott in the public’s mentality, to give the public a reason to pause before judging him innocent or guilty,” Napolitano said. He said this strategy could be beneficial for a defense that needs to “undemonize” Peterson in the eyes of the public, but he warned that it could backfire if Geragos doesn’t substantiate his claims with concrete evidence after the prosecution lays out its case next month.". Paragraph joined by me.
Undemonizing -- wouldn't exorcising be a better word? -- Peterson will be an uphill battle. He's clearly a flight risk, clearly a scumbag, and clearly not at all interested in his wife's fate. A wise man once told me nobody can make you look dumber than you can -- and Peterson has been doing a great job of making himself look like the new starring role in Dumber and Dumberer. I'm not surprised his defense team's first approach has been deflection, since they obviously need to get the jury thinking about something, ANYTHING other than their client's clearly guilty behavior. [Bonus Rant! The authors of "The Cases That Haunt Us", John Douglas & Mark Olshaker, are way off base in that otherwise interesting book when they say there is no such thing as "guilty behavior". That's one of those things so ignorant, so out of touch with the real world, that only an intelluctual/professional could believe it.]
The article however delves into a subject that's long interested me -- the idea of satanic cults, and the strange belief that they don't exist. Obviously there's no proof of them, so they don't exist right?
There is an element of truth here: the idea of satanic cults ritualistically slaughter hundreds if not thousands every years IS hogwash. However, suggesting that means they don't exist is just as ignorant as ascribing too much of a role to them.
"Our classmates are going to kill us."
For some reason, the theme to "Secret Agent Man" is running through my head right now.
Monday, June 09, 2003
I really oughta update more often
Nice article linked here, about why the press acts the way it does when it finds itself the focus of a scandal.
Best quote --
I think the first problem is that journalists are surprisingly naive. Although they've been on the other side of a feeding frenzy, it's impossible to know what it's like until you're there. Think of pilots who get caught in storms without navigation equipment and don't know what's up or down. Then imagine that happening at supersonic speed. It's disorienting. It's maddening. It can be terrifying.
I think the experience may be particularly difficult for journalists who tend to have a sense of righteousness that often comes without self-awareness. The truth is that journalists are used to judging others and not being judged.
When politicians or corporate executives have their integrity questioned, they often bristle. Journalists never understand this. They think it is arrogance or ignorance. But when the reputation of a news organization is at stake, the defensiveness is usually even greater. The instinct is to minimize what's happened, to point to all that's good in the organization and to insist that everything is back on track. The New York Times' first statement -- that the Jayson Blair case was just about Jayson Blair -- is a classic example of this.