Truth Before Dishonor

I would rather be right than popular

Archive for the ‘crime’ Category

What An Ordeal

Posted by John Hitchcock on 2014/08/15

I am at this moment in a hotel room, getting ready to head off to the airport for my three week overseas trip. But just getting here was an ordeal and a half. The company I am contracted to has known I needed to be in Salt Lake City by the 13th or 14th so I can catch my flight on the 15th for 2 months. And I kept training students right up to the end (a break in training of 45 days or more means I would have to go through the 4-day training class all over again). My last student found my truck in the shop 5 times in 5 weeks, one of those times being his fault. I had nox sensor issues more than once, a clutch replaced, a fuel pump replaced, a cylinder liner replaced, and a brand new 1200 dollar super-single drive tire replaced with another brand new 1200 dollar tire (his fault).

On August 6, I was in California. I delivered a load to Carson, then went over to Colton to pick up my next load, headed to Shelbyville, Tennessee. The load was to pick up between 10am and 11pm on the 6th, so I arrived at 5am and waited. And waited. And waited some more. It wasn’t ready at 10am like it was supposed to be, then at 1pm I was informed a stop in Ochelaka, Oklahoma was added. It was finally ready to go at 7pm.

The delivery times of 3am on the 8th for OK and 3am on the 9th for TN got changed. New delivery times were 630am on the 9th and 3am on the 10th. And I got time to go into the shop at the Petro to get my drive tire replaced. My student had dropped a trailer and pulled out from under it, like is done 120 times a year. Only he didn’t lower the landing gear far enough, and he pulled out real fast without stopping midway to assure things were good. The trailer dropped down onto the drive tire, and since he was pulling out too fast, the truck came right out, shredding the tread on one 1200 dollar super-single drive tire. All the way around the tire.

I got load assignments to pick up a load on the morning of the 10th to deliver to Haverhill, Massachusetts the morning of the 11th and pick up a load in the Boston area 3pm on the 11th to be delivered to Ogden, UT on the 13th.

After delivering in OK, my Shelbyville delivery time for the 10th got changed to 720am, meaning I would be late to pick up in Murfreesboro, late to deliver to Haverhill, late to pick up in the Boston area. So I go pick up my load in Murfreesboro. And lo and behold, the yard jockey had backed the trailer up too far. He pushed the trailer tires against a large concrete back-stop, pinning the mudflap between the back-stop and the tire. And when he dropped the trailer, he tore off the mudflap and bent the bracket. I was going to have to go out-of-route to Nashville to get the damage repaired. But first, it being a heavy load, I had to get the truck scaled out. And there was a long line inside the truckstop waiting for the scale ticket. And then the scale ticket. 30,000 on the drives and 36,600 on the trailer. 34,000 maximum. So back out, stretch the trailer tandems as long as legally possible. Rescale. 32,000 on the drives, 34,600 on the trailer. Overweight. Back to the shipper to rework the load. Over an hour lost at the truckstop. Two hours lost at the shipper. Then back to the truckstop to scale it out, and it’s legal this time.

So next we go to the TA to get the mudflap hanger straightened and a new mudflap installed. 40 miles out of route, and 3 hours wait time. And we’re finally ready to roll on to Haverhill, MA. Shortly after leaving Nashville on I-40, a man with white hair and a short-cropped white beard walked toward the highway so my student moved into the left lane and slowed down. The man continued walking out onto the 70 mph highway, and then he really did it. He threw something that looked like a brick at my windshield! He missed, hitting my mirror mount and barely hitting the lower seal around the passenger mirror.

Instead of delivering in Haverhill at 4am on the 11th, it looked like a 5pm delivery. My load out of Boston to Ogden got pulled off me. Now, I had a delivery in Northeast Massachusetts for the evening of the 11th with nothing getting to Utah. And a flight and hotel room I already paid for on the line. But my Dispatch Manager pulled through. I had an 11pm pick up in Middletown, Connecticut to be delivered to Salt Lake City 11pm on the 13th.

So, we get stuck behind a crash on I-78 on the Pennsylvania/New Jersey border. Then we get stuck behind a crash on I-287 in New York. Then we get stuck in a 7 mile back-up behind a crash on I-95 in Connecticut. Then we get stuck in a back-up on I-290 in Massachusetts. We finally get delivered in Haverhill at 930pm, when it was supposed to be delivered at 4am. Now, off to the Connecticut pick-up. And… we get stuck in an hour-long back-up on I-90 in Massachusetts. And a midnight pick-up. Other than unseasonable cold and unusual rain where it doesn’t normally in the summer, the trip to Salt Lake City was uneventful. Finally, I could relax.

There’s still time for something else to be screwed up since I am not on the plane yet…

Posted in Blogging Matters, crime, Real Life | Tagged: , | 3 Comments »

Progressives, Mainstream Media Are Anti-Semites

Posted by John Hitchcock on 2014/07/18

Sorry for the redundancy in the headline. While Truth Before Dishonor is decidedly pro-Israel, as is any Bible-believing Christian, the Democrat Party, as shown in their loudly booing the insertion of pro-Israel language in its platform in 2012, Progressives, Mainstream Media (brought to you by the Redundant Department of Redundancy) are decidedly anti-Israel. To the extreme that they support Islamic Jihadists, Islamic terrorists, child-murdering war criminals against the peace-desiring, self-defense-minded, self-preservation minded Israelis and the only nation in the Middle-East that is both Democratic and tolerant of Mohammedism, Christianity, Judaism, atheism.

From Robert Stacy McCain:

Here’s how the liberal mind works: The only thing they need to know is, “Who’s the victim of oppression?” Once the liberal media decides Palestinians are victims and Israelis are oppressors, it doesn’t matter what actually happens — Hamas suicide bombers blowing up busloads of innocent Israelis, launching missiles at Tel Aviv, whatever — the victim/oppressor dynamic controls the narrative.

Stand for Freedom.
Stand for religious tolerance.
Stand for Democratic rule of Law.
Stand against genocide.
Stand against bigotry.

Stand up for the right of Israel to exist and Jews to live.
Down with the lying Media. Down with the lying Hamas and State-sponsored Terrorism.

Posted in Christianity, crime, Culture, Islam, Israel, Judaism, Liberal, media, Philosophy, politically correct, Politically Incorrect, politics, Religion, society, terrorists, truth, war | Tagged: , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Wisconsin Democrat Prosecutors Not Having Fun

Posted by John Hitchcock on 2014/07/18

HT Hogewash

Wisconsin, known as “The birthplace of Progressivism” (view with a grain of salt), had recall elections that didn’t work out so well for Democrats after Governor Walker and the Republicans passed sweeping reforms that severely cut into the slush money Public Employee Unions (and their off-shoots) got out of their subjects — reforms the Democrats tried to stop by fleeing the state instead of doing their jobs.

Then came the highly partisan, highly secretive, highly unconstitutional, highly intimidating raids and political rectal exams of Conservative groups fighting the Leftist recall attempts and Leftist big money (which have never been investigated). Followed by Conservative legal pushback to protect the rights of all individuals from Fascist tyranny.

And the Democrat prosecutors, not used to having to defend their heavy-handed partisan intimidation tactics, are losing court battles and not liking it one bit.

O’Keefe and his Wisconsin Club for Growth have turned their civil rights lawsuit — a complaint many legal experts believed would be an uphill battle at best — into ground-breaking litigation to be reckoned with.

It certainly has demanded the attention of John Doe prosecutors turned defendants: Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm, the Democrat who launched the secret probe into dozens of conservative organizations in the summer of 2012; two of Chisholm’s assistant DAs; John Doe special prosecutor Francis Schmitz; and Dean Nickel, a shadowy investigator contracted by the state Government Accountability Board.

Some say the prosecutors, not used to being on the defensive, are sounding a little nervous these days, maybe even hostile. Their filings in federal court of late come across as condescending, and testy.

Who could blame them? There’s much at stake for Chisholm and crew – beyond the forced termination of the probe they’ve pushed for nearly two years.

In comes Wisconsin’s Attorney General, who has declared that, according to State Law, the Government Accountability Board doesn’t have to be accountable to the general public. Orwellian barely covers what Wisconsin’s law, written by Progressives, does to actual word definitions.

MADISON, Wis. — It appears the state Government Accountability Board will be able to keep its secrets from the public eye.

In an opinion [pdf] issued Thursday, Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen said the GAB “may not” turn over its confidential investigative records to the Legislative Audit Bureau because “there is no specific authorization for it do so.”

Now the leaders of the Legislature’s audit committee say they might change the law to open up the records.

The Legislature has provided specific authorizations of confidential information in other circumstances, Van Hollen wrote, but the audit bureau’s right to access documents under Wisconsin statute only provides a “general right” access, and no specific authorization to access confidential records.

So, according to Wisconsin’s Attorney General, Wisconsin law states that the Government Accountability Board is not accountable to the Legislative Audit Bureau or the people who elect their government officials. Once the Federal judge who demanded the total destruction of the material unconstitutionally taken in hyper-partisan raids finds out the GAB is not releasing information, he’s going to have something to say about that.

This is Progressivism trying to hang onto its Fascist tyranny and avoid being accountable for its wholly unconstitutional intimidation of all who stand against Government Control of everything.
__________________________
For more information of who was involved in the protests, including information destroying the Leftists’ Godwinning of Walker and Republicans, see Restoring Honor Now.

Also read the 96 articles (so far) by Watchdog.org in this surreal unfolding tale of overreaching government and pushback by regular citizens.

Posted in 1st Amendment, Character, Conservative, Constitution, Constitution Shredded, crime, Culture, Elections, funny business, history, Law, Liberal, Personal Responsibility, Philosophy, politically correct, politics, Socialists, society, truth | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Let’s Amend The Second Amendment

Posted by John Hitchcock on 2014/06/12

HT Bmore (Note: His link changes on a regular basis, so it won’t always show the graphs I have below.)

Take a look at these charts and tell me what correlations you found.

gun violence voting record

I suggest we amend the Second Amendment as follows: If your voting record is to the Left of The Crying Man* you are not permitted to own guns or knives or any sharp objects. What do you think? Do you think the lying liar# who “bought his way into Heaven” by lying and demagoguery would like the idea?

I know, I know. Correlation does not necessarily mean causation, but the Left are always misrepresenting correlations and declaring by fiat (not the decrepit car company) that their misrepresented correlations necessarily mean causation for their pet takeover desires.

*John Boehner
#Former NYC Mayor Bloomberg

Posted in 2nd Amendment, Character, Conservative, Constitution, crime, Culture, Elections, Humor - For Some, Insanity, Law, Liberal, Over-regulation, Personal Responsibility, Politically Incorrect, politics, Real Life, society | Tagged: , , , , , | 5 Comments »

Hey Gun Grabbers

Posted by John Hitchcock on 2014/04/19

Can we at least try enforcing the laws already on the books before we go about violating the Second Amendment? Hmmm?

When you catch a violent felon violating gun laws by having one, and then let him go, this happens. He wouldn’t have kidnapped that teen-aged girl, raped her, tortured her, tied her up, imprisoned her, poured gasoline on her, and tried to set her on fire if you Leftists hadn’t released him from prison early.

This one, as usual, is on you!

Posted in Character, Constitution, crime, Culture, Law, Liberal, politically correct, politics, society | Tagged: , , | Comments Off

I Contributed To #GosnellMovie

Posted by John Hitchcock on 2014/04/16

I contributed to help make the Gosnell movie happen. You can, too. Go to www.gosnellmovie.com and you can help make an important movie happen. Hot Air has some important news about who is blocking the attempt to crowdfund, and two actors who have made youtube videos in support of the crowdfunding.

____________________________
Edit: For those who have not heard of the heinous mass murderer Kermit Gosnell (and mainstream media and Hollywood like it that way), read what I wrote and Dana wrote back in 2011. Fair warning: have a strong stomach (preferably empty).

Posted in abortion, Character, crime, Culture, Health Care, media, Personal Responsibility, Philosophy, politically correct, Politically Incorrect, politics, Pro-Life, society | Tagged: , , , , , | 3 Comments »

Department of Injustice Joins Anti-Zimmerman Protests Before Trial – And Here We’ve Been Taught Justice Is Blind. Fooled Again.

Posted by Yorkshire on 2013/07/10

In the United States, Justice is supposed to be BLIND. It should be in Ideal Cases that the Courts deliver a fair and just trial to be judged by a Judge, or a Jury of the defendant’s peers. The Justice Department for its symbol has the scales of justice to be equal and blind. Or as Sgt. Friday would say, just the facts, ma’am, just the facts. As said, in all trials this is the ideal, but we know “things happen” and if severe enough, a mistrial happens. This is a statue representing Blind Justice:

However, our present Department of Injustice has forgotten this. It started its tenure in 2009 by dismissing a guilty plea by persons obstructing the voting process. We see the myriad of scandals with NSA, IRS, and others. Most of this is being done by Omission, than Commission. Or, don’t say anything and it may disappear. But with the George Zimmerman trial Withholder’s Department of Injustice has sunk to another new low in that they campaigned and spent TAX DOLLARS to vilify the Defendant, Zimmerman. See below. This is how Justice Feels now. In Shame.

Newly Released Documents Detail the Department of Justice’s Role in Organizing Trayvon Martin Protests
DOJ deployed obscure section to play role in Florida protests.

July 10, 2013 – 9:29 am

Judicial Watch announced today that it has obtained documents proving that the Department of Justice played a major behind-the-scenes role in organizing protests against George Zimmerman. Zimmerman is on trial for second-degree murder in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin in February 2012.

Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the DOJ on April 24, 2012. According to the documents JW received, a little-known DOJ unit called the Community Relations Service deployed to Sanford, FL, to organize and manage rallies against Zimmerman.

Among JW’s findings:

March 25 – 27, 2012, CRS spent $674.14 upon being “deployed to Sanford, FL to work marches, demonstrations, and rallies related to the shooting and death of an African-American teen by a neighborhood watch captain.”

March 25 – 28, 2012, CRS spent $1,142.84 “in Sanford, FL to work marches, demonstrations, and rallies related to the shooting and death of an African-American teen by a neighborhood watch captain.”

March 30 – April 1, 2012, CRS spent $892.55 in Sanford, FL “to provide support for protest deployment in Florida.”

March 30 – April 1, 2012, CRS spent an additional $751.60 in Sanford, FL “to provide technical assistance to the City of Sanford, event organizers, and law enforcement agencies for the march and rally on March 31.”

April 3 – 12, 2012, CRS spent $1,307.40 in Sanford, FL “to provide technical assistance, conciliation, and onsite mediation during demonstrations planned in Sanford.”

April 11-12, 2012, CRS spent $552.35 in Sanford, FL “to provide technical assistance for the preparation of possible marches and rallies related to the fatal shooting of a 17 year old African American male.” – expenses for employees to travel, eat, sleep?
JW says the documents it obtained reveal that CRS is not engaging in its stated mission of conducting “impartial mediation practices and conflict resolution,” but instead engaged on the side of the anti-Zimmerman protesters.

More here:

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2013/07/10/newly-released-documents-detail-the-department-of-justices-role-in-organizing-trayvon-martin-protests/?fb_action_ids=10201363392397216&fb_action_types=og.recommends&fb_source=other_multiline&action_object_map=%7B%2210201363392397216%22%3A505767429492108%7D&action_type_map=%7B%2210201363392397216%22%3A%22og.recommends%22%7D&action_ref_map=%5B%5D

Posted in Character, crime, funny business, Insanity, Law | Tagged: , | 3 Comments »

Zimmerman – Martin: Just as I predicted

Posted by DNW on 2013/07/01

I had intended to post this up Friday last but didn’t get to it, because the network graphic  I had captured (depicting a pursuing Zimmerman shooting Trayvon at a distance) months ago wasn’t handy, and an area-wide power outage cut the entire effort short.

So, this commentary is much less topical than it was a couple of days past. Nonetheless:

As I had predicted many months ago, when the facts of the matter were still uncertain: the question in the Zimmerman case would likely evolve into a question as to whether Zimmerman,  if he was the victim of an unjustified physical assault – and we do not absolutely yet know that to be the case – even had the right to defend himself against a battery by responding with deadly force.

There's no doubt George Zimmerman was getting a whuppin ...

There’s no doubt George Zimmerman was getting a whuppin …

Those who have had their attention drawn to the case will no doubt have noticed the changing nature of the claims of the “let’s hang Zimmerman” crowd.

As the news dribbled out we’ve gone from network news graphics depicting Zimmerman poised at a distance while shooting a child-like Trayvon after he had supposedly chased Trayvon into a corner; to a subsequent insistence that while Zimmerman may have been in a “scuffle” he had suffered no physical injuries; to a now new  theory suggested by the bald headed fellow pictured above : i.e.,  you have the obligation under certain circumstances to take an unjustifiable beating.

A beating or “whupping'” in the affected language of the effete clown in the suspenders, that would leave you like this:

2012-12-03T200804Z_USA-FLORIDA-SHOOTING

ZIMMERMAN, AFTER ENCOUNTERING TRAYVON MARTIN

As I wrote over a year ago on First Street Journal,

March 28, 2012 at 15:42

Oh, one last thing that despite all of my commentary, I have not yet mentioned.

In my dealings with progressives and lefties, for all of their hyperbole about what they conceive of as rights, for all their willingness to engage in political violence, for all their talk of resisting injustice and fighting for the right of peoples or for justice or for whatever, they seem to nonetheless believe that it is your moral obligation to take a beating, or suffer a rape, rather than kill the offender.

When it comes down to it, if everything that could conceivably be exculpatory for Zimmerman is proved to be true, (and I don’t imagine it will) and if he did nothing whatsoever to provoke Trayvon into a physical assault, and if it is shown that he was having his head pounded against the pavement at the very moment he shot Trayvon, there will still be many on the left that will say it was unjustified.

An essential characteristic of the leftist organism is their different sense of personal boundaries.

Well, we’ll see how it plays out.”

Well, we are now seeing just how it is in fact playing out. And it is just as I predicted.

Legal Insurrection has this, on the actual theory being developed by the prosecution,  the courtroom deployment of which seems to have been waiting in the wings.

UPDATE

In an effort to explain the image I had in mind as I responded to Yorkshire, I am adding the marked up picture below.

If anyone has an updated trial based map which is properly scaled and refers to an uncontested version of the respective parties’ movements,  they are welcome to suggest it, and I will happily remove this one.

Until such a time then …

The red pointer shows the GPS location of the shooting, per the Wiki site. If the Wiki coordinates are accurate, the death location is less further down the condo access path toward the Green condo, than news accounts and graphics originally suggested; graphics which I had accepted.

The red star seems to be the agreed upon location of Brandy Green’s condominium.

The yellow circle represents a location that is both two doors down from Brandy Green’s condo (or townhouse) and between two buildings;  a spot which has been suggested as a place Trayvon had sought out to “escape” from Zimmerman’s view. That is to say, a place obscured between two buildings on the one hand, while being two doors away from home, on the other. (This construction of events is more or less per Rachel Jeantel’s statements,  and assumes she is telling the truth in this regard.)

The green circle is where Zimmerman, if he is telling the truth about his own movements, paused to turn and go back to his vehicle.

The rest is self-explanatory.  A 100 ft scale is found in the lower left corner of the image.

Get yourself a ruler if you need to.

Shooting loc

Posted in crime, Culture, Law, Liberal, media, race, Uncategorized | 3 Comments »

Katie Halper of Salon – is she stupidly malicious? Or just plain stupid?

Posted by DNW on 2013/06/17

When someone, in this instance Katie Halper of Salon, is caught out playing fast and loose with facts in a transparent attempt to whip up a little progressive mob action, how are we to judge the author and her intentions? Barely sublimated narrative malice is after all, the common coin of progressive political narration. The disposition toward malice is taken for granted by most alert readers as being part of the architecture of the run-of-the-mill leftist mind. So, when we come across news articles which in passing misrepresent the facts of  some leftist cause de jour, we tend not to blink.

When however, the construction of the false narrative is rather more elaborate than usual, we pause.

Wandering from news link to news link recently, I came across this mess , ‘Stand your ground’ law helps white defendants a lot more than black ones” Double standards and all of that .

In her essay, Halper poses two Florida cases, “Wald” and “Alexander”, as examples of notorious and especially invidious legal outcomes resulting from what is generally called a no retreat self-defense or “stand your ground” plea.

Wald, who was a white male, got off on a justifiable force plea after killing an intruder in his house. This was bad. Alexander, who is black, went to jail for  for assultively firing a gun in a house she had once shared with her spouse. This is however not good, but also bad. But perhaps we are getting a little ahead of ourselves …

The relevant Florida statute reads in part:

1) A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:

(a) The person against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person’s will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and
(b) The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred. 776.013 Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.

Halper’s narrative strategy is to illustrate her double standard contention with descriptions of what she offers up as two relevant paradigm cases. Halper concludes that the divergent outcomes for defendants Ralph Wald and Marissa Alexander (in these purportedly legally comparable events) is attributable to the race of the defendants. Halper writes:

“The disparity between these outcomes should be shocking. But, sadly, it’s not, once you take into account the fact that Wald is white and Alexander is black.”

Now,  it soon enough becomes apparent that Halper’s real purpose is not so much retrospective and legal as proactive and political. She wishes to use these cases to sound a more particular alarm: warning the progressive troops that while no “stand your ground” claim has yet been made in the Martin-Zimmerman case, as ” Zimmerman waived his right to a “stand your ground” pretrial hearing …”  she nonetheless considers it ” is likely that ‘stand your ground’ will come up during the actual trial.” And, Halper wonders, ” If it does, [and ] … the defense is successful. Will Zimmerman end up a free man, like Wald?”

So it’s to prime the troops for a little, or a lot of, anti-Zimmerman street action as much as any other reason that this is written. But the obvious poisoning of the well aside, what author and left-wing activist  Katie Halper more overtly purports to do, is to draw a contrast in supposedly egregious judicial outcomes between two putatively legally alike cases.

So, just as an exercise, let’s place Halper’s preemptive attempt to de-legitimize a defense which Zimmerman’s defense team has not in fact made, aside for a moment. Let’s instead consider whether the two exemplar cases she cites are even truly alike. In aid of doing so, we ask: is her presentation of the material anything like honest or evenhanded?

Let’s review the first instance in Halper’s parable of racial disparity, injustice, and unequal treatment, which centers on Ralph Wald.

Katie Halper introduces Wald thus,

“On March 10 of this year, around midnight, Ralph Wald, 70, of Brandon, Fla., got out of bed  to get a drink and found Walter Conley, 32, having sex with his wife, Johanna Lynn Flores, 41, in the living room. He immediately went back into his bedroom, grabbed his gun and shot Conley three times.”

Now, the “Think Progress” site, which Halper cites twice in succession as an authority for Conley being Flores’ lover, establishes the background somewhat differently:

“Ralph Wald, a 70-year-old Vietnam veteran, walked into his home around midnight, and less than ten seconds later, fired three shots at Walter Conley, according to ABC News.” Italicized divergences.

Halper, unfortunately,  does not bother to inform us as to why she believes the Think Progress site was a trustworthy source for information on Conley and Flores’ status lovers, but not for a description of the exact circumstances proximate to the shooting.

1. Did Wald walk into his house as Think Progress has it, or did he arise from sleep? Halper does not follow Think Progress there, but does not say why.

2. We also note that as part of the process of establishing context or characterization, Think Progress thought fit to include the factoid that Wald was a Vietnam veteran. This, Halper either also fails to notice, or dismisses without explanation. Her mind is obviously focused elsewhere.

But, as we see when reviewing a number of other articles, besides being as Halper describes him, an impotent 70 year old white man, Wald was 1. a Vietnam veteran, 2. a retired Lieutenant Colonel, and 3. the father of a then 20 year old daughter from a previous marriage.

To then recap the fact situation somewhat more comprehensively (and comparably, as we will see later): It was midnight and retired Lieutenant Colonel Ralph Wald, a 70 year old Vietnam veteran, and father of an adult daughter, had been sleeping in his house.  Wald awoke from his sleep only to find a man on top of his wife in his  own living room. Wald reportedly retrieved a gun from his bedroom, returned, and shot the man three times.

The man was apparently so preoccupied with his activities, or indifferent to their discovery, that he never bothered to decouple and decamp when Wald retreated to his bedroom in order to arm himself against the intruder.

The sticking points for Halper’s moral slide rule seem to be Wald’s age and impotence, along with the reported fact that the man having sex with, or raping, Wald’s wife on the living room floor of Wald’s house in the middle of the night, was a sometime current neighbor, and her one time boyfriend. Apparently Halper believes that this past association somehow made the neighbor’s presence in both Wald’s house and wife, excusable; or at least nonthreatening in some way.

Unfortunately for Halper’s insinuated no-harm no-foul thesis, Wald’s wife Johnna Lynn Flores,  the actual recepient of Conley’s living room floor delivered sexual attentions, is not of much assistance in granting us this particular progressive reassurance.  The Tampa Bay reports:

“Flores, the surviving central actor in the episode besides Wald, testified she was “black-out” drunk the night of the shooting after consuming a large quantity of cognac and remembered almost nothing.”

Halper seems wary that this “minor detail” might imply trouble for her theory, as she defensively admits,

“… while the fact that the two were lovers doesn’t imply consent, Flores has never accused Conley of rape — nor do prosecutors buy that that’s what Wald actually thought was happening.”

No, she is right in this; it does not imply consent. Flores was, on her own testimony blacked out and incapable of remembering anything.

We naturally suspect that if this sexual episode had taken place on, say, a college campus, with Flores an alcohol or drug besotted and blacked out coed, that Halper would be asserting there was a prima facie case that Flores had been de facto , if somehow not legally, raped. We would tend to agree. And note too, Halper’s trust of the prosecutors’ judgment with this statement:

” Flores has never accused Conley of rape — nor do prosecutors buy that that’s what Wald actually thought was happening”.

This trusting attitude will be much less evident later, once Halper begins work arranging her version of the Alexander case. And, while Halper makes much of the fact that the deceased was a former boyfriend of Flores, and an apparently occasional next door neighbor whom Wald might have recognized – and then presumably spared – Wald’s wife Johanna Flores, the recipient of Conley’s sexual attentions, had a somewhat different view of the outcome.

What was Johanna Flores’ own verdict on the verdict? “

“I am elated, absolutely elated,” Flores said outside the Tampa courtroom where her spouse, retired U.S. Army Lt. Col. Ralph Wald, 70, was acquitted of second-degree murder Thursday. Once Wald was released from jail, she said, he had promised her a special celebration. “Because my husband puts me first, he’s taking me to the Waffle House,” Flores said.”  Tampa Bay Times

What then of Conley?

In the second instance of Katie Halper’s parable, the moral character of both Marissa Alexander the shooter, and Rico Gray the abusive husband will become hammering points as she labors to establish exculpating factors in the Alexander case which will help to prove racial bias. So, what of Conley’s character then? Why has that not been introduced more thoroughly? We do remember him. He is after all, the dead “lover” in the Wald case. And Halper even thought fit to include the fact that he had a tattoo honoring Johanna.

Well, in the words of a Mail Online article which Halper cited for the authority that Wald showed no remorse in killing Conley, but which she failed to actually quote, we find this eminently quotable nugget:

Ms Flores was arrested last October – just two weeks before she and Wald were married – for allegedly firing a shot of Conley. She said he came over and refused to leave. Conley told police Flores invited him back to the home they used to share. She and Conley, who had a record of petty thefts and worked as a laborer, had shared a house next door to Wald in the community of Brandon. Flores allegedly shot at Conley at 3am on October 19. She and Wald were dating then and he bailed her out of jail. Those charges were later dropped. Ms Flores and Wald married on October 25. Wald, a U.S. Army veteran, has a 20-year-old daughter with a previous wife.

So, in order to drive him away, and in a period prior her marriage to Wald, Johanna Flores had herself shot at Conley – months before her husband finally killed him using the same technique.

Wald, a retired – if 70 and impotent- Lieutenant Colonel; Conley, a petty thief killed while shagging the “blacked out” wife (who had already shot at him) of another man, in the middle of the night, in that man’s own house, in that man’s own living room.

In the Alexander case, as sad as the eventual legal outcome was for Marissa Alexander, the facts on the ground, and the proximate circumstances, are clearly different. But before we start in on the physical facts, let’s make specific note of how Halper introduces Marissa Alexander:

“On Aug. 1, 2010, Marissa Alexander, a 31-year-old mother of three, with a master’s degree and no criminal record, was working for a payroll software company in Jacksonville.”

Compare that again with the treatment she delivers Wald, “On March 10 of this year, around midnight, Ralph Wald, 70, of Brandon, Fla., got out of bed  to get a drink and…”

Again, for Wald, no “Vietnam veteran”; no, father of a daughter; no, retired Lieutenant Colonel; and no mention of a previously clean legal record. Just a description of a supposedly cuckolded and impotent old man, who killed his wife’s lover in a fit of jealousy, when in search of a drink, he got out of bed and discovered them.

On then, to the description of setting in the Alexander case.

First, although the way Halper describes the context in Alexander’s case is jarringly sketchy and telegraphic, it is still clear enough to show that when Marissa Alexander committed aggravated assault with a firearm, the location in which the event occurred was not her current home, and she was not confronting  an unrelated midnight intruder. Instead, Alexander (on testimony and report) went to a dwelling which she had once shared with her spouse Rico Gray.

Thus, according to Halper’s own account, Marissa Alexander  ” … went to their former house to get some belongings.” Halper asserts Marissa Alexander did this thinking, “he [Rico Gray] was not at home”. However, “he”, her estranged husband Rico Gray, was home; whether she knew it or not.

Halper, now switching to one of those really neat passive voices wherein shit just magically happens, says, “The two got into an argument.” And, “Alexander says that Gray threatened her and she feared for her life.”

Ok … Halper then does something seemingly odd for anyone looking to present an objective and informative version of events, but something which makes sense for a polemicist trying to be clever. She angles to base her exculpatory recounting of Marissa Alexander’s actions not on neutral police reports, but on the testimony of the formally aggrieved party: performing a little rhetorical judo so to speak.

In this instance the legally aggrieved party of record is ostensibly Rico Gray, the husband of Alexander. It is Gray who is posited (his kids actually are) as the victim of the aggravated assault charge involving Alexander’s felonious use of a firearm.

Halper aims to undermine the State of Florida aggravated assault charge against Alexander by impeaching her husband Gray with his own words. But now remember, it is really the kids who are the state’s main motivation in bringing charges. Halper then, ostensibly referencing Rico Gray’s deposition of the encounter, tells us,

“When Alexander retreated into the bathroom, Gray tried to break the door. She ran into the garage, but couldn’t leave because it was locked.  She came back, he said, with a registered gun, which she legally owned …”

At a glance, we therefore assume Halper is quoting Gray’s damning admissions in the deposition document directly. The elisions are naturally taken to be all Halper’s. Thus Halper, superficially quoting Gray’s deposition, writes:

” I called her a whore and bitch and … I told her … if I can’t have you, nobody going to have you,” he said, in a deposition.”

But for anyone who actually bothers to check the link under the words “he said”, he finds not a legal deposition, but  an outraged opinion piece written by Fred Grimm of the Miami Herald. Here is how Grimm wrote it up:

“Sitting in the State Attorney’s Office, Gray described how he had erupted in anger when he discovered text messages on his wife’s phone to another man. (Alexander had moved out, but had come home briefly that day to retrieve her clothes.) “I was in a rage. I called her a whore and bitch and . . . I told her, you know, I used to always tell her that, if I can’t have you, nobody going to have you. It was not the first time of ever saying it to her.”

Halper did then add an ellipsis to those Grimm used; but she  might better have helped the cause of truth  if she had quoted Grimm a little more extensively rather than elliptically:

“Marissa fired the gun twice that day into the wall. No one was injured. But the State Attorney’s Office said the reckless discharge of a firearm endangered the children. A jury (never told about the mandatory 20-year sentence) agreed. Circuit Judge James Daniel, handing down the verdict, noted that because of the state law, the sentencing decision “has been entirely taken out of my hands.” emphasis added.

Oh yeah, there were those kids in the room. Halper does of course mention them as being there; almost in passing as part of Grays self-critical depositional assessment of his own behavior. But she does not clearly stipulate why Alexander was really charged as she was: which was because the shots were discharged in a dwelling in the presence of kids (one of whom a little research will show was apparently next to the man whom Alexander was trying to impress with her no retreat seriousness of purpose). Or as one news source put it:

“Alexander, 31, claims she fired a shot from a handgun into the wall to protect herself during a confrontation with her husband, who she said had abused her. Because his two children were with them when she fired a shot in his direction, she was charged with three counts of aggravated assault.”2012 by News4Jax.com. All rights reserved Emphaisis added

Nor in Halper’s attempt to establish this as a legally comparable case to Wald which ended in racially motivated and disproportionate justice, does Halper mention the following “little fact”: After the shooting event of August 10 2010, and after her booking on the aggravated assault charge, Marissa Alexander was freed on bond.

Ordered to stay away from her ex husband, she nonetheless, 5 months later on December 30th of the same year violated her probation, and was arrested on a charge of domestic violence for assaulting Rico Gray at his Brockett Way home address.

Photographs were taken into evidence of his [in my view relatively minor] facial abrasions and swelling.

Marissa Alexander was then contacted by the police via phone; and, after initially claiming she had an “alibi”, eventually consented to meet with an officer: REPORTShe was arrested and remained jailed until her trial over the aggravated assault charge involving the children.

In perusing the various news accounts it appears that Alexander could have made a defensive pleading at trial on a basis other than “stand your ground”, but chose not to do so.  She opted to try for the so-called “stand your ground” defense instead.

However, ” …  a Duval circuit judge rejected her Stand Your Ground defense. The judge decided that Alexander could have fled instead of running into the garage and fetching the pistol from her car. ‘This is inconsistent with a person in genuine fear of his or her life,’ the judge ruled — illustrating, if nothing else, that the effectiveness of the controversial self-defense statute varies wildly from one Florida circuit to the next.”

Whether it affected the judge’s decision or not, it is interesting to note how the law  reads regarding the presumptive coverage of the right. It says,

(2) The presumption set forth in subsection (1) does not apply if:

(a) The person against whom the defensive force is used has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, residence, or vehicle, such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person; or …

It should also be noted that despite all this, Alexander was offered a reduced three year sentence plea by the same prosecutor who is in now charge of the Zimmerman case, Angela Corey.

Corey further indicated that she might have offered an even greater reduction (than three years instead of a potential 20) but it was Marissa Alexander’s violation of the terms of her probation over the outstanding aggravated assault charge, a bond violation which also resulted in her arrest for domestic battery, which made an even greater reduction of sentence offer on the part of prosecutors problematical.

In any event Alexander turned the 3 year offer of reduced time down. And now, unfortunately, she is in jail, sentenced to 20 years. But it is not because she’s black.

Where does all this leave Katie Halper? It leaves her holding title to what can only be, given the sources she herself cites, a deliberately deceitful narrative; a narrative intended to poison the well of public and perhaps even judicial opinion, in order to harm a third party’s interests.

That Halper has done this, is clear evidence of malice. That she has done it so blatantly, and expected it to pass, is persuasive evidence of stupidity.

Halper certainly looks guilty on both counts.

Posted in Character, crime, politics, race, stereotype, truth, Uncategorized | Comments Off

What Man Made Climate Change

Posted by Yorkshire on 2013/05/30

Who Da Thunk! We’s wuz right afterall. All the time we lived in reality, and Algore’s of the world wuz wrong!!!!

Oops! UK Climate Change Czar: Humans May Not Be Responsible For Global Warming After All

Michael Miller
On May 30, 2013

Holy carbon offset, say it ain’t so, Al! The UK’s Energy and Climate Change czar said this week that although he still believes the earth’s temperature is rising, “natural phases” may be to blame.

Translation: We didn’t do it. (Al Gore unavailable for comment.) From The Telegraph:

Ted Yeo, an environment minister under John Major, is one of the Conservative Party’s strongest advocates of radical action to cut carbon emissions. His comments are significant as he was one of the first senior figures to urge the party to take the issue of environmental change seriously.

He insisted such action is “prudent” given the threat climate change poses to living standards worldwide. But, he said, human action is merely a “possible cause.”

Read it all (plus cartoon)
http://www.ijreview.com/2013/05/55695-uk-climate/?utm_source=EmailElect&utm_medium=Email&utm_content=Subscriber%2338993&utm_campaign=05-30-2013%20IJ%20Review

Posted in crime, Environmentalism, Global Warming, Politically Incorrect, Real Life, Science in the news | Tagged: , | 2 Comments »

Joe “Court Jester” Biden is at it Again – Ladies, Get A Shotgun

Posted by Yorkshire on 2013/02/26

Joe’s at it again. His job as Court Jester is sealed bythis video where he advises Women to get a 12 Ga. Double-Barrel Shotgun for protection. The Jester’s advise is two shots anywherewill scare a bad guy away. Watch this:

Posted in Character, crime, Entertainment, Humor - For Some | Tagged: , | Comments Off

Lies Of Omission

Posted by Foxfier on 2013/02/07

I’m fairly sure that anyone here is sufficiently ”plugged in” to current politics enough to have heard about House member Gabby Gifford’s recent plea for further gun restrictions. I’m not sure what your local media is like, but there’s a fair chance that there was even a mention of Sarah Palin or at least some sort of “incitement” behind that shooter’s attack. Given the body count, it’s not too surprising.

Also recently mentioned, though only in passing, is that the guy who shot up the Family Research Council in DC. Honestly, my main memory of that was being on a family trip and wondering why the heck somebody targeting based on “anti-gay bias” would have bags of Chick-fil-A. I can remember a few commentators suggesting that it was some sort of cartoonish attempt at “blending in”– an indication of just how crazy his view of those who disagree is or was. “Hey, Chick-fil-a is ‘anti-gay’ the same way that the FRC is– they don’t support redefining marriage to fit current pop culture appeals. The Family Research Council even denies a man and woman are functionally identical to two guys or two gals, of all the nerve! They’ll never notice me coming in and killing people if I have suitable fast food bags!”   Not someone to take too seriously, even if he <I>did</i> have a gun.

I vaguely remember reading a blog about him choosing the target from the Southern Poverty Law Center, but I think that was from a site that collects examples of the SPLC faking and inflating “hate” for fundraising purposes. As I said, it didn’t stick in my mind, and I already don’t trust the SPLC. I assumed that they’d mentioned the FRC as being against homosexual marriage and the guy had gone from there.

Mostly, the “Giffords shooting” (the six dead victims get less press, since it seems likely she was the focus– if only because her public meeting gave that scum a crowd) sticks in one’s mind so much more because of the horrible range of people killed; from the little girl that was a 9/11 baby and the retired grandparent-types to the federal Judge and the first staffer to die in the line of duty, there was someone incredibly relatable to for everyone. Nobody died in the FRC attack, and Leonardo Johnson was able to overcome the shooter even after being shot in the arm.  No fuss about heroism there, so it must have not been that bad of a shot, or it would’ve hit the news, right? (An aside: You might notice that I don’t name the murderers or attempted murderers. I don’t want to give them that level of recognition. The victims or heroes, though, are a different matter, and it took quite a bit of digging to find Mr. Johnson’s name wasn’t “A. Security Guard.”)

After today, I’m rather disabused of the notion that the Giffords attack was anything but more successful and more hyped: the attempted murderer bought the Chick-fil-A sandwiches to rub in the faces of his dying victims.

Insult to injury.  Fatal injury.  Not as cartoonish, now.

If not for Mollie Hemmingway’s post over at Ricochet, I wouldn’t have even thought about media bias. I’m Catholic– if that doesn’t make you realize how much the media screws up, what on earth will?  It would be easier to find stories about the Church where reporters got it right than where they didn’t.  I’m sure other traditional religion followers, or even folks who simply are part of uncommon fandoms or do something as “strange” as know more about a gun than what end the bullet comes out can relate…. The news screws things up, a lot.

I’m guessing folks will remember the “Blame Sarah Palin Because Her Website Had A Map With Gifford’s Area In A Target” to-do? If not, Mollie goes over it, with links. Although I want you to go read it, the short version is: even though Mrs. Palin didn’t say anything vaguely like ”go shoot this bad woman,” and there was no evidence that the Gifford’s shooter had even seen the map or Palin’s facebook page, it was worrying because it might affect an effect on “troubled” people.

Turns out that the FRC was ”mentioned” on the SPLC site– it was on a “hate map.” That’s where the thank-God ineffective attempted murderer got his target. From a hate map.  They’re hateful, you see– so it’s good to target them.

Target a house seat: dangerous.

Make a “hate map” of those who oppose you politically on an issue: not worth mentioning. In fact, noticing that the attacker specifically stated he chose the target because of that “hate map” means that you are picking a fight.

As Mollie writes in response to a quote about that little detail “reigniting the culture wars that erupted around the shooting:”

Excuse me? What is that supposed to mean? I mean, you have an actual shooting in the culture war – an actual shooting – and you dismiss this aspect of the story as a “detail” that is “sure to reignite the culture wars”? The gall. The chutzpah. The …. hypocrisy of our media. The story doesn’t mention, by the way, that the shooter had a list with other groups whose names he got from the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Cherry on top: a guy goes in to kill people he hates, and has a list of other targets that he hates, and intends to assault the dying further with a symbol of yet another group he hates… and the SPLC doesn’t include that as a “hate incident.”

Posted in Blogging Matters, charitible organizations, Christianity, Conservative, crime, Culture, Palin, politics, Real Life, society | Comments Off

Convicted Hammer Murderer Murders Again, Liberals Blame Guns

Posted by John Hitchcock on 2013/01/15

A man brutally murdered his own grandmother in 1980, got convicted, and went to prison. After getting out of prison, he once again went on to murder people. He set a building ablaze, then proceeded to lay in wait for the firefighters to arrive so he could murder them. I’m sure you’ve already heard a little about him. He’s the man in western New York that was on the news. But did you know he was already convicted of murder?

It’s already illegal for him to have in his possession the gun he used to murder the firefighters, because he’s a convicted violent felon. He already murdered before, using a hammer and not a gun. He murdered family. And did a stint in prison for it. But the Left, always looking for ways to prevent criminals from bearing full responsibility for their actions, let the violent murderer free to murder again. And the Left, always looking for ways to prevent criminals from bearing full responsibility for their actions, blamed guns for his next bunch of murders.

The solution is very easy to understand. The solution is also Biblical. Execute the murderer and that will serve as a deterrence. No murder, once executed, has ever gone on to murder another person. But a violent hammer murderer who murdered his own family member has gone on to murder other people outside his family after being released from prison.

It wasn’t the gun that murdered those firefighters. It was a convicted violent murderer who did. But the Left refuses to lay the blame at the convicted violent murderer’s feet. To do so would be to require adults to be responsible for their actions, and the Left is apparently incapable of the basic logic necessary to come to that conclusion.

No, they want to steal our Providence-given Second Amendment rights from us law-abiding citizens.

Make it illegal to carry a gun and only criminals will have guns.
Remember, when seconds count, the police are only minutes away.

Posted in Character, Constitution, Constitution Shredded, crime, Culture, Law, Liberal, media, Over-regulation, Personal Responsibility, Philosophy, society | Tagged: , , , | Comments Off

Madalyn Murray O’Hair

Posted by Yorkshire on 2012/12/15

She’s the Bitch that took God out of School and nothing has been the same since. And this was over her son having to pray at Poly HS in Baltimore. Remember it well. She moved to Texas, went missing, found dead much later. And I think her son became a minister. Now today we had another PREYING at school, but it was of children. I wonder if each school shooting, the heat is turned up higher at her current residence.

Saw Obama comment on this. And honestly, I didn’t think he was going to get through his comments without breaking down. He did wipe away a tear or two. It was tough for him to handle. I will praise him for his words.

It happened in 1963 along with all the other things that altered the course of America and more or less derailed the core fabric of the country. To me, it was the start of the long slow descent we’re in now. What was commonplace in 1962 has been peeled back slowly to the point of what was normal life then, is now looked at as you could do that then. This woman was a starting point of all normal nuclear families complain of today. That is if normal nuclear families still exist anymore.

From Wikipedia: Madalyn Murray O’Hair (April 13, 1919 – September 29, 1995) was an American atheist activist. She was the founder of the organization American Atheists and served as its president from 1963 to 1986. One of her sons, Jon Garth Murray, was the president of the organization from 1986 to 1995, while she remained de facto president during these nine years. She is best known for the Murray v. Curlett lawsuit, which led to a landmark Supreme Court ruling ending official Bible-reading in American public schools in 1963. This came one year after the Supreme Court prohibited officially sponsored prayer in schools in Engel v. Vitale. O’Hair later founded American Atheists and became so controversial that in 1964 Life magazine referred to her as “the most hated woman in America”.[1][2]

In 1995 she was kidnapped, murdered, and her body mutilated, along with her son Jon Murray and granddaughter Robin Murray O’Hair, by former American Atheist office manager David Roland Waters.

Posted in Christianity, crime, history, Personal Responsibility | Tagged: , , | Comments Off

They Always End Up Showing Us What They Are

Posted by John Hitchcock on 2012/11/04

Hate-filled totalitarian Leftists who have no regard for Rule of Law. That’s what they are, and they always end up showing it. The difference between now and then? “Then”, the dinosaur Mainstream Media was fully able to cover up their actions. Now, New Media exposes them to millions of people.

For instance, most people in the blogosphere have heard about Obama calling people to vote for him out of a sense of revenge — revenge toward Obama’s American enemies. And Romney called him out on it. What did the dinosaur Mainstream Media do? They accused Romney of talking about revenge, and not Obama.

Next up, Valerie Jarrett, the brains behind the Obama frankenstein monster.

A rep from Jarrett office was in today. She gave us a finish line pep talk and then afterwards, heard her saying how Jarrett is very excited about a 2nd term agenda and a big part of that agenda is to punish everyone who opposed them during the first term and the campaign. Strange that everything was “Ms. Jarrett wants this, and Ms. Jarrett is looking forward to that”. You hardly heard Obama’s name mentioned by her which I guess reinforces what people are saying. Valerie Jarrett really is the power in the White House. I know that when her representative showed up it was like royalty was visiting. All the big dogs were lined up to meet her and acting real friendly and they gave us a heads up an hour before and told us we better “put on a good show” while she was here.

The part that really stuck out to me was when I overheard the rep say that Jarrett told them, “After we win this election, it’s our turn. Payback time. Everyone not with us is against us and they better be ready because we don’t forget. The ones who helped us will be rewarded, the ones who opposed us will get what they deserve. There is going to be hell to pay. Congress won’t be a problem for us this time. No election to worry about after this is over and we have two judges ready to go.” She was talking directly to about three of them. Sr. staff. And she wasn’t trying to be quiet about it at all. And they were all listening and shaking their heads and smiling while she said it. Pretty creepy.

If that isn’t bone-chilling, you’re already completely gone. Very clear hate-filled guarantees of throwing the US Constitution and the Rule of Law out the window, in order to “punish” those who opposed their tyrannical rule. Congress won’t be a problem because Obama has already shown he’ll rule by fiat, completely ignoring the Constitutional requirements. Violating them on a whim.

This is the existential election. Obama wins and kiss America and Liberty good-bye. Obama loses and America survives its greatest existential threat.

Posted in Character, Constitution, Constitution Shredded, crime, Elections, Law, Liberal, media, Obama, Personal Responsibility, Philosophy, politics, Socialists, society, war | Tagged: , , , | 1 Comment »

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 208 other followers

%d bloggers like this: