Author Archives: Dana Pico

Posted on by

We’re not really serious about rape

Haley Reed, photo by Oldham County Detention Center, and is a public record.

It seems that every day I see another story about another criminal treated leniently. From the Lexington Herald-Leader:

Former Kentucky teacher gets 5 year prison sentence for sexually assaulting student

by Taylor Six | Sunday, June 26, 2022 | 9:59 AM EDT

A former choir teacher at Oldham County High School was sentenced on Thursday for raping an underage student in 2018.

Haley Reed, 40, of La Grange, was sentenced to five years in prison and is not eligible for probation, according to multiple media reports. Reed will also be required to complete sex offender treatment and register as a sex offender for life.

According to court documents, Reed pleaded guilty in March to third-degree rape and first-degree unlawful illicit sex acts with a minor under the age of 18.

There’s a bit more at the original, but the story from WLKY has a lot more information:

Reed, who wore glasses, and had her hair in two braids, kept quiet in court Thursday. But the young man she admitted to having sex with in the spring of 2018, at school, said plenty.

“This woman did everything in her power to try and cut me off from my friends and family, as well as make sure she was my whole world,” the victim told the court.

Now 21, her former student read a victims’ impact statement detailing what happened when he was 17. He called Reed a “predator’ and a “monster” and urged the judge not to continue to let her walk free.

“If I was a girl and she were a man, it would be a much different story, a pedophile is a pedophile. She deserves the maximum sentence,” he said. . . . .

The young victim, now in college, said, “Today, a pedophile is getting what they deserve.”

While she received a five-year sentence, Reed could be eligible for parole if she completes a sex offender treatment program.

Miss Reed was originally charged with:

  • KRS §530.064(2)(a) Unlawful transaction with a minor, 15 counts, a Class C felony
  • KRS §510.060(1)(d) Rape in the third degree, 10 counts, a Class D felony;
  • KRS §510.090(1)(d) Sodomy in the third degree, five counts, a Class D felony.

Under KRS §532.060, the penalty for a Class C felony(2)(c) is imprisonment for not less than five (5) years nor more than ten (10) years, while a Class D felony (2)(d) carries a penalty of imprisonment for not less than one (1) year nor more than five (5) years.

In effect, Miss Reed was allowed the minimum sentence for a single count of a Class C felony, and the maximum sentence third degree rape, the sentences running concurrently.

My question is: given that Miss Reed admitted to an Oldham County Police Department detective that she had “sex with a teen student approximately eight times between April and June after school hours inside OCHS,” why was she allowed to plead down?

Reed’s victim, Jacob Powers, delivered a blistering impact statement before the court this afternoon, arguing that she “deserves the maximum sentence.”

“At this time sitting here, it’s been four years since I was a victim of rape,” Powers said. “Four years since a person I originally met at 12 years old, took advantage of me. I wouldn’t say I’m afraid of much, but scanning a crowd at an event, making sure she’s not there, or having to look twice at someone in a grocery store scares the hell out of me. It’s most likely someone else, but if she’s sick enough to do what she did, why couldn’t she be there?”

Powers called Reed a “predator” who did “everything in her power” to cut him off from friends, family and to “make sure she was my whole world.”

“As a 17-year-old kid, I was taken to meet her parents, told I would be the father of her children, and that we would spend the rest of our lives together, marriage included,” he said. “These predatory tactics worked perfectly on me because being a father is all I wanted in life.”

Mr Powers was 17 at the time of the sexual offenses, which is old enough to consent to sex under Kentucky state law, but Miss Reed was a “person in authority” over the student at the time, which triggers the various statutes listed. Miss Reed’s attorney argued that Mr Powers consented and was legally old enough to do so, which drew some national attention to the case.

So, why the minimum sentences? Why don’t we treat rape seriously?

Posted on by

Amanda Marcotte loses it over abortion Not that we didn't know it would happen

It’s perhaps telling that Amanda Marcotte’s Twitter biography photo was taken in a bar.

While I knew that the left would wax apoplectic over the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization, I was fully aware that Amanda Marcotte would go off the deep end far worse than some of the others. Miss Marcotte wrote:

As many who watch the Supreme Court closely suspected, it now appears all but certain that the draft decision was probably leaked by a conservative trying to pressure Chief Justice John Roberts into joining the majority opinion. That pressure, if that’s what it was, worked.

This is factually untrue. From the conclusion of the Syllabus in the Supreme Court’s release of the decision, found on page 8 of the document:

ALITO, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which THOMAS, GORSUCH, KAVANAUGH, and BARRETT, JJ., joined. THOMAS, J., and KAVANAUGH, J., filed concurring opinions. ROBERTS, C. J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment. BREYER, SOTOMAYOR, and KAGAN, JJ., filed a dissenting opinion.

Translation: while the vote to reverse the decision of the Court of Appeals, 945 F. 3d 265, was 6-3, the Chief Justice did not join with the majority opinion, but wrote separately. While Associate Justices Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh also filed separate, concurring opinions, they signed onto Associate Justice Samuel Alito’s majority opinion. One thing is clear: Miss Marcotte did not actually read, at least not carefully, the actual decision.

It is also that, of the six justices who voted to uphold abortion bans, only one — Justice Clarence Thomas — was appointed by a president who won the majority of the vote. Both Trump and Bush obtained the White House, and the ability to nominate justices, because of the archaic electoral college system that overweighs the votes of rural whites and marginalizes the majority of Americans who support reproductive rights.

Again, this is factually untrue. While the younger George Bush received fewer popular votes than Vice President Al Gore in 2000, he not only won the popular vote in 2004, 62,040,610 to 59,028,444 for Senator John Kerry (D-M), but with a 50.7% to 48.3% margin, he won an absolute majority of all votes cast. John Roberts was appointed by the younger President Bush on July 19, 2005, which was in Mr Bush’s second term. Justice Alito was nominated on October 31, 2005, also during the President’s second term.

To compound the injustice of this, one of the Trump-nominated judges, Justice Neil Gorsuch, has no right to sit in his seat. He is only there because Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., illegally used his power as then-Senate Majority Leader to refuse to hold hearings for then-President Barack Obama’s 2020 nominee to the court, Merrick Garland.

“Illegally used”? I wonder: did Miss Marcotte ever claim that Senate Majority Leader Ton Daschle (D-SC) was “illegally us(ing)” his authority over the Senate’s schedule to deny votes to several of President Bush’s lower court nominees, stating that if they did not have the support of at least 60 members, the number required to break a filibuster, he would not allow a vote at all?

Of course, there is no law which compels the Senate to vote on any particular nomination. The Constitution, in Article I, Section 5, specifies that “Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings.”

Instead, in a direct violation of his constitutional duties, McConnell held the seat open for a year. All so Republicans could install someone who could be counted on to ram through endless amounts of reactionary policies rejected by the American majority that wants a clean environment, sensible gun safety regulations, fair labor laws, and human rights.

Senator McConnell took a real gamble, a gamble that the Republican nominee would win the 2016 election. At the time he did this, Donald Trump was surging and leading in the Republican primaries, and all of the polls had him losing against former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. In refusing to allow Mr Garland to be confirmed, he was gambling that the (supposedly) more moderate Merrick Garland wouldn’t be replaced by a flaming leftist appointed by Mrs Clinton. We got lucky, and Mr Trump defeated Mrs Clinton.

And there’s no sign that the restlessness is going away. In his concurring opinion on Dobbs, Thomas openly invites lawsuits to challenge “all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell,” i.e. the decisions that secured the right to use birth control, the right to have sex with another consenting adult in the privacy of your home, and the right to marry someone of the same sex.

It is true that Justice Thomas has long been an opponent of the concept of “substantive due process,” not that Miss Marcotte has any flaming idea what substantive due process actually means, but it is also true that none of the other Justices joined Mr Thomas’ concurring opinion.[1]Justice Thomas concurring opinion begins on page 117 of the .pdf document. Rather, in the majority opinion, Justice Alito specified:[2]Page 66 of the Opinion of the Court, found on page 74 of the .pdf document. This is pointed out again on page 71 of the Opinion of the Court, page 79 of the .pdf document.

Unable to show concrete reliance on Roe and Casey themselves, the Solicitor General suggests that overruling those decisions would “threaten the Court’s precedents holding that the Due Process Clause protects other rights.” Brief for United States 26 (citing Obergefell, 576 U. S. 644; Lawrence, 539 U. S. 558; Griswold, 381 U. S. 479). That is not correct for reasons we have already discussed. As even the Casey plurality recognized, “[a]bortion is a unique act” because it terminates “life or potential life.” 505 U. S., at 852; see also Roe, 410 U. S., at 159 (abortion is “inherently different from marital intimacy,” “marriage,” or “procreation”). And to ensure that our decision is not misunderstood or mischaracterized, we emphasize that our decision concerns the constitutional right to abortion and no other right. Nothing in this opinion should be understood to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abortion.

Miss Marcotte has long claimed that evil reich wing conservatives want to take away the right to use contraception, but when she tried to document this in her book It’s a Jungle Out There: The Feminist Survival Guide to Politically Inhospitable Environments, the most up with which she could come is Quiverfull, a small sect about which Wikipedia said, “One 2006 estimate put the number of families which subscribe to this philosophy as ranging from ‘the thousands to the low tens of thousands’.”

Even taking the extreme position of Miss Marcotte that we evil reich wing conservatives want to ban contraception, it fails the logic test: while we might want our wives to bear us as many strong, fine sons as possible, we really don’t want our mistresses to get knocked up and cause us problems, or cost us child support.

Of course, if our mistresses are married to other men, we do want to get them pregnant, so other, weaker men will have to pay to rear our progeny. 🙂

Is there a sarcasm tag for the previous two paragraphs?

Of course, the author had absolutely no problem with vaccine mandates for COVID-19.

References

References
↑1 Justice Thomas concurring opinion begins on page 117 of the .pdf document.
↑2 Page 66 of the Opinion of the Court, found on page 74 of the .pdf document. This is pointed out again on page 71 of the Opinion of the Court, page 79 of the .pdf document.
Posted on by

One way or another, I’m gonna get ya, get ya, get ya, get ya

You can never escape!

One way or another, I’m gonna find ya
I’m gonna get ya, get ya, get ya, get ya
One way, or another, I’m gonna win ya
I’m gonna get ya, get ya, get ya, get ya
One way, or another, I’m gonna see ya
I’m gonna meet ya, meet ya, meet ya, meet ya
One day, maybe next week
I’m gonna meet ya, I’m gonna meet ya, I’ll meet ya

. — Blondie and coronavirus

It seems that the plebeians have become too complacent about COVID-19, and need to be frightened again! From CNN:

New coronavirus subvariants escape antibodies from vaccination and prior Omicron infection, studies suggest

By Jacqueline Howard, CNN | Updated 5:20 AM EDT, Thursday June 23, 2022

Omicron subvariants BA.4 and BA.5 appear to escape antibody responses among both people who had previous Covid-19 infection and those who have been fully vaccinated and boosted, according to new data from researchers at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, of Harvard Medical School.

However, Covid-19 vaccination is still expected to provide substantial protection against severe disease, and vaccine makers are working on updated shots that might elicit a stronger immune response against the variants.

The levels of neutralizing antibodies that a previous infection or vaccinations elicit are several times lower against the BA.4 and BA.5 subvariants compared with the original coronavirus, according to the new research published in the New England Journal of Medicine on Wednesday.

“We observed 3-fold reductions of neutralizing antibody titers induced by vaccination and infection against BA4 and BA5 compared with BA1 and BA2, which are already substantially lower than the original COVID-19 variants,” Dr. Dan Barouch, an author of the paper and director of the Center for Virology and Vaccine Research at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston, wrote in an email to CNN.

“Our data suggest that these new Omicron subvariants will likely be able to lead to surges of infections in populations with high levels of vaccine immunity as well as natural BA1 and BA2 immunity,” Barouch wrote. “However, it is likely that vaccine immunity will still provide substantial protection against severe disease with BA4 and BA5.”

Note what is being said here: we are being told that the vaccines will protect people better from getting sick from the BA.4 and BA.5 variants, but implies, though it does not directly state, that immunity from the vaccine will protect you where “natural BA.1 and BA.2 immunity,” from having contracted and recovered from the virus will not.

They recently found that the BA.4 and BA.5 viruses were more likely to escape antibodies from the blood of fully vaccinated and boosted adults compared with other Omicron subvariants, raising the risk of vaccine-breakthrough Covid-19 infections.

The authors of that separate study say their results point to a higher risk for reinfection, even in people who have some prior immunity against the virus. The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates 94.7% of the US population ages 16 and older have antibodies against the coronavirus that causes Covid-19 through vaccination, infection, or both.

Simply put, the vaccines will not prevent you from contracting the virus, but will, at best, keep you from getting as sick from it. We might as well face it: masks don’t help anything, and we’re all going to contract the virus at some point. In all probability you have already contracted it at some point, but may not know that you had it.

BA.4 and BA.5 caused an estimated 35% of new Covid-19 infections in the United States last week, up from 29% the week before, according to data shared by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Tuesday.

BA.4 and BA.5 are the fastest spreading variants reported to date, and they are expected to dominate Covid-19 transmission in the United States, United Kingdom and the rest of Europe within the next few weeks, according to the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control.

I am certainly no anti-vaxxer, and have been vaccinated, and twice boostered myself. But these were my free choices, and I believe that everyone should have the right to choose freely whether or not to take the vaccines.

Posted on by

Killadelphia Philadelphia ties 2013's homicide totals, with more than half of the year remaining.

Congratulations for Philadelphia’s Mayor, Jim Kenney, District Attorney, Larry Krasner, and Police Commissioner Danielle Outlaw! As of 11:59 PM EDT on Wednesday, June 22, 2022, under their leadership the City of Brotherly Love has, with 246 homicides this year, tied the total number of murders for the entire year of 2013.

I will admit it: I hadn’t previously thought much of former Mayor Michael Nutter. He was a liberal Democrat in a line of liberal Democrats — Philadelphia’s last Republican mayor left office while Harry Truman was still President! — and, in following John Street, I didn’t really see reason to hope that he’d be any better than Mr Street. But, under Mr Nutter, District Attorney Seth Williams — who wound up with legal problems of his own, and served 2½ years in federal prison — and Police Commissioner Charles Ramsey, murders in the City of Brotherly Love steadily declined, from 391 in 2007, the year before Messrs Nutter and Ramsey took office — Mr Williams was elected in 2009, succeeding Lynne Abraham — down to 246 in 2013. There was an increase to 248 in 2014, and then 280 in 2015, Messrs Nutter’s and Ramsey’s final year in office.

But nothing like the increases under Mayor Kenney! 2016 saw 277 killings, but then they jumped to 315, then 353, 356, 499 and 562 last year. It was only by pure, dumb luck that 2020 finished below 500 homicides, given that there were two more on New Year’s Day of 2021, and the Philadelphia Police Department actually stated that there had been 502 homicides in 2020, before ‘correcting’ that down to 499. I fouled up and didn’t take a screen capture of that when it was up, so you’ll have to take my word for it.

Were it not for the previous record of 500 homicides in 1990, under Mayor Wilson Goode, he of MOVE bombing fame, Mayor Kenney would have both first and second place in the homicide numbers.

But, not to worry: although this year’s homicide numbers are down slightly, 5.75%, the city is still on track for between 519 and 530 homicides, easily good for second place.[1]Methodology: I divided the total homicides by June 22nd of this year by 261, the number of murders on the same date in 2021, yielding 0.9425287356321839, then multiplied that number by 562, the … Continue reading

The chart to the right? That includes only those years in which homicides were at least 400; Mayor Kenney ought to break into that chart again, for this year, sometime between and October 2nd and 8th.

Whatever Messrs Kenney and Krasner, and Miss Outlaw, are doing, doesn’t work!

References

References
↑1 Methodology: I divided the total homicides by June 22nd of this year by 261, the number of murders on the same date in 2021, yielding 0.9425287356321839, then multiplied that number by 562, the number of homicides in 2021 to get 529.70. I use this method to account for the fact that there are more warm months ahead than behind, and homicides normally increase in summer and fall. Another method, dividing 246, the number of homicides, by 173, June 22nd being the 173rd day of the year, yielding a figure of 1.421965317919075 killings per day, then multiplying that by 365, yields 519.02 homicides for the year.
Posted on by

“So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.” — John 8:7

Stacey Henley, from his Twitter biography.

I will admit it: I had never heard of Stacey Henley before. Mr Henley writes about electronic games, and those are simply of no interest to me. But now he’s telling us that if we choose to go to see Spider-Man: Lotus, we must be horrible, horrible raaaaacists.

Titled Spider-Man: Lotus, the movie was one of the most anticipated amateur movie projects. I say ‘was’, but in a lot of cases, it still is. The reason the movie has become so controversial is because the actor playing Spider-Man, Warden Wayne, has just been outed as having a history of using racial slurs. In particular, casual use of the N-word with an ‘a’, and occasional use with a hard R. He’s white.

What? Does that mean if Mr Wayne was black, it would be acceptable?

This was almost immediately followed by leaks that the movie’s director, Gavin J. Konop also had a history of racial and ableist remarks. This is not just the best boy and assistant grip (with apologies to all the hard working crews out there). This is the star and the director. You could not find two people who better represent the film. Knowing that the two most central people in the project are racists has obviously put a lot of people off from watching and supporting Spider-Man: Lotus. But predictably, a lot of people don’t care.

We do not know, of course, how many other people associated with the movie might hold views that Mr Henley would find objectional, or label racist, or sexist, of homophobic, or transphobic. Whatever all of the other actors, writers, producers, directors, cameramen and other techs, wardrobe people, and whatever might happen to be just isn’t published information. But Mr Henley wants to cancel them all!

That old selfish chestnut is being rolled back out – ‘lots of people work hard on this movie and I want to support them’. I call bull effluence, pal. You just want to watch the movie, and a little racism isn’t going to stop you. If that’s the case, just say that. Say ‘racism just isn’t a dealbreaker for me, I want to see Spider-Man’. We’d understand. It’s so rare to see Spider-Man in movies these days. It’s been, what? Five months since the last one left theatres? A lifetime.

A clue here: if Messrs Konop and Wayne can get ‘cancelled’ by this, other people will lose their jobs. The author either doesn’t realize that, or he doesn’t care; both are possible.

My good (electronic) friend, Robert Stacy McCain, noted that Ezra Miller, the actor who played the Flash in Justice League, has had roles in several other movies, including some big-budget films, and is not starring in The Flash, has run across some serious legal problems:

In June 2022, the Standing Rock Sioux tribal court issued a temporary order of protection against Miller on behalf of 18-year-old activist Tokata Iron Eyes. Chase Iron Eyes and Sara Jumping Eagle, Tokata’s parents, requested the court order due to Miller allegedly using “violence, intimidation, threat of violence, fear, paranoia, delusions, and drugs” to hold sway over their child. The relationship between Miller and Tokata Iron Eyes, which began in 2016 when Miller was 23 and Iron Eyes was 12, also included Iron Eyes flying to London in 2017 to visit Miller on the set of Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald.

Iron Eyes also dropped out of school in 2021, allegedly to follow Miller. Iron Eyes’ parents also alleged in their documents that Miller had caused bruises on their child’s body and that Miller had manipulated their child to believe they are transgender. Tokata later responded by denying their parents’ allegations. As of June 10, 2022, law enforcement has been unable to locate Miller to serve them with the order. . . .

On June 16, 2022, a mother and her twelve-year-old child were granted a temporary harassment prevention order against Miller in Massachusetts, after the latter allegedly threatened the woman’s family and showed inappropriate behavior towards the child. According to the mother and child, Miller, who was originally visiting a neighbor, showed up to the family’s house unexpectedly while wearing a bulletproof vest and brandishing a gun before “pestering” the child by “uncomfortably” touching their hips.

Yeah, you start messin’ around with 12-year-olds, and even the greedy sleazebags in Hollywood might see this as a problem. You can picture the scene in the corporate offices at Warner Bros., with executives asking, “Wait a minute — we spent $200 million on a movie starring a guy with ‘they/them’ pronouns? And now he’s on the lam, accused of diddling 12-year-olds, two weeks before the movie’s supposed to hit theaters?”

Mr Miller came out in 2012 as, well, sexually odd. He stated that he identified neither as a male or a female, and that looking for love in all the wrong places meant there was no place off limits. Pretty serious stuff, when you consider the accusations that he had attempted to manipulate a 12-year-old to believe he was transgender.

Yet, despite Mr Henley’s attacks on the star and director of The Flash, I have yet to find anything by the author condemning Mr Miller.

Of course, transgenderism is Mr Henley’s real concern, and he attacked J K Rowling, creator of the Harry Potter world, because Miss Rowling, very much a hard left liberal, doesn’t seem to accept the quaint notion that girls can be boys and boys can be girls:

It’s the same excuse people use for supporting the upcoming Hogwarts Legacy game. JK Rowling, the single most influential person in the Harry Potter franchise, might have said some horrible things, but I really want to support Gary the junior level designer, so I have to support this game (with apologies to our hard working devs). Troy Leavitt? Never heard of him.

Why is it so important to the author? Because he claims to be a “transgender woman.” Of course, in accordance with The First Street Journal’s Stylebook, we refer to the author by the appropriate honorifics and pronouns. I have, as yet, been unable to determine Mr Henley’s birth name, but Stacey is a name used by both males and females, so Stacey Henley could actually be his birth name. Mr Henley was born a male, and a male he will always be, regardless of how many medications he takes, or under which surgical procedures he had gone.

So why hasn’t Mr Henley, at least as far as I could find, told us that we must boycott The Flash? After all, the accusations of sexually abusing or ‘grooming’ a 12-year-old are pretty serious, and Mr Miller does not seem to have put up much of a defense against them yet.

JK Rowling matters particularly because she is the acceptable face of transphobia. A few of her celebrity chums have declared for her in this nonsensical culture war, but none have come out with half the degree of erroneous and transphobic rhetoric as she has. A great number of middle-class media columnists seem to agree with her, and they have a significant platform themselves, but there are few other major cultural figures waiting in the wings to replace Rowling as the transphobe-in-chief. She is crucial to the movement.

For a while, it seemed as though she was being locked out of her own legacy. She was not present for the Harry Potter reunion, and again, the developers have deliberately and explicitly distanced themselves from her. However, the latest trailer for Fantastic Beasts promotes itself under her name, fluttering across the screen in huge letters. It’s easy to convince ourselves that she’s a pariah, that she is now divorced from the world she created, but she’s not. She seems to be heading in that direction, but as long as you all support Harry Potter regardless of how hateful and deliberately malicious JK Rowling’s statements become, you’re saying trans people just don’t matter as much as fictional wizards. A boycott got rid of Papa John after his repeated racial slurs, but Papa John’s as a business still exists. There doesn’t seem to have been any serious attempt to remove JK Rowling from the idea of Harry Potter, lest it mean missing out on the next instalment of a series that ended its golden age a decade ago.

I guess that if you buy a pizza from Papa John’s, you’re racist!

I confess: I’ve read all of the original Harry Potter books. I thought it was silly when Miss Rowling said, many years later, that Albus Dumbledore was homosexual, because there was none of that in the books. And I’ve seen Aquaman, in which Amber Heard, the former Mrs Johnny Depp, stars as Mera, because I don’t care, one way or the other, about the ridiculous Johnny Depp/Amber Heard lawsuits. Some people blame the former Mrs Depp, and some people blame her ex-husband, but I really don’t give a darn about the claims and counter-claims of two Hollywood celebrities. When Aquaman 2 comes out, I’ll probably see that, too, though at home, when it comes out on one of the channels I get.[1]I’m about ¾ deaf, and there are certain consonants I just don’t hear, so seeing movies in the theater doesn’t work for me. At home, I have closed captioning available.

I also haven’t boycotted Jane Fonda’s movies, or Sean Penn’s, though, let’s face it, Mr Penn’s only great character was Jeff Spicoli in Fast Times at Ridgemont High, and he’s been going downhill since then. I just don’t care about whatever sins the actors may have committed. Jesus said, “He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.”

That’s not hypocrisy on my part; that’s me telling you what is, and is not, important to me.

But for Mr Henley, to not tell us to avoid Mr Miller’s The Flash movie, yeah, that’s hypocritical, and it always will be.

References

References
↑1 I’m about ¾ deaf, and there are certain consonants I just don’t hear, so seeing movies in the theater doesn’t work for me. At home, I have closed captioning available.
Posted on by

Suspected murderer captured in Lexington

The Lexington Police Department has captured the suspect in a seven-month-old homicide; better late than never!

Lexington murder suspect arrested 7 months after deadly shooting, records show

by Christopher Leach | Tuesday, June 21, 2022 | 7:12 AM EDT | Updated: 1:04 PM EDT

Robert Okorley. Photo from Fayette County Detention Center, and is a public record.

A Lexington murder suspect was arrested Monday evening in connection to a 2021 killing on Main Street, according to court documents.

Robert Okorley, 40, is facing charges of murder, attempted murder, second degree assault, criminal mischief and possessing a handgun as a convicted felon, according to his arrest citation. He’s accused of killing Jesse Jimenez, 32, and shooting another on Nov. 5, 2021.

He’s being held at the Fayette County Detention Center on an $885,000 bond, according to court records.

Lexington police said they initially responded to a call of shots fired in the area around Main Street and Oliver Lewis Way early in the morning, but they didn’t find anything unusual. Not long after, a man showed up at the University of Kentucky Chandler Hospital suffering from a gunshot wound, Lexington police Lt. Chris Van Brackel said at the time.

When police learned that the victim man was in the 700 block of West Main Street when he was injured, they went back to investigate further and found the man later identified as Jimenez dead in an apartment on the upper level of the building. The building is occupied on the lower level by a web design and marketing agency.

According to the report, Mr Okorley got into a fight with a third person, and after the fight was over, he pulled a gun and attempted to shoot the man, but hitting Mr Jimenez instead. After that, a fourth man ran out of the building and jumped into the bed of a moving pickup truck. Mr Okorley then fired at the departing vehicle, wounding the driver in the arm. If Mr Okorley is indeed the perpetrator, he’s apparently not a very nice person.

Video footage captured the entire incident and clearly identified Okorley as the suspect, court documents say. Okorley was also identified as the suspect by an eyewitness.

Well, if they’ve got the whole thing on tape, and it clearly identifies Mr Okorley as the perpetrator, Commonwealth’s Attorney Lou Anna Red Corn will probably agree to a plea bargain down to manslaughter that lets him out in ten years, because that’s the kind of thing she does.

According to the Fayette County Detention Center’s records, Mr Okorley is facing charges of murder, assault in the 2nd degree, criminal mischief in the first degree, and possession of a handgun by a convicted felon. I am shocked, of course, that Mr Okorley (allegedly) violated state gun control laws.

Posted on by

I owe Seth Williams an apology

At 11:17 AM EDT on Monday, June 20th, Seth Williams, a former District Attorney for Philadelphia, tweeted, “I am now being told that from midnight Friday until midnight Sunday, Philadelphia tragically suffered 41 shootings, 14 homicides, and 6 victims remain in critical condition. What we are doing now is not working!” Not having seen numbers like that anywhere in the media, I responded:

Well, I suppose that I owe Mr Williams an apology, because the numbers from the Philadelphia Police Department — the report was not updated on Monday, I suppose because whoever does the updating was off for the Juneteenth holiday — finally came in, and they are ugly.

The previous report was that 230 people had been murdered as of Friday, June 17th, so yup, Mr Williams’ report was right on target.

I responded to Mr Williams that I had seen nothing in The Philadelphia Inquirer supporting numbers anywhere close to that, and, checking the newspaper’s website main page again this morning, I still don’t. There is a story about teenagers concerns about the proposed 10:00 PM curfew, which is being considered in the wake of the South Street shootings during a rowdy street celebration full of teenagers, a five day old story about serious problems at Prevention Point Philadelphia, and, Heaven forfend!, the hugely critical Local strike could impact availability of beer ahead of Fourth of July weekend! Moving on to the newspaper’s crime page, there was a story about the killing of John Albert Laylo, a visitor from the Philippines, who was shot dead in what is now being called a targeted hit, but one which hit the wrong car. There was a story from Friday about two fatal shootings, plus another which left a victim, shot in the head, in extremely critical condition, and another about a murder in February, allegedly committed by a closeted bisexual male who wanted to keep his boyfriend from revealing their relationship.

There was a story, dated Thursday, June 16th, about three homicides Wednesday evening into Thursday morning.

But that’s it; there’s nothing in the Inky, at least as of 9:14 AM EDT, to tell readers that 14 people were murdered over the Juneteenth weekend.

There was, however, a significantly sized advertising blurb, telling people that they could subscribe for unlimited digital access for just 99¢ per week for 12 weeks, followed by $3.99 per week, billed every 4 weeks, no commitment, cancel anytime.

But I have to ask: why should people subscribe to the Inquirer if the newspaper is not going to do something really radical like report the news?

We noted, in January, Philadelphia Inquirer columnist Helen Ubiñas and her complaint, For two mothers touched by gun violence: ‘Pray, pray, and pray some more.’: Numbers tend to attract attention around here; the people behind them, not always so much.

On Thursday, she typed a similar lament:

Everyday gun violence goes unchecked, even as high-profile massacres capture the nation’s attention

We can’t accept the asymmetrical way people look at shooting victims based on race.

by Helen Ubiñas | Thursday, June 16, 2022

Within a few days of the mass shooting on South Street, two people were already in custody.

Two days later, two more.

And almost immediately came a familiar appeal from the loved ones of murder victims whose killings remain unsolved:

Where was the full-court press to identify suspects and make arrests in the deaths of their family members?

There’s more at the original. But perhaps Miss Ubiñas ought to look a bit more closely at her own newspaper in asking that question.

She had, in December of 2020, written an opinion column saying that we should at least know the names of the people slaughtered in the City of Brotherly Love, yet the newspaper at which she has worked for many years appears to have gotten even worse at reporting the news about homicides.

Fourteen people murdered? That’s almost five South Streets! 41 shootings, at least according to Mr Williams?[1]The city’s shooting database has not been updated to confirm this. That’s one shy of three South Streets, about which the Inquirer wrote story after story.

But last weekend, which ended two days ago? Barely more than crickets from our nation’s third oldest continuously published daily newspaper, nothing, no one looked at the numbers, no one figured it out.

The thing is, I’ve figured it out. The Inky spends a lot of time when innocent people are killed. We saw that the paper paid attention to the accidental killing of Jason Kutt, a white teenager shot at Nockamixon State Park, an hour outside of the city. That’s five separate stories, a whole lot more than the two or three paragraphs most victims get.

Then there was the murder of Samuel Sean Collington, a Temple University student approaching graduation. Mr Collington was a white victim, allegedly murdered by a black juvenile in a botched robbery. The Inquirer then published 14 photographs from a vigil for Mr Collington, along with another story about him. Five separate stories about the case of a murdered white guy.

To which shootings, to which killings, does the newspaper not pay attention? It doesn’t pay attention to the murders of young black boys and men by other young black boys and men, which happens to be the majority, the vast majority, of the homicides in the City of Brotherly Love. It’s easy to have sympathy for people like Mr Collington, or Mr Laylo. The Inquirer has even tried to drum up sympathy for kids like Marcus Stokes or Thomas Siderio.

But when one gang banger shoots and kills another gang banger? The editors and publisher of the Inquirer not only don’t care, but actively don’t want to publish stories about them, because it does not fit within the worldview they want to project.

References

References
↑1 The city’s shooting database has not been updated to confirm this.
Posted on by

Philadelphians are fighting back! When the city cannot protect the people, the people will protect themselves

We have previously noted that the law-abiding people in Philadelphia have been seeking concealed carry permits at a record pace. And we have seen stories about some of the bad guys in Philly being sent untimely to their eternal rewards.

Why are people in the City of Brotherly Love arming themselves? When there are innocent victims being gunned down for no apparent reason, when it’s not just the gang-bangers shooting other gang-bangers, and the city has a George Soros stooge ‘progressive’ District Attorney who likes to set the captives free, a whole lot of Philadelphians have gotten the message: you are on your own!

But today’s surprise is that The Philadelphia Inquirer has actually reported on it!

As more people get guns and carry permits, Philly sees a sharp rise in homicides ruled justified

More people in Philadelphia are legally arming themselves and shooting their armed attackers amid a violent crime spike.

by Mensah M Dean | Monday, June 20, 2022

In May, a South Philadelphia man stepped out of his house for a smoke when police said a gun-wielding man rode up on a bicycle and demanded money. The homeowner dropped his cigarette, pulled out his licensed gun, and fatally shot the would-be robber in the head.

In March, an assistant manager at a Dollar General store in North Philadelphia used his legal gun to shoot a man who police said burst into the store in a ski mask, demanded money, and threatened to kill the cashier. “I’m opening up the register for you, sir,” said the manager, who instead pulled his own handgun and shot the robber in the head, killing him.

The same month, a customer with a carry permit inside Max Food Market in the Yorktown section fatally shot a gunman who tried to rob him while he was playing a video poker machine. “You have to defend yourself,” said Maximo Torres Rodriquez, the store’s owner. “You have to do it.”

The three would-be assailants died from their injuries and in all three cases authorities brought no charges against the shooters. These sorts of deadly clashes in which the intended victims survive and assailants die are rare in Philadelphia, but are becoming more common as a growing number of people have legally armed themselves amid rising numbers of carjackings, shootings, and homicides.

Mr Rodriquez put it exactly right: sometimes “You have to defend yourself. You have to do it.”

Also read: Jennifer Stefano: The case for impeaching Larry Krasner

We’re not supposed to say it, but sometimes a homicide is a public service. When the Dollar General assistant manager shot and killed the would-be robber, perhaps the robber would have been satisfied with the cash and left without hurting anyone, but as crooks get successful, they are also emboldened, and the odds are extremely high that he’d have attempted to knock over another store and another store, and eventually someone would get shot, and possibly killed.

Justified homicides jumped 67% from 2020 to 2021 ― from 12 to 20 according to the Philadelphia Police Department. An additional six have been ruled justified by the department but are awaiting the District Attorney’s Office to sign off. In 2019, there were 10 justified killings, six in 2018 and eight in 2017, the department said.

So far in 2022, victims have shot at least eight armed assailants to death, with more than seven months remaining in the year.

“The total number of shootings and the climate of gun violence has gotten more severe,” said District Attorney Larry Krasner. “So I would expect that there would be more situations involving self-defense.”

As Krasner said, the surge in justified shootings reflects the general rise in gun violence in the city. With unjustified homicides hitting a record total last year, with 562 victims, self-defense killings climbed too, though only slightly as a percentage of all homicides.

Let’s do the math:

  • 2017: 315 murders + 8 justified homicides = 323 total, 2.48% justified.
  • 2018: 353 murders + 6 justified homicides = 361 total, 1.66% justified.
  • 2019: 356 murders + 10 justified homicides = 366 total, 2.73% justified.
  • 2020: 499 murders + 12 justified homicides = 511 total, 2.35% justified.
  • 2021: 562 murders + 26 justified homicides = 588 total, 4.42% justified.
  • 2022: 230 murders + 8 justified homicides = 238 total, 3.48% justified.

The trend worries some analysts and gun-control advocates, who say civilians who buy guns for protection may be putting themselves and others at more risk, not less. They cite studies showing that legally purchased guns are more likely to be fired in accidental shootings, during domestic disputes, and in suicides than in self-defense.

721 West Butler Street. Click to enlarge.

Of course, the Inquirer article let us know that more law-abiding people obtaining weapons is a bad thing, stating that they are more likely to be discharged in accidents, domestic disputes and suicides, offering several paragraphs of statistics.

There is one thing that the article did not include, perhaps because it simply isn’t quantifiable. We have previously published several street scene photographs of Philadelphia, showing how many residents have put themselves in jail, barring up their porches and windows, to try to defend themselves from the thugs. There is an attitude of fear, fear! permeating the city, a fear that at any time your number could come up, and that is due to the city not protecting innocent people. When you have a district attorney like Larry Krasner who largely refuses to prosecute illegal firearm possession cases, who doesn’t like to enforce the laws already on the books, who metes out slaps on the wrists for even violent crimes, coupled with a homicide rate higher than Chicago’s, of course people are going to be worried. People are buying firearms for the protection of their families and themselves because it has become blatantly obvious: the city isn’t protecting them.

Posted on by

The abomination of ‘red flag’ laws It's OK if we suspend your constitutional rights for just a little while, right?

Governor Tom Wolf (D-PA), who will be leaving office at the end of the year, tweeted out a nice little graphic of what happens under the so-called “red flag” laws. Due process of law, he tells us, is part of it.

But look at the graphic.

Jane’s social media contact, Randy, posts photos of guns & cryptic messages.

Followed by:

Jane calls the police to report the posts.

What does “cryptic” mean?

adjective Also cryp·ti·cal.

  1. mysterious in meaning; puzzling; ambiguous: a cryptic message.
  2. abrupt; terse; short:
  3. a cryptic note. secret; occult:
  4. a cryptic writing. involving or using cipher, code, etc.

So, if Jane simply doesn’t understand Randy’s message, Governor Wolf wants her to call the cops!

Then follow the next steps:

The police petition in court to temporarily remove Randy’s guns.

Police provide evidence that Randy is a danger to himself/others.

The court agrees to a temporary removal of Randy’s weapons.

You know what you don’t see in there? You don’t see any notification to Randy, and presumably Randy’s attorney, that he is under investigation to see if he “is a danger to himself/others,” because, just like any search warrant, the court and the police do not want the subject of the warrant to know the police are coming to enter his home and seize evidence. Due to Jane’s puzzlement over Randy’s message, the police show up, enter his home, possibly forcibly, and seize his property, all without Randy having had a chance to defend himself before the court.

Now, up to this point, Randy has committed no crime! Rather, because Jane is worried about him, she has sicced the cops on him, and don’t fool yourself: while police officers are normally more politically conservative than liberal, there’s nothing the police, or at least police chiefs, like more than a disarmed public. As they view Jane’s complaint, if they are going to err, they are more likely to err on the side of wanting Randy’s guns removed.

There’s even an incentive there: if they don’t try to have Randy’s firearms taken away, and it turns out that he does commit a crime, or even suicide, with his weapons, and it comes out that the police had Jane’s complaint and didn’t try to take Randy’s guns, they, or their city or jurisdiction, could be held liable in a civil suit. But Jane, doubtlessly, will be shielded from legal action for calling in a genuine concern, and I can see the red flag laws the left want passed keeping her identity confidential.

The police are not the only ones who do not like an armed citizenry; prosecutors don’t care for it much, either, so persuading the prosecutor or city attorney or whomever needs to petition the judge for the removal order might not be difficult. Judges, though not liable for the consequences of their decisions, might well feel their own internal pressure to prevent a tragedy.

So, what’s missing in all of this? As Jane, and the police, and the city attorneys, and the judges, several people, are all at least somewhat motivated by the idea that they could prevent a tragedy, there’s no one involved to protect Randy’s rights.

Enter Jeff Goldstein, and Robert Stacy McCain’s story on his problems:

Crazy People Are Dangerous (and the Problem With ‘Red Flag’ Laws)

Saturday, June 18, 2022

You haven’t forgotten Deb Frisch, have you? In October 2018, Frisch — whose harassment of Protein Wisdom blogger Jeff Goldstein lasted a dozen years — was finally sentenced to four years in a Colorado prison. When last we heard about her, in August 2021, she had been denied parole after ranting insanely at her parole board hearing.

This morning, I noticed I’d gotten some extra traffic to one of my posts about Frisch, and investigation led to Not The Bee: If you need a reason to oppose“red flag” gun laws, this writer’s harrowing 12-year tale of terrifying stalking and harassment might just do the trick.

To cut a long story short, the lovely Miss Frisch became obsessed with Mr Goldstein for some insane reason or other, and when things didn’t go the way she wanted, she started attacking, online, of course, not physically, Mr Goldstein and his family, in particular his then two-year-old son. Miss Frisch made baseless accusations that Mr Goldstein was molesting his son, all of which had to get the attention of local law enforcement; allegations of child sexual abuse are always things which trigger law enforcement investigations.

Mr McCain concluded:

The way our legal system operates — the built-in prejudices of courts, based on decades of precedents intended to “protect” the rights of the mentally ill — it is very difficult to get a dangerously deranged person locked up. Whenever a mentally ill person commits an atrocity (or gets shot by the cops), you’ll see commentators saying that this shows problems with our nation’s mental health system, when in fact it was liberal judges in the 1970s and ’80s who decided it should be nearly impossible to keep crazy people locked up in lunatic asylums, where they belong. These same judges, however, will probably be willing to sign “red flag” orders based on unproven claims, without due process for those targeted by such orders.

According to Governor Wolf, the gun owners do receive due process, even though they don’t get any chance to defend themselves until after their homes have already been invaded by the police and their legally-owned firearms seized, all on the word of someone who doesn’t like a “cryptic” message.

Now, there’s a difference between Jane, who thought Randy’s social media posting had a “cryptic” message, and Miss Frisch, who accused Mr Goldstein of child sexual abuse, but the result is the same: without any actual evidence of a crime beyond someone’s stated ‘concern,’ both “Randy” and Mr Goldstein had to defend themselves through the legal system, costing them expensive attorney’s fees — Mr Goldstein specifically mentioned that he’d had attorneys — to regain their weapons. The fictional Jane in Governor Wolf’s tweet might have had motives as pure as the wind-driven snow, but Miss Frisch’s were wholly malevolent, and (seemingly) driven by obsession and mental illness.

But the police and the courts have no choice but to take allegations of child sexual abuse seriously, and the same will be true of “red flag” law accusations. How can anyone know, prior to an investigation, whether the accuser or ‘tipster’ is being either deliberately fraudulent or simply concerned, but they’ll have to act.

It could be an estranged husband or wife, trying to gain leverage in child custody or support. It could be someone who can’t stand the thought of Bambi getting killed who calls the cops on a guy just before deer season. It could be one gang trying to get another gang disarmed. Or it really could be a concerned citizen who believes he has seen something of legitimate concern. The trouble is that you can never know unless the police actually investigate, and that means records and trouble and quite possibly a suspension of his constitutional rights for an innocent civilian, along with possible attorney’s fees.

The real secret is actual law enforcement. Remember Nikolas Cruz, who killed 17 people and wounded 17 others in the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting? There were continual warnings about him, and at least 23 incidents where the Broward County Sheriff’s Department had calls about him, but nothing was done. Had the Sheriff’s deputies done something really radical like arrested him and charged him with crimes, he could have been convicted, and barred from buying a weapon. The Broward County schools knew of his behavioral problems, transferred him from school-to-school, but, in an effort to keep him out of the so-called ‘school-to-prison pipeline,’ did not notify law enforcement when he assaulted another student.

If law enforcement had done their job, Mr Cruz would not have been able to buy, legally, the weapons he did. If the school district had done their jobs, he would have been reported to law enforcement in a manner which could not be ignored.

So, because the people who are charged, under the law, with notifying law enforcement about someone like Mr Cruz haven’t been doing their jobs, Governor Wolf and the left want ordinary citizens like the fictitious “Jane” to do the job, and to create a system where Jane’s speculation and word have legal weight. After all, it’s for people’s safety, right?

Well, there are a lot of constitutional rights which could be ignored, to improve public safety! We could do away with the need to prove guilt, and just imprison, or execute, anyone we just “knew” was a bad guy. We could suspend the rights of free speech and free association, to keep the bad guys apart. Given that half the country seemed to think that the right of free association and assembly could be suspended over COVID-19, and a bunch of state governors got away with it, well surely that right isn’t really important, right?

Benjamin Franklin once said, “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” It seems that a whole lot of Americans have decided that they deserve neither liberty nor safety.