Now this is interesting. I have pretty much refrained from comment on the Duke case. (Duke case? What Duke case? I don't know nothing about no Duke case.) But ABC journalist Terry Moran has written a short piece arguing that the victims (the falsely accused, that is) don't deserve to have their exoneration celebrated after this transparent travesty of injustice fell apart because they are, er, white and privileged. It's really just a straightforward example of inverted snobbery, a particularly juvenile trait, all the more freakish for it being from another privileged, white male.
What is interesting is the positive roasting he gets in the comments. There are hundreds of them! And the vast majority call him out for being an ass. If I were ABC, I'd take careful note of the outpouring of righteous indignation that their public obviously feel in the face of a prosecutor going for a home run on a transparently false accusation. If I were someone falsely accused, of anything, I'd take at least a little heart.
Also interesting is what this whole case says about a justice system with a guilty conscience. Once you have started down the road of destroying an innocent man for political ends, you have to continue along it or die. Once your integrity has been lost, your credibility will eventually and inevitably follow. The longer it goes on, the worse it will get. One wonders how long before the same happens to family law, and how bad it will get.
(*) If you don't get the reference, Manuel will explain.
What is interesting is the positive roasting he gets in the comments. There are hundreds of them! And the vast majority call him out for being an ass. If I were ABC, I'd take careful note of the outpouring of righteous indignation that their public obviously feel in the face of a prosecutor going for a home run on a transparently false accusation. If I were someone falsely accused, of anything, I'd take at least a little heart.
Also interesting is what this whole case says about a justice system with a guilty conscience. Once you have started down the road of destroying an innocent man for political ends, you have to continue along it or die. Once your integrity has been lost, your credibility will eventually and inevitably follow. The longer it goes on, the worse it will get. One wonders how long before the same happens to family law, and how bad it will get.
(*) If you don't get the reference, Manuel will explain.
RSS
3 comments:
Or of course instead of being in this situation you could have seen it coming years ago and chosen to remain childless ... but then that would be taking responsibility for your own actions, and that is just un-American.
- SK
I can relate to the duke players. I was going through a horrid divorce. I had not seen my wife in 2 years. I call the woodstock family court office to see if I had any court dates coming up . They said I was divorced yesterday and I was served via email lol. I complained and said I would appeal it , 3 days later the crazy bitch said I raped her 12 years earlier. Two years later it almost over. HELL HAS NO FURY AS MY SCORN. Peter Tarbat tarbat1@msn.com. Love your blog
Mr. Kane, what on earth are you trying to say? Your comment seems to bear no relation to the posting, so I assume you must mean to address the general topic of my blog. It is the parent's fault for being disenfranchised because they had children in the first place? How truly bizarre.
Post a Comment