Post by: Boomhauer on November 02, 2007, 07:19:11 AM
Quote
Police Divers Search Pond Near Home of Suburban Chicago Cop in Missing Wife Probe
Friday, November 02, 2007
BOLINGBROOK, Ill. Authorities in Illinois were searching a pond near the home of a missing suburban mom Friday after executing a search warrant at the residence she shared with her cop husband in what is still being described as a missing persons case.
The disappearance of Stacy Peterson, 23, missing since Sunday, has reignited interest in the death of the third wife of her husband, Drew. Kathleen Savio drowned in a bathtub in 2004.
The warrant authorized troopers to search the home, a sport utility vehicle and a car owned by Drew and Stacy Peterson, said Will County state's attorney's office spokesman Charles Pelkie, who declined to say what, if anything, investigators found during the search.
Two rifles were among the items recovered from the home. Peterson told FOX News he is not a hunter, but has a gun collection.
"He's saying she took off which is not her," Peterson's sister Cassandra Cales told FOX News. "She wouldn't leave those kids. That's what she told me Friday. I wanted to get her out of there she said she was fearing for her life she said she wasn't going to leave those kids."
Authorities also searched a pond near the Bolingbrook home with the help of a dive team from the Naperville Police Department, state police said.
"No criminal charges have been filed and no one has been taken into custody," Pelkie said.
Authorities said they have found no indication of foul play and the case remained a missing person investigation.
Peterson, 53, has said he believes his 23-year-old wife has left him for another man.
"I believe she's with someone else, but I believe she's safe," Peterson said. He said she called him Sunday night and told him she was leaving, taking some clothes and money from a safe in the couple's home.
Click here for more from MyFoxChicago.com.
Peterson, a 29-year police veteran and Bolingbrook police sergeant, said his wife has suffered from what he called "mood issues" since her sister's death from colon cancer last year.
"Ever since then, Stacy has been different," Peterson said Wednesday. "... She's been under the care of a psychiatrist" and is taking antidepressant medication.
Will County State's Attorney James Glasgow has started pulling and reading through old files from the Savio case, including police and coroner's reports, Pelkie has said.
Savio obtained an order of protection against Drew Peterson in 2002, alleging a pattern of physical abuse and threats, according to court records.
Click here to read the full story at the Chicago Sun-Times.
"In light of recent developments, he's reviewing this with an open and fresh mind ... to determine if further action will be warranted," Pelkie said, adding that Glasgow wasn't in office when Savio died and so hadn't been familiar with her case.
Peterson denied he had anything to do with his ex-wife's death or Stacy Peterson's disappearance.
"It bothers me," he said. "I've led an honorable life, and people are looking at me sideways. It hurts."
The couple celebrated their four-year wedding anniversary last month, Drew Peterson said. Hours before his wife called him Sunday night she had left their home to help another sister and that sister's boyfriend paint their home, he said.
She did not show up, prompting the family to try unsuccessfully to reach her on her cell phone, police said.
Peterson said he thought the couple had a good marriage, "but maybe she didn't," he said.
Stacy Peterson's family agreed she was depressed, but said it was because she believed her husband watched everything she did. They said she had asked for a divorce.
"She just wanted people to know she was unhappy, and she didn't like how she was being treated," said her aunt, Candace Aikin, 48, of El Monte, Calif. "In case she disappeared if something bad happened to her."
Aikin said she talked to her niece every week and knows she did not have a boyfriend.
"She had a husband who was following her 24/7," she said.
Family members also said they didn't think Stacy Peterson would leave without her kids Lacy, 2, and Anthony, 4.
"I know damn well she wouldn't go without them kids," said her uncle, Gary Cales, 68, of Hemet, Calif.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Friday, November 02, 2007
BOLINGBROOK, Ill. Authorities in Illinois were searching a pond near the home of a missing suburban mom Friday after executing a search warrant at the residence she shared with her cop husband in what is still being described as a missing persons case.
The disappearance of Stacy Peterson, 23, missing since Sunday, has reignited interest in the death of the third wife of her husband, Drew. Kathleen Savio drowned in a bathtub in 2004.
The warrant authorized troopers to search the home, a sport utility vehicle and a car owned by Drew and Stacy Peterson, said Will County state's attorney's office spokesman Charles Pelkie, who declined to say what, if anything, investigators found during the search.
Two rifles were among the items recovered from the home. Peterson told FOX News he is not a hunter, but has a gun collection.
"He's saying she took off which is not her," Peterson's sister Cassandra Cales told FOX News. "She wouldn't leave those kids. That's what she told me Friday. I wanted to get her out of there she said she was fearing for her life she said she wasn't going to leave those kids."
Authorities also searched a pond near the Bolingbrook home with the help of a dive team from the Naperville Police Department, state police said.
"No criminal charges have been filed and no one has been taken into custody," Pelkie said.
Authorities said they have found no indication of foul play and the case remained a missing person investigation.
Peterson, 53, has said he believes his 23-year-old wife has left him for another man.
"I believe she's with someone else, but I believe she's safe," Peterson said. He said she called him Sunday night and told him she was leaving, taking some clothes and money from a safe in the couple's home.
Click here for more from MyFoxChicago.com.
Peterson, a 29-year police veteran and Bolingbrook police sergeant, said his wife has suffered from what he called "mood issues" since her sister's death from colon cancer last year.
"Ever since then, Stacy has been different," Peterson said Wednesday. "... She's been under the care of a psychiatrist" and is taking antidepressant medication.
Will County State's Attorney James Glasgow has started pulling and reading through old files from the Savio case, including police and coroner's reports, Pelkie has said.
Savio obtained an order of protection against Drew Peterson in 2002, alleging a pattern of physical abuse and threats, according to court records.
Click here to read the full story at the Chicago Sun-Times.
"In light of recent developments, he's reviewing this with an open and fresh mind ... to determine if further action will be warranted," Pelkie said, adding that Glasgow wasn't in office when Savio died and so hadn't been familiar with her case.
Peterson denied he had anything to do with his ex-wife's death or Stacy Peterson's disappearance.
"It bothers me," he said. "I've led an honorable life, and people are looking at me sideways. It hurts."
The couple celebrated their four-year wedding anniversary last month, Drew Peterson said. Hours before his wife called him Sunday night she had left their home to help another sister and that sister's boyfriend paint their home, he said.
She did not show up, prompting the family to try unsuccessfully to reach her on her cell phone, police said.
Peterson said he thought the couple had a good marriage, "but maybe she didn't," he said.
Stacy Peterson's family agreed she was depressed, but said it was because she believed her husband watched everything she did. They said she had asked for a divorce.
"She just wanted people to know she was unhappy, and she didn't like how she was being treated," said her aunt, Candace Aikin, 48, of El Monte, Calif. "In case she disappeared if something bad happened to her."
Aikin said she talked to her niece every week and knows she did not have a boyfriend.
"She had a husband who was following her 24/7," she said.
Family members also said they didn't think Stacy Peterson would leave without her kids Lacy, 2, and Anthony, 4.
"I know damn well she wouldn't go without them kids," said her uncle, Gary Cales, 68, of Hemet, Calif.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Let's see what I've got straight...
53 year old cop...23 year old woman...a bit strange, don't you think?
This is the cop's fourth wife
Third wife died, found drowned in bathtub, ruled to be accidental. (investigation has been reopened
Fourth wife disappeared.
Apparently, 3rd wife had a restraining order against the husband
WTF is going on up there? This case is extremely strange, and stuff ain't adding up
Post by: Manedwolf on November 02, 2007, 07:23:35 AM
Hence, nooz.
This sort of thing goes on every day in every city, but it's page 20 stuff. Unless it has those qualifications.
1. young
2. attractive
3. white
4. missing
Then it's LOOK AT THE NOOZ ALL DAY COVERAGE LOOK MORE SAME NOOZ...
Post by: HankB on November 02, 2007, 07:27:39 AM
Things didn't work out very well for her husband, Scott.
(What IS it with the Petersons?)
Post by: richyoung on November 02, 2007, 10:48:53 AM
It's a YOUNG ATTRACTIVE MISSING WHITE WOMAN.
Hence, nooz.
This sort of thing goes on every day in every city, but it's page 20 stuff. Unless it has those qualifications.
1. young
2. attractive
3. white
4. missing
Then it's LOOK AT THE NOOZ ALL DAY COVERAGE LOOK MORE SAME NOOZ...
Hence, nooz.
This sort of thing goes on every day in every city, but it's page 20 stuff. Unless it has those qualifications.
1. young
2. attractive
3. white
4. missing
Then it's LOOK AT THE NOOZ ALL DAY COVERAGE LOOK MORE SAME NOOZ...
Yes, by all means. Look at the non-stop coverage of Channon Christian. Who is Channon Christian? She was:
1. young
2. attractive
3. white
4. missing -
...until her mutilated body (breasts cut off, cleaning fluid poured down her throat) was found after FOUR DAYS of rape and torture ( including being forced to watch the rape, mutilation, and killing of her boyfriend), by five animals, four of which happened to be male and all of whom happened to be black. That was ALL OVER the news, right?
Like the Duke (non)-rape case?
Like Tawana Brawley?
Right?
Wasn't it?
Post by: Boomhauer on November 02, 2007, 10:59:03 AM
And it ain't like it happened several years ago, or anything.
And it is also why I will always fight to the death.
Post by: Scout26 on November 02, 2007, 11:42:13 AM
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-franklinoct16,0,4025427.story
1. Young
2. Attractive
3. Black
4. Missing (Sadly, found dead)
Then this week we also had.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-mendez31_weboct31,0,2812419.story
1. Young(ish) Mom
2. Attractive
3. Hispanic
4. Missing (sadly, also found dead)
Missing women do get a lot of play/airtime here locally, it's the national "Nooz" that only jumps on it when it's a cute white women.
Post by: SomeKid on November 02, 2007, 07:51:16 PM
I live in Chattanooga, two hours south of Knoxville. Same state. The media here barely touched that story. I knew of it because I am a junky, and read probably a dozen different papers. That horrible incident is why I always carry on dates, and am willing to go for broke if hell comes.
Post by: De Selby on November 03, 2007, 12:01:50 AM
It's a YOUNG ATTRACTIVE MISSING WHITE WOMAN.
Hence, nooz.
This sort of thing goes on every day in every city, but it's page 20 stuff. Unless it has those qualifications.
1. young
2. attractive
3. white
4. missing
Then it's LOOK AT THE NOOZ ALL DAY COVERAGE LOOK MORE SAME NOOZ...
Hence, nooz.
This sort of thing goes on every day in every city, but it's page 20 stuff. Unless it has those qualifications.
1. young
2. attractive
3. white
4. missing
Then it's LOOK AT THE NOOZ ALL DAY COVERAGE LOOK MORE SAME NOOZ...
Yes, by all means. Look at the non-stop coverage of Channon Christian. Who is Channon Christian? She was:
1. young
2. attractive
3. white
4. missing -
...until her mutilated body (breasts cut off, cleaning fluid poured down her throat) was found after FOUR DAYS of rape and torture ( including being forced to watch the rape, mutilation, and killing of her boyfriend), by five animals, four of which happened to be male and all of whom happened to be black. That was ALL OVER the news, right?
Like the Duke (non)-rape case?
Like Tawana Brawley?
Right?
Wasn't it?
Yeah, it's the MSM covering up for non-white criminals.
Or actually, could it be that you just don't notice the race when it's white people? For instance, I have read numerous stories about a white guy killing and eating his victims, white guys killing dozens of women, and white guys molesting kids on video. Of course, I only knew they were white when I looked at photos-no one mentions race in print if the offender is white.
But some news boards (the ones concerned with the Channon Christian atrocity) are fixated on mentioning race when the offender is black-why oh why, I wonder?
Not every carjacking and double homicide makes the news-even horrible crimes sometimes go largely unnoticed. This is true when victims are both black and white; but you can be sure that there will always be people on both sides who claim that a certain victim did or did not get attention because of race. It's Louis Farrakhan doing it on one side, and the Vanguard news service doing it on the other. Both deserve the same level of attention-none.
Post by: Perd Hapley on November 03, 2007, 02:17:07 PM
Post by: De Selby on November 03, 2007, 02:20:19 PM
shooter, I don't know if I agree with you or not. To help me decide, please disclose your race, ethnicity, gender, religion and sexuality.
The funny/sad part about it is how many times you find people asking the same question, but without the smiley. It's like you need the right racial credentials to be taken seriously on some issues; crazy, just crazy.
Post by: richyoung on November 03, 2007, 04:16:10 PM
Post by: armchair warrior on November 03, 2007, 04:40:21 PM
member of a minority, the report goes something like "Male, 28 to 35 years old,
brown hair,brown eyes,5'10-6'.No mention of race at all!That could be 50%
of the population.
Jeez,don't they think that it might be helpful?
Post by: De Selby on November 03, 2007, 05:01:02 PM
If you think the MSM * DOESN'T * cover up for "non-white" criminals, try googling "Wichita Massacre"... odds are it will be the first time you heard of THAT one, either....
Actually I have-an apartment full of people who were brutally tortured and then executed in the snow (save one survivor). The fact that it wasn't as big as Lacie Peterson's disappearance does not have anything to do with the race of the attackers or the victims. You will have to accept that not every horrible crime will make the news-if every single such homicide were publicized, we'd have no time for any news but murders.
So no, I don't think the MSM covers up for non-white criminals. What possible reason would there be for that? Is there some powerful minority criminal lobby out there ready to hammer them for reporting crime???
What I do notice is that both whites and non-whites of certain persuasions make a HUGE stink about victims of their race going unnoticed, and accusing the media of "covering up violence against whites" and alternatively of "not caring about just another black victim". That is where race comes in-there's rarely evidence that race is a factor in these crimes, but there's always someone willing to jump on the bandwagon to declare this or that crime a casualty in the war of the races.
Myself, I try to not see racism behind every tree, and I recognize that most of these crimes are what they are-atrocious crimes committed by thugs, irrespective of their races. I'd rather not be part of the race-baiting and racially charged conflict that follows, and a quick search of the kinds of websites that waive the Wichita Massacre and Channon Christen banners will show everyone what kinds of groups are feuling the cries of racism surrounding those two particular crimes.
Post by: De Selby on November 03, 2007, 05:01:51 PM
I know for a fact that if there is a bank robbery around here and the suspect is a
member of a minority, the report goes something like "Male, 28 to 35 years old,
brown hair,brown eyes,5'10-6'.No mention of race at all!That could be 50%
of the population.
Jeez,don't they think that it might be helpful?
member of a minority, the report goes something like "Male, 28 to 35 years old,
brown hair,brown eyes,5'10-6'.No mention of race at all!That could be 50%
of the population.
Jeez,don't they think that it might be helpful?
To be honest, that almost always means the suspect is white in my experience. I rarely see race mentioned unless the suspect isn't white.
Post by: RoadKingLarry on November 03, 2007, 05:05:12 PM
Post by: De Selby on November 03, 2007, 05:50:17 PM
Maybe it should be a non-issue but if a couple of white psychos killed a house full of black folks you know darn good and well it will be a race thing when it hits the news.
That sort of thing has happened many times before-the reason it's a race thing is that in every case where it happened, it was explicitly about race. White psychos blew up buildings with little girls inside, shot up groups of people marching around for rights, and burned out and lynched farmhouses full of people for reasons that had everything to do with race. That's why a crime like that would immediately be treated as a race thing-because of the track record of such crimes in the past.
Post by: richyoung on November 05, 2007, 07:05:05 AM
Or actually, could it be that you just don't notice the race when it's white people?
I don't remember having the oppertunity to ignore hte races involved in the Duke (non)-rape case - did you? Cuz I remember a year of everybody pouncing on them evil rich white college boys that raped an African-American. I didn;t have much chance to ignore race when Tawana Brawley (African-American) accused white people of raping her and writing racial slurs on her - Al Shartpton et al were all OVER that one - (until it turned out as false as the Duke case....).
Not that I would wish it on ANYONE, but if a BLACK couple were carjacked, raped for 4 days, mutilated and killed by alleged WHITE perpetrators, the media frenzy would be ON!
Post by: SomeKid on November 05, 2007, 12:12:23 PM
The Witchita and Knoxville cases are very similar.
White victims. Black scum. No media coverage. As rich pointed out, when it is reversed, it is rammed down our throats, even if the accusations are false.
Post by: wooderson on November 05, 2007, 12:47:44 PM
A simpler explanation for the Channon Christian case - it was solved, rather rapidly, and those responsible are in the process of being held accountable.
Post by: MechAg94 on November 05, 2007, 01:05:09 PM
Post by: richyoung on November 06, 2007, 06:51:02 PM
'No media coverage' - yet people across the country have heard about it. Weird, isn't it?
It's called the "Internet" - Al Gore invented it. Check it out sometime! Still, it doesn't count as "mainstream media", now does it?
Post by: Perd Hapley on November 06, 2007, 07:37:54 PM
When us wacky conservatives complain about a lack of media coverage, on any issue, we're not saying that the story can't be found on page 17 of the New York Times, or that it's not out there on the internet somewhere. We're talking about the prominence the Old Media assigns to various stories or issues; how often they talk about one thing, when something else has equal importance or relevance. That has a huge effect on how people think about things.
An example that shootinstudent will understand is the way that the Iraqis are, allegedly, favoring Iran-friendly political parties. I've never heard that anywhere, but from him. I'm sure those news-stories are out there, somewhere, so I could learn about them. But, like most Americans, I don't read thirteen newspapers per day, or follow every news report that comes out of the Middle East.
Post by: Tallpine on November 07, 2007, 07:23:54 AM
Quote
But, like most Americans, I don't read thirteen newspapers per day, or follow every news report that comes out of the Middle East.
Well, you're just uneducated. I suppose you don't read Arabic, either?
Post by: armchair warrior on November 07, 2007, 02:20:10 PM
I know for a fact that if there is a bank robbery around here and the suspect is a
member of a minority, the report goes something like "Male, 28 to 35 years old,
brown hair,brown eyes,5'10-6'.No mention of race at all!That could be 50%
of the population.
Jeez,don't they think that it might be helpful?
member of a minority, the report goes something like "Male, 28 to 35 years old,
brown hair,brown eyes,5'10-6'.No mention of race at all!That could be 50%
of the population.
Jeez,don't they think that it might be helpful?
To be honest, that almost always means the suspect is white in my experience. I rarely see race mentioned unless the suspect isn't white.
You've got to be kidding.
If its a white person,the media usually has a picture or drawing.
Here in "oh, so politically correct" Marin county,no minority commits a crime
according to the local rag.
Post by: De Selby on November 07, 2007, 04:40:19 PM
didn;t have much chance to ignore race when Tawana Brawley (African-American) accused white people of raping her and writing racial slurs on her - Al Shartpton et al were all OVER that one - (until it turned out as false as the Duke case....).
Not that I would wish it on ANYONE, but if a BLACK couple were carjacked, raped for 4 days, mutilated and killed by alleged WHITE perpetrators, the media frenzy would be ON!
Not that I would wish it on ANYONE, but if a BLACK couple were carjacked, raped for 4 days, mutilated and killed by alleged WHITE perpetrators, the media frenzy would be ON!
This is a good point-look at the guys who were all over the Duke case making it into a giant racial issue. Why would you want to copy them?
The people who trot out these stories of murders and then declare "WHITE VICTIMS! No coverage!" are doing exactly the same thing that Al and Jesse did to the Duke players. Pointing out that it happens both ways shouldn't justify you doing the same thing that the Reverends did to the Duke players, should it?
You are noting that there was an attempt by some to make that case into a race issue when it wasn't, and then turning around to invent exactly the same kind of race issue but with the races of victim and perp reversed. Instead of copying Farrakhan, you should try to be smarter than that-claiming that there's a conspiracy to cover up crimes against white victims committed by minorities is simply reversing what he does whenever a black victim goes unreported on the CNN ticker.
As for all black victims, the reason such cases would make the news as race incidents is that there's such a long, long history of racist violence against blacks in this country. That doesn't make it right to presume such a crime as you imagine would be motivated by racist hatred, but it's certainly an understandable suspicion. I don't think there's ever been a single mass murder of black people by whites in America that was not motivated by racism, which explains why the media would naturally speculate on racism for such crimes, and generally does not assume racism when there is an office shooting, a serial killer, or a missing persons case.
Post by: De Selby on November 07, 2007, 04:42:02 PM
An example that shootinstudent will understand is the way that the Iraqis are, allegedly, favoring Iran-friendly political parties. I've never heard that anywhere, but from him. I'm sure those news-stories are out there, somewhere, so I could learn about them. But, like most Americans, I don't read thirteen newspapers per day, or follow every news report that comes out of the Middle East.
Good example.
Just because something isn't widely noticed doesn't mean it's unreported, and a lot of time, lack of reporting has some rather benign and common sense reasons. You don't read about every homicide in every city in America, even though they're all horrible, because most of the time they are local, rather than national, stories. And stories that become national do so for a multitude of reasons-not because the victims were this or that color.
Post by: Scout26 on November 07, 2007, 05:41:57 PM
1) Husband is a cop
2) Age difference between them (he's 53, she's 23) and they started dating when she was 17.
3) He's been married 4 times
4) Mrs #3 died under "questionable" circumstances (Drowned in 'empty' bathtub), after cops responded 18 times to there home.
5) Mrs #3 sent a "I think my husband is going to kill me" letter to the State's Attorney.
Post by: Matthew Carberry on November 07, 2007, 07:26:21 PM
Quote
I don't think there's ever been a single mass murder of black people by whites in America that was not _____________ motivated by racism, which explains why the media would naturally speculate on racism for such crimes, and generally does not assume racism when there is an office shooting, a serial killer, or a missing persons case.
I would suggest that the word "allegedly" or "presumably" or "assumedly" or something a little less definitive be inserted there.
When a white person kills blacks, or a straight person assaults gays, or most any other "majority" on "other" group crime occurs, "hate" is seemingly always presumptively assumed, even when there is no actual evidence to that effect (other than the identity of each) or the perpetrator has even stated their motive was "neutrally" criminal.
In the Wichita and Knoxville cases, IIRC, the perpetrators explicitly stated racist motives to their victims (well the surviving one reported slurs and such statements) and to their interrogators.
That's a big difference, hate is assumed (and usually prosecuted for regardless of real evidence) when it's "white on minority" while the authorities are quick to state that there is no "hate crime angle" in most "minority on white" incidents.
That's an extant double standard that brain-dead PC thinking has created. The insistence that non-PC motivations make the exact same crimes somehow "worse" and deserving of more severe (versus merely equivilent) punishments.
It's time for hate crime (essentially thought crime) laws to be cast onto the dust heap of history with other racial/group based laws.
Post by: De Selby on November 07, 2007, 07:34:53 PM
I was responding specifically to the prediction that a mass murder of black people by whites would be treated as a racist crime. The reason I think it is played that way in the media is that such crimes historically have in fact been racist crimes-I don't mean that every crime committed against minorities by whites is racist, or should be presumed to be racist. That is obviously wrong and unthinking, which you are right to point out.
A remedy that treats crimes equally, black or white, is a good thing to seek. But what some people are doing when they find a supposed media cover-up of black on white crime, is turning around and doing the exact same sort of thing that the race-baiters are doing on the other end of the spectrum.
To continue with your ideas on hate crimes laws, complaining about the media coverage of one particular crime by trotting out other crimes and alleging a racial cover-up, is like trying to remedy inequalities in hate-crime law by prosecuting more minorities for hate crimes, rather than questioning the faulty premises behind the law.
Post by: Tecumseh on November 08, 2007, 12:08:07 PM
Hopefully he is not allowed to carry a firearm while he is under investigation for the safety of others and for the community.
Post by: Tecumseh on November 08, 2007, 12:09:57 PM
Quote
I don't think there's ever been a single mass murder of black people by whites in America that was not _____________ motivated by racism, which explains why the media would naturally speculate on racism for such crimes, and generally does not assume racism when there is an office shooting, a serial killer, or a missing persons case.
I would suggest that the word "allegedly" or "presumably" or "assumedly" or something a little less definitive be inserted there.
When a white person kills blacks, or a straight person assaults gays, or most any other "majority" on "other" group crime occurs, "hate" is seemingly always presumptively assumed, even when there is no actual evidence to that effect (other than the identity of each) or the perpetrator has even stated their motive was "neutrally" criminal.
In the Wichita and Knoxville cases, IIRC, the perpetrators explicitly stated racist motives to their victims (well the surviving one reported slurs and such statements) and to their interrogators.
That's a big difference, hate is assumed (and usually prosecuted for regardless of real evidence) when it's "white on minority" while the authorities are quick to state that there is no "hate crime angle" in most "minority on white" incidents.
That's an extant double standard that brain-dead PC thinking has created. The insistence that non-PC motivations make the exact same crimes somehow "worse" and deserving of more severe (versus merely equivilent) punishments.
It's time for hate crime (essentially thought crime) laws to be cast onto the dust heap of history with other racial/group based laws.
Post by: Matthew Carberry on November 08, 2007, 04:39:57 PM
They committed murder, send them to prison. End of story.
Post by: richyoung on November 10, 2007, 04:34:19 PM
Rich,
I live in Chattanooga, two hours south of Knoxville. Same state. The media here barely touched that story. I knew of it because I am a junky, and read probably a dozen different papers. That horrible incident is why I always carry on dates, and am willing to go for broke if hell comes.
I live in Chattanooga, two hours south of Knoxville. Same state. The media here barely touched that story. I knew of it because I am a junky, and read probably a dozen different papers. That horrible incident is why I always carry on dates, and am willing to go for broke if hell comes.
Please take this the way I mean it - God please you, and keep your powder dry...
Stay safe -
Rich
Post by: richyoung on November 10, 2007, 04:37:37 PM
If you think the MSM * DOESN'T * cover up for "non-white" criminals, try googling "Wichita Massacre"... odds are it will be the first time you heard of THAT one, either....
Actually I have-an apartment full of people who were brutally tortured and then executed in the snow (save one survivor). The fact that it wasn't as big as Lacie Peterson's disappearance does not have anything to do with the race of the attackers or the victims. You will have to accept that not every horrible crime will make the news-if every single such homicide were publicized, we'd have no time for any news but murders.
So no, I don't think the MSM covers up for non-white criminals. What possible reason would there be for that? Is there some powerful minority criminal lobby out there ready to hammer them for reporting crime???
What I do notice is that both whites and non-whites of certain persuasions make a HUGE stink about victims of their race going unnoticed, and accusing the media of "covering up violence against whites" and alternatively of "not caring about just another black victim". That is where race comes in-there's rarely evidence that race is a factor in these crimes, but there's always someone willing to jump on the bandwagon to declare this or that crime a casualty in the war of the races.
Myself, I try to not see racism behind every tree, and I recognize that most of these crimes are what they are-atrocious crimes committed by thugs, irrespective of their races. I'd rather not be part of the race-baiting and racially charged conflict that follows, and a quick search of the kinds of websites that waive the Wichita Massacre and Channon Christen banners will show everyone what kinds of groups are feuling the cries of racism surrounding those two particular crimes.
Does the fact that the Nazi's were the first to publicice the Katyn forrest massacres somehow make them less relevant? Their victims less dead? What difference does the SOURCE make, provided it providedes a TRUTHFUL RECORD OF EVENTS?
Post by: richyoung on November 10, 2007, 04:42:23 PM
didn;t have much chance to ignore race when Tawana Brawley (African-American) accused white people of raping her and writing racial slurs on her - Al Shartpton et al were all OVER that one - (until it turned out as false as the Duke case....).
Not that I would wish it on ANYONE, but if a BLACK couple were carjacked, raped for 4 days, mutilated and killed by alleged WHITE perpetrators, the media frenzy would be ON!
Not that I would wish it on ANYONE, but if a BLACK couple were carjacked, raped for 4 days, mutilated and killed by alleged WHITE perpetrators, the media frenzy would be ON!
This is a good point-look at the guys who were all over the Duke case making it into a giant racial issue. Why would you want to copy them?
The people who trot out these stories of murders and then declare "WHITE VICTIMS! No coverage!" are doing exactly the same thing that Al and Jesse did to the Duke players. Pointing out that it happens both ways shouldn't justify you doing the same thing that the Reverends did to the Duke players, should it?
Here's a clue, free of charge...it "did't happen both ways" - the Duke case was a fraud from the get-go - any person could see that - yet the MSM shoved it down everyone's throat for over a year. Neither the Wichita Massacre nor the KNoxville horror were fake - multiple people graveyard dead, AFTER torture. Yet not a peep. So you see, they aren;t the same...
.
Post by: Tecumseh on November 10, 2007, 09:52:00 PM
didn;t have much chance to ignore race when Tawana Brawley (African-American) accused white people of raping her and writing racial slurs on her - Al Shartpton et al were all OVER that one - (until it turned out as false as the Duke case....).
Not that I would wish it on ANYONE, but if a BLACK couple were carjacked, raped for 4 days, mutilated and killed by alleged WHITE perpetrators, the media frenzy would be ON!
Not that I would wish it on ANYONE, but if a BLACK couple were carjacked, raped for 4 days, mutilated and killed by alleged WHITE perpetrators, the media frenzy would be ON!
This is a good point-look at the guys who were all over the Duke case making it into a giant racial issue. Why would you want to copy them?
The people who trot out these stories of murders and then declare "WHITE VICTIMS! No coverage!" are doing exactly the same thing that Al and Jesse did to the Duke players. Pointing out that it happens both ways shouldn't justify you doing the same thing that the Reverends did to the Duke players, should it?
Here's a clue, free of charge...it "did't happen both ways" - the Duke case was a fraud from the get-go - any person could see that - yet the MSM shoved it down everyone's throat for over a year. Neither the Wichita Massacre nor the KNoxville horror were fake - multiple people graveyard dead, AFTER torture. Yet not a peep. So you see, they aren;t the same...
.
Any how many black men were victimized? Look at some of the men on the Innocence Projects website. What about Amadou Diallo? Why are so many more black men imprisoned then white men? please explain that.
Post by: Matthew Carberry on November 11, 2007, 01:31:45 AM
Post by: Perd Hapley on November 11, 2007, 08:40:45 AM
Why are so many more black men imprisoned then white men? please explain that.
Glad to. We don't put enough white boys behind bars. More punishment for criminals of both races, I say.
Post by: Matthew Carberry on November 11, 2007, 12:28:53 PM
Quote
Why are so many more black men imprisoned then white men? please explain that.
Drug laws.
Post by: richyoung on November 11, 2007, 06:05:34 PM
didn;t have much chance to ignore race when Tawana Brawley (African-American) accused white people of raping her and writing racial slurs on her - Al Shartpton et al were all OVER that one - (until it turned out as false as the Duke case....).
Not that I would wish it on ANYONE, but if a BLACK couple were carjacked, raped for 4 days, mutilated and killed by alleged WHITE perpetrators, the media frenzy would be ON!
Not that I would wish it on ANYONE, but if a BLACK couple were carjacked, raped for 4 days, mutilated and killed by alleged WHITE perpetrators, the media frenzy would be ON!
This is a good point-look at the guys who were all over the Duke case making it into a giant racial issue. Why would you want to copy them?
The people who trot out these stories of murders and then declare "WHITE VICTIMS! No coverage!" are doing exactly the same thing that Al and Jesse did to the Duke players. Pointing out that it happens both ways shouldn't justify you doing the same thing that the Reverends did to the Duke players, should it?
Here's a clue, free of charge...it "did't happen both ways" - the Duke case was a fraud from the get-go - any person could see that - yet the MSM shoved it down everyone's throat for over a year. Neither the Wichita Massacre nor the KNoxville horror were fake - multiple people graveyard dead, AFTER torture. Yet not a peep. So you see, they aren;t the same...
.
Any how many black men were victimized? Look at some of the men on the Innocence Projects website. What about Amadou Diallo? Why are so many more black men imprisoned then white men? please explain that.
Here's a possibilty...THEY BROKE THE LAW!
Post by: Tecumseh on November 12, 2007, 10:59:44 AM
didn;t have much chance to ignore race when Tawana Brawley (African-American) accused white people of raping her and writing racial slurs on her - Al Shartpton et al were all OVER that one - (until it turned out as false as the Duke case....).
Not that I would wish it on ANYONE, but if a BLACK couple were carjacked, raped for 4 days, mutilated and killed by alleged WHITE perpetrators, the media frenzy would be ON!
Not that I would wish it on ANYONE, but if a BLACK couple were carjacked, raped for 4 days, mutilated and killed by alleged WHITE perpetrators, the media frenzy would be ON!
This is a good point-look at the guys who were all over the Duke case making it into a giant racial issue. Why would you want to copy them?
The people who trot out these stories of murders and then declare "WHITE VICTIMS! No coverage!" are doing exactly the same thing that Al and Jesse did to the Duke players. Pointing out that it happens both ways shouldn't justify you doing the same thing that the Reverends did to the Duke players, should it?
Here's a clue, free of charge...it "did't happen both ways" - the Duke case was a fraud from the get-go - any person could see that - yet the MSM shoved it down everyone's throat for over a year. Neither the Wichita Massacre nor the KNoxville horror were fake - multiple people graveyard dead, AFTER torture. Yet not a peep. So you see, they aren;t the same...
.
Any how many black men were victimized? Look at some of the men on the Innocence Projects website. What about Amadou Diallo? Why are so many more black men imprisoned then white men? please explain that.
Here's a possibilty...THEY BROKE THE LAW!
Post by: richyoung on November 12, 2007, 05:33:26 PM
And why are whites given less time or no time for beaking the same laws?
Proof for that stuff in red, please?
Quote
Do you really think that 1/3 black men is a meaninless statistic?
Did they break the law?
Quote
Why is a minority being overwhelmingly represented in prison populations?
Because if we cut them any slack, people like you will complain that "those who prey on minorities aren't punished the same as those who victimize whites" - since the overwhelming majority of black and brown perpetrated crime is against....black and brown victims.
Post by: De Selby on November 12, 2007, 07:04:15 PM
didn;t have much chance to ignore race when Tawana Brawley (African-American) accused white people of raping her and writing racial slurs on her - Al Shartpton et al were all OVER that one - (until it turned out as false as the Duke case....).
Not that I would wish it on ANYONE, but if a BLACK couple were carjacked, raped for 4 days, mutilated and killed by alleged WHITE perpetrators, the media frenzy would be ON!
Not that I would wish it on ANYONE, but if a BLACK couple were carjacked, raped for 4 days, mutilated and killed by alleged WHITE perpetrators, the media frenzy would be ON!
This is a good point-look at the guys who were all over the Duke case making it into a giant racial issue. Why would you want to copy them?
The people who trot out these stories of murders and then declare "WHITE VICTIMS! No coverage!" are doing exactly the same thing that Al and Jesse did to the Duke players. Pointing out that it happens both ways shouldn't justify you doing the same thing that the Reverends did to the Duke players, should it?
Here's a clue, free of charge...it "did't happen both ways" - the Duke case was a fraud from the get-go - any person could see that - yet the MSM shoved it down everyone's throat for over a year. Neither the Wichita Massacre nor the KNoxville horror were fake - multiple people graveyard dead, AFTER torture. Yet not a peep. So you see, they aren;t the same...
.
If it's so wrong when it happens to white people, why are you doing your best to hype crimes just because the perpertrators are black? And why do you think it's alright for the racist websites that carry those stories to engage in race-baiting just like the Reverends in the Duke case?
I don't get what you're saying here. Apparently your answer to race baiting against white perps is to do it to black perps. Am I reading that right?
Post by: richyoung on November 13, 2007, 06:45:24 AM
If it's so wrong when it happens to white people,....
Close. Its wrong when it happens to ANYONE, by ANYONE....
Quote
"... why are you doing your best to hype crimes just because the perpertrators are black?"
I'm not "hyping" anything. I'm reporting facts. I'm reporting actual crimes the MSM ignores, while it "hypes" non-existent crimes like the Duke rape case - which seems indicitive to me of some kind of agenda....
Quote
And why do you think it's alright for the racist websites that carry those stories to engage in race-baiting just like the Reverends in the Duke case?
I don't. Care to quote me where I in any way endorse "race-baiting"? I don;t endorse the Nazi's, either - however, that does nothing to discredit their reporting of the Katyn Forest Massacre. I'd be waiting a long time to hear about it from Russian sources...
Quote
I don't get what you're saying here. Apparently your answer to race baiting against white perps falsly accused whites caught in a media firestorm is to do it to factually report horrendous crimes that actually were done by black perps. Am I reading that right?
Try it now - I fixed it for you....
Post by: ilbob on November 13, 2007, 11:00:46 AM
I know for a fact that if there is a bank robbery around here and the suspect is a
member of a minority, the report goes something like "Male, 28 to 35 years old,
brown hair,brown eyes,5'10-6'.No mention of race at all!That could be 50%
of the population.
Jeez,don't they think that it might be helpful?
member of a minority, the report goes something like "Male, 28 to 35 years old,
brown hair,brown eyes,5'10-6'.No mention of race at all!That could be 50%
of the population.
Jeez,don't they think that it might be helpful?
To be honest, that almost always means the suspect is white in my experience. I rarely see race mentioned unless the suspect isn't white.
Post by: ilbob on November 15, 2007, 07:04:53 AM
Quote
And why are whites given less time or no time for beaking the same laws?
This is an over touted claim, that turns out to mostly be based on the disparity in the sentences for cocaine and crack selling. Blacks tend to sell crack, and the penalties are greater. Despite what you might think, selling crack is a different crime than selling cocaine.
Quote
Do you really think that 1/3 black men is a meaninless statistic? Why is a minority being overwhelmingly represented in prison populations?
My guess would be that minorities are represented in prison by direct proportion to who is found guilty of serious crimes. In case you have not figured it out, certain racial and/or ethnic groups commit crimes in far greater rates then people not in those groups.Males commit crimes at greater rates then females. I do not hear you complaining that there are not enough females in prison.
Post by: Perd Hapley on November 15, 2007, 07:31:58 PM
I do not hear you complaining that there are not enough females in prison.
He would if he were there.
