printAnn Coulter is right about very many things; it’s a shame she rarely writes about the things she’s right about. This week, she has—and with a vengeance—in an excellent column exposing the crime that is America’s news coverage of the case of creepy, corrupted “Foxy Knoxy” (Amanda Knox), an American college student, aged 21, from Seattle, Washington, who is on trial for murder in Perugia, Italy.
With O.J.-type evidence in support of their case, Italian law enforcement agencies are alleging Knox murdered and sexually assaulted one of her roommates, British exchange student Meredith Kercher.
I’ve watched the case unfold and have had similar thoughts as those Ann Coulter expresses in “NYT: DUKE LACROSSE PLAYERS KILLED MEREDITH KERCHER:
“The evidence includes:
— a large kitchen knife, believed by forensic investigators to have caused at least one of Kercher’s three wounds, found at Sollecito’s house. Despite having been thoroughly washed, the knife had Knox’s DNA on the handle and the murder victim’s DNA on the blade.
— a bloody footprint at the crime scene that matches Sollecito’s. The floor had been cleaned so that the footprint was invisible to the naked eye, but was revealed with Luminol (just like on “CSI”).
— Knox’s bloody footprints, mixed with Kercher’s blood, were found in another roommate’s room, where a window had been broken to make it look like there had been a break-in — a theory discounted immediately by investigators. Knox’s footprints, too, had been scrubbed but were discovered with Luminol.
— Kercher’s bloody bra strap at the crime scene that had abundant amounts of Sollecito’s DNA on it.” Read on.
[SNIP]
The case is instructive in what it says of a deep-seated pathology infecting American society, where reality takes a backseat to some self-serving parallel universe. You see it again and again … Something else that’s worth noting and is not forthcoming from the American media, paragons of pity that they are: Meredith Kercher, whose throat was cut with a pen knife during the sexual assault, died an agonizingly slow death.
I read A.C. and thought about you. She can make very good points when she wishes to think clearly.
I would not characterize Ann as unbiased and unopinionated. As for the case, the sad thing about the news media is that (and especially in judicial cases) it neglects to point out critical facts and arguments – and I am not in the courtroom – but Ann points out CORRECTLY how the “objective” media can distort cases make the guilty seem innocent or the innocent see guilty (although that proved to be too hard to do in the Duke case) when it feels like doing so.
“Ann Coulter is right about very many things; it’s a shame she rarely writes about the things she’s right about.”
This is the fascinating psychology summed up by the half-serious Rothbard’s Law.
You, on the other hand, appear to be extremely well acquainted with what you are able to write well about, and write accordingly!
This particular story flew over my radar, though. I’m so selective about where I get my info that I don’t even let myself go to television for the news anymore. I gave me dumb-chills. Sometimes that means missing a story entirely, but I think it wise to prefer a mild lack of information to a distortion of it.