Posted: 21 Jul 2011 01:42 PM PDT
At age 14 Brandon McInerney fatally shot Larry King, age 15 and a fellow student at his high school. The victim was a gay cross dresser who wore high-heeled boots, makeup and jewelry to school, and had made a series of public sexual advances toward McInerney. McInerney, who is not gay and had a girlfriend, took offense at King's continuing sexual harassment.
According to the defense attorney, the killing was motivated by McInerney's "inability to deal with the humiliation of having an openly gay boy flirt with him at school," which seems reasonable enough. But the prosecution claims that the murder was a hate crime, solely on the basis that McInerney had associations with the "white supremacist movement."
Indeed, McInerney had the temerity to avoid "a school field trip to the Museum of Tolerance, the educational arm of the human rights organization the Simon Wiesenthal Center"—obviously marking him as a bad guy.
One obvious issue is how much self-control a child of 14 may be expected to have when being harassed in this way. (Even on the prosecution's theory, emotional control is critical, since they propose that the killing was motivated by a general hatred toward homosexuals.) The developmental data clearly show that the prefrontal control centers are the last parts of the brain to develop. For very sound evolutionary reasons derivable from the evolutionary theory of sex, young males are especially prone to impulsivity and have difficulty controlling their emotions, including, in this case, anger. What some have called the "young male syndrome" is simply another way of saying that young males are designed to be relatively uncontrolled emotionally. In a nutshell, that is the perfectly reasonable logic of separate judicial systems for adults and children.
And in this case, the defense will show that the anger was the result of attacks on his sexual identity—a particularly difficult issue at age 14. Going through puberty is hard enough without having a gay cross dresser blowing kisses at you and loudly proclaiming his love for you ("Love you, baby") while passing in the hallway. Nevertheless, McInerney not only was charged with first degree murder but is being tried as an adult. He faces the possibility of life in prison if convicted.
It's obvious that being sexually harassed by a gay student would lead to anger for pretty much any heterosexual teenage boy—or adult. But the prosecution wants the jury to believe that McInerney's motive had nothing to do with anger at being harassed. Rather it was because McInerney was a "White nationalist" whose hatred against homosexuals motivated the killing.
The prosecution witness who provided the logic of the motive is Dan Swanson, a Simi Valley police detective with no academic qualifications. One suspects that he may have been trained by the SPLC's Law Enforcement Training or the ADL's Law Enforcement Agency Resource Network.Swanson began his testimony with a 3-hour presentation of the "history of white supremacy dating back to the Ku Klux Klan and running through the modern day neo-Nazi movement." The idea is that Nazis didn't like gays, so, since McInerney has an association with the symbols of Nazism and "White supremacy," he must have murdered King out of hatred.
On the face of it, this is a ploy by prosecutors to poison the minds of jurors given current standards of political correctness. After his 3-hour historical background presentation, Swanson
Amazingly, the judge allowed Swanson to give
So this part of the presentation was basically irrelevant even to the prosecution's theory. But it was quite effective in producing a negative attitude toward McInerney in at least one juror.
Let's grant that McInerney was into this stuff. But there are no statements from McInerney linking his attitudes on race or National Socialism with his killing of King. No statements from McInerney declaring a general hatred toward homosexuals. There was no presentation of scientifically gathered data showing how common hatred toward homosexuals is among people with attitudes and associations like McInerney's. Surely they don't all have such attitudes. And in any case, the vast majority of those with McInerney's attitudes do not attack homosexuals.
To deny the relevance of King's harassment in provoking McInerney is ridiculous. The whole thing seems like nothing more than yet another attempt to criminalize having a White identity and a sense of White interests.
To make matters more difficult for the defense, the prosecution intends to use a "state law allowing judges to admonish jurors that a victim's sexual orientation should not influence deliberations" ("Trial in killing of gay teen will test new law"; LA Times, 7-21-11). This law is intended to preclude so-called "gay panic" defenses where people claim they victimize someone in an emotional panic when they learn he is gay.
This just shows how out of touch with reality the law has become. The victim's gender orientation is obviously relevant to the motive here; McInerney's anger is absolutely understandable but only if the victim's sexual orientation is taken into account. If a girl had been making such public declarations of attraction, McInerney probably would have been flattered.
But in fact, the defense will be allowed to present its evidence that McInerney was sexually harassed, and I should think that this material will resonate strongly with most jurors despite what the activists want.
This is a truly despicable attempt to get a first degree murder conviction against a child whose attitudes conflict with the current zeitgeist. It is completely reliant on guilt-by-association reasoning that taps into the massive indoctrination of the mainstream media on any issue related to White identity, the Ku Klux Klan, or National Socialism. We can only hope that the jury has the courage to ignore this red herring and punish the prosecution by finding him not guilty.
Posted: 21 Jul 2011 12:04 PM PDT
Part of my duties, however, as host of The Political Cesspool Radio Program, is to keep our blog filled with lots of interesting stories during the week to tide you over until our weekly broadcast airs on Saturday evenings.
As a writer, it could be argued that my magnum opus was an article last year on the infamous Glenn Beck rally in Washington, D.C.
This week, Glenn Beck is at it again.
He delivered the keynote speech at the "Christians United for Israel" summit where he proudly proclaimed that if anyone wants to dehumanize Jews, "then count me a Jew and come for me first." As if to reiterate his point, he follows up that statement with the exclamation that, "I am a Jew," even though he certainly is not.
Check out the embarrassing video below, if you can, and pay close attention to the 1:30 – 1:47 mark, the 2:08 – 2:12 mark, and the 2:19 – 2:27 mark. I couldn't bear to watch it past that point, so if he says anything else that's equally absurd just note it in the comments section below (Ed.: Its a ringing endorsement of Israel as a besieged state—no mention of Israeli aggression, ethnic cleansing, or apartheid, and it includes a ringing denouncement of Helen Thomas).
Glenn Beck is so repulsive because he is so disingenuous. If he were just a rank and file Christian Zionist that really believed in all that nonsense, then that's one thing. But you can tell by simply watching him speak that he is bogus.
Frankly, I think he is somewhat mentally ill.
I don't know if I've ever seen him go five minutes on television without employing his fake crying routine. Watching that act could gag a maggot. He kind of reminds me of someone who would have been selling "miracle" elixirs from a gypsy bandwagon back in the day.
All in all, this video takes groveling to a whole other level. He has no honor and no dignity.
And at the end of the day, what does he have to show for such pandering?
Fox News canceled Glenn Beck's television show shortly after this incident.
Oh well, you can't win 'em all, Glenn!
Reposted from The Political Cesspool.
Jul 21, 2011
The Brandon McInerney Hate Crime Trial
Messages in this topic (1)