Slog
News & ArtsMonday, July 23, 2012
News Morning News: J. P. Patches, Penn State, and Goat Man
Posted by Anna Minard on Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 8:50 AM
Capitol Hill Block Party: It is over! Read all about it here. No, really! Do! We had a lot of fun.
RIP, JPP: J. P. Patches (real name: Chris Wedes) dies at 84. Cranky Goldy reports here.
Penn State Pays the Price: The NCAA fines Penn State $60 million, bans them from post-season football bowl games for four years, and strips them of all football wins from 1998 onward, among other punishments. That, by the way, means Joe Paterno is no longer the winningest college football coach in history.
Seventeen-year-old Girl from Kentucky Faces Charges After Tweeting Her Rapists' Names:
Savannah Dietrich of Louisville told the Courier-Journal she is frustrated by what she feels is a lenient deal for her attackers. After posting the names on Twitter, Dietrich wrote, "I'm not protecting anyone that made my life a living Hell."
The Associated Press does not normally report the names of sexual assault victims, but Dietrich and her parents say they do not want to shield her identity and want her case to be public.
The boys' attorneys have asked a judge to hold Dietrich in contempt for violating the confidentiality of a juvenile hearing and the judge's order not to speak about it.
The Deadliest Day in Iraq This Year: 103 killed across the country in bombings and shootings, likely in coordinated Al Quaeda attacks.
Haz-Mat Crews at Darigold: Possible ammonia leak at the South Seattle dairy plant, two-block radius closed to traffic.
Federal Way 8-year-old Bicyclist Hit, Killed: Wayde Rodriguez-Fale was riding his bike a block from home around 10 last night when he was struck by a car.
Awkward Entertainment News: The Dark Knight Rises tops the box office with $160 million.
Have You Heard of Goat Man? "A man spotted dressed in a goat suit among a herd of wild goats in the mountains of northern Utah has wildlife officials worried he could be in danger as hunting season approaches."
Make Your Week Truly Truly Truly Outrageous:
1
Afterward, Dietrich tweeted, "They said I can't talk about it or I'll be locked up. ... Protect rapist is more important than getting justice for the victim in Louisville."
If they jail her or put ANY sanctions on her for this, we need to make this a national issue and yell and scream about it. The media may not be able to report the names of her attackers, but it happened to her; it’s her story, she gets to control it.
If they jail her or put ANY sanctions on her for this, we need to make this a national issue and yell and scream about it. The media may not be able to report the names of her attackers, but it happened to her; it’s her story, she gets to control it.
4
@1: She will not be jailed for this, but it should be noted that it was a juvenile hearing. These kinds of orders are not to protect rapists, but to protect children, regardless of their crimes.
Just because those children (legally) are also rapists does not mean that child protection laws are rendered moot. I know people have a hard time with this, but others do not lose constitutional and legal rights because they are bad people or held to be abhorrent.
The whole point of juvenile laws is that we as a society believe children can not be held totally responsible for their actions, which is why children can not enter legal agreements, vote, etc. Judging what makes a person not responsible for their actions is another issue.
Just because those children (legally) are also rapists does not mean that child protection laws are rendered moot. I know people have a hard time with this, but others do not lose constitutional and legal rights because they are bad people or held to be abhorrent.
The whole point of juvenile laws is that we as a society believe children can not be held totally responsible for their actions, which is why children can not enter legal agreements, vote, etc. Judging what makes a person not responsible for their actions is another issue.
5
I can’t follow the link on the goat story. I was thinking: his choice; his risk.
But then I read your comment, DOUG, and I’m wondering if that’s his goal. Eeeewwwww.
Or maybe I’ve just read too much Savage.
But then I read your comment, DOUG, and I’m wondering if that’s his goal. Eeeewwwww.
Or maybe I’ve just read too much Savage.
6
That seems like a serious miscarriage of justice: they shared lurid pictures of her and the plea deal was agreed to with discussion with her beforehand? Seems like she has a right to be angry and not just quietly allowing this to go on.
7
@4 I understand the privacy issues with juveniles. I firmly agree that the media should not report the boys' names, nor read her tweets unedited.
She, however, should be allowed to tell her story. Sure, we live with Twitter now so she's not just telling a few friends and family, she's potentially telling the world. But I still hold that it should be her right to do so. Juvenile or not, this is a thing that happened to her. Protecting these boys to this degree is minimizing her input on her experience.
She, however, should be allowed to tell her story. Sure, we live with Twitter now so she's not just telling a few friends and family, she's potentially telling the world. But I still hold that it should be her right to do so. Juvenile or not, this is a thing that happened to her. Protecting these boys to this degree is minimizing her input on her experience.
8
@ 5, maybe DOUG meant to be gross, but I think he meant that goats (like any mating animal) can be dangerously aggressive and territorial during mating season.
9
Then --- And Now: no news is still no news!
Today, we heard the cutesy-voiced Megan from Colorado Public Radio talk and talk and talk about psycho mass murderer, James Holmes, without conveying any information whatsoever!
She could go on and on, yet we learn nothing substantive about his actual background?
[YAKETY YAK --- DON’T TALK BACK!]
Back in 1968, one heard similar cutesy-voiced types, and still they conveyed no information on the background of the accused assassin of Senator Bobby Kennedy, nor on those incredibly bizarre “witnesses.”
Actual eye witnesses, between the ages of 14 years to over 70 years old, uniformly described a mystery woman as being an olive-skinned brunette, in her late 20s to early 30s, with a slight foreign accent.
The police state they have found this woman, and bring forth a very young blonde, fair-complected college student with her leg in a cast and on crutches?
The perfect I.D. match!!!!!
The other witness, a part-time security guard who was physically situated at exactly where the kill shot originated, worked at Lockheed, possibly as a plumber’s assistant, but this was never actually confirmed?
Curiously, the bizarre blonde “witness” had an aunt and uncle who also worked at the classified area in Lockheed where the security guard worked?
Also, the blonde witness’ father, although employed at a different company (Technicolor Corporation), worked on a classified contract with Lockheed? (We won’t even mention that the presiding judge in the accused assassin’s trial (Sirhan Sirhan) was Herbert Walker --- anyone ever hear of somebody, possibly an effing president, named George Herbert Walker Bush??? Didn’t think so.)
Bizarre witnesses and quite the long string of “coincidences” --- which we never, ever learned of from any of those cutesy-voiced talking bots!
It might be helpful, even pertinent, to know that James Holmes’ father was involved with a company working on a DoD-funded contract developing “cortronic neural networks” including neural interfaces, etc.
It might be helpful, even pertinent, to know if James Holmes was ever involved as a test subject in any neuroscience experiments during either his undergrad or grad schooling.
Only years later did we learn that Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber, was once a test subject under an MKULTRA project while he was at Harvard!
MKULTRA Updates
Awhile back there was a brief mention in the corporate news of the proof of weaponization of the avian flu virus, or H5N1 virus, by scientists at a Dutch academic research center as well as at the University of Wisconsin. Now both the lead scientists involved had studied under the same molecular biology professor at the University of Pennsylvania, who happens to also be the director of their Institute for Strategic Threat Analysis and Response, a program funded by the program at the DoD, formerly known as MKULTRA at the CIA (it was moved to the DoD sometime during the 1970s).
This very same molecular biology prof co-authored a report to the Bush Administration a few years back, warning of the weaponization of the avian flu virus --- looks like they accomplished it!
During the very same Bush Administration, the story finally surfaced of Anthrax samples (and other biological agents) sent from a lab in Rockville, Maryland, to Iraq’s Saddam Hussein, which he then used against the Kurds and later in the Iraq-Iran War.
Turns out, this lab was originally funded, sometime in the 1960s, under the CIA’s MKULTRA program.
These “coincidences” just never seem to end!
More...
Today, we heard the cutesy-voiced Megan from Colorado Public Radio talk and talk and talk about psycho mass murderer, James Holmes, without conveying any information whatsoever!
She could go on and on, yet we learn nothing substantive about his actual background?
[YAKETY YAK --- DON’T TALK BACK!]
Back in 1968, one heard similar cutesy-voiced types, and still they conveyed no information on the background of the accused assassin of Senator Bobby Kennedy, nor on those incredibly bizarre “witnesses.”
Actual eye witnesses, between the ages of 14 years to over 70 years old, uniformly described a mystery woman as being an olive-skinned brunette, in her late 20s to early 30s, with a slight foreign accent.
The police state they have found this woman, and bring forth a very young blonde, fair-complected college student with her leg in a cast and on crutches?
The perfect I.D. match!!!!!
The other witness, a part-time security guard who was physically situated at exactly where the kill shot originated, worked at Lockheed, possibly as a plumber’s assistant, but this was never actually confirmed?
Curiously, the bizarre blonde “witness” had an aunt and uncle who also worked at the classified area in Lockheed where the security guard worked?
Also, the blonde witness’ father, although employed at a different company (Technicolor Corporation), worked on a classified contract with Lockheed? (We won’t even mention that the presiding judge in the accused assassin’s trial (Sirhan Sirhan) was Herbert Walker --- anyone ever hear of somebody, possibly an effing president, named George Herbert Walker Bush??? Didn’t think so.)
Bizarre witnesses and quite the long string of “coincidences” --- which we never, ever learned of from any of those cutesy-voiced talking bots!
It might be helpful, even pertinent, to know that James Holmes’ father was involved with a company working on a DoD-funded contract developing “cortronic neural networks” including neural interfaces, etc.
It might be helpful, even pertinent, to know if James Holmes was ever involved as a test subject in any neuroscience experiments during either his undergrad or grad schooling.
Only years later did we learn that Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber, was once a test subject under an MKULTRA project while he was at Harvard!
MKULTRA Updates
Awhile back there was a brief mention in the corporate news of the proof of weaponization of the avian flu virus, or H5N1 virus, by scientists at a Dutch academic research center as well as at the University of Wisconsin. Now both the lead scientists involved had studied under the same molecular biology professor at the University of Pennsylvania, who happens to also be the director of their Institute for Strategic Threat Analysis and Response, a program funded by the program at the DoD, formerly known as MKULTRA at the CIA (it was moved to the DoD sometime during the 1970s).
This very same molecular biology prof co-authored a report to the Bush Administration a few years back, warning of the weaponization of the avian flu virus --- looks like they accomplished it!
During the very same Bush Administration, the story finally surfaced of Anthrax samples (and other biological agents) sent from a lab in Rockville, Maryland, to Iraq’s Saddam Hussein, which he then used against the Kurds and later in the Iraq-Iran War.
Turns out, this lab was originally funded, sometime in the 1960s, under the CIA’s MKULTRA program.
These “coincidences” just never seem to end!
11
@10, the Onion had a great piece on the fact that this mourning process is now perfected in the US.
http://www.theonion.com/articles/sadly-n…
http://www.theonion.com/articles/sadly-n…
12
Goat man may simply be habituating the goats to his presence it order to more easily shoot a trophy on opening day of hunting season. Or perhaps he is a stringer for National Geographic or a graduate student in biology collecting data for a thesis.or dissertation. Actually, I don't think we know he is a he, could be a woman.
13
The only Goat Man I've ever heard of used to chase teenagers out of a cemetery near Rolla, MO:
http://www.missourighosts.net/goatmansgr…
http://www.missourighosts.net/goatmansgr…
14
@7++. @4, you are deeply confused.
You say, "I know people have a hard time with this, but others do not lose constitutional and legal rights because they are bad people or held to be abhorrent." But neither does this girl "lose constitutional and legal rights" - like her first amendment rights to speak freely - because the judge says so. I call total bullshit on that. Cite me the Constitutional law that backs you up: that says that a judge, to protect a juvenile pleading guilty, can (without review) remove the first amendment rights of the victim to protect those who are pleading guilty.
Moreover, if you're going to argue that "The whole point of juvenile laws is that we as a society believe children can not be held totally responsible for their actions, which is why children can not enter legal agreements, vote, etc." then you can't possibly believe, simultaneously, that this girl can be held to the bullshit legal agreement placed upon her against her will by this judge. Can't have it both ways.
You say, "I know people have a hard time with this, but others do not lose constitutional and legal rights because they are bad people or held to be abhorrent." But neither does this girl "lose constitutional and legal rights" - like her first amendment rights to speak freely - because the judge says so. I call total bullshit on that. Cite me the Constitutional law that backs you up: that says that a judge, to protect a juvenile pleading guilty, can (without review) remove the first amendment rights of the victim to protect those who are pleading guilty.
Moreover, if you're going to argue that "The whole point of juvenile laws is that we as a society believe children can not be held totally responsible for their actions, which is why children can not enter legal agreements, vote, etc." then you can't possibly believe, simultaneously, that this girl can be held to the bullshit legal agreement placed upon her against her will by this judge. Can't have it both ways.
15
The problem with the teenage rapists story is that the plea deal hadn't been accepted by the judge yet, only agreed to by the prosecutors. If the victim didn't like the deal, she should have made sure the judge knew she wasn't on board and hopefully the judge would have rejected the agreement as being too lenient. Instead, she just pissed the judge off.
She still shouldn't have any sanctions though for the tweet though.
She still shouldn't have any sanctions though for the tweet though.
16
@14: The laws are very different when you are dealing with minors. Gag orders like this are totally common, and no one ever argues that they are unconstitutional. If such orders were not in place, it would be pointless to disallow the media to print the names of juvenile offenders.
The point is that the judge has a duty to do everything in his power to protect every child involved in this case, and forbidding the victim to tell the names of the offenders to other people is essentially how it works. She is not disallowed from discussing the event, she just can not tell the names of the guilty.
Also, the first amendment does not actually grant anyone the right to say anything, anywhere. There are actually quite a few restrictions on it, you know.
The point is that the judge has a duty to do everything in his power to protect every child involved in this case, and forbidding the victim to tell the names of the offenders to other people is essentially how it works. She is not disallowed from discussing the event, she just can not tell the names of the guilty.
Also, the first amendment does not actually grant anyone the right to say anything, anywhere. There are actually quite a few restrictions on it, you know.
17
@16: All very true. I still don't care. As far as I'm concerned this survivor should feel free to shout the names of her attackers from the rooftops if she so chooses. Twitter and FB seem like a good alternative.
18
@16, thanks for answering. You haven't been clear, but I will assume you are defending the principle of these laws in general, and not this one ruling in particular. (If you are defending this one in particular, then you are defending the moral outrage of ordering this girl to *help protect* the boys who *plead guilty to first-degree sexual abuse of her*.)
On the more-general principle of these laws: you stated quite clearly @4 that "others do not lose constitutional and legal rights because they are bad people". I asked you to specifically clarify your point re: the Constitution. You did not. Instead, you made non-specific (as well as snide) statements about restrictions on the first amendment. Sure there are restrictions: which specific one is this? Again, cite me the Constitutional law that backs you up, and then we'll talk.
More to the point, the situation we're describing is not that the "bad people" lose their Constitutional rights, but that the *victim* loses her Constitutional rights. So your original statement remains just baffling, because you still haven't cited what particular Constitutional (or for that matter, legal) right the boys would be losing.
The idea that "no one ever argues that they are unconstitutional" is (unless you can give me the total list of all gag orders in comparable situations - juvenile rape cases - for the past 40 years) a statement of opinion, not fact, and can be dismissed. It's also irrelevant: when a judge orders you not to say something under penalty, then it is a first amendment issue. It might be a losing first amendment issue - again, cite me specific case law to support your apparent position that it's a losing argument - but it's obviously a first amendment issue.
You've also not addressed the glaring double standard in your claims, raised in my second paragraph @14, where *because the boys can't be held accountable for obeying all laws*, it's reasonable to *ask the girl to be accountable for obeying all laws*.
More...
On the more-general principle of these laws: you stated quite clearly @4 that "others do not lose constitutional and legal rights because they are bad people". I asked you to specifically clarify your point re: the Constitution. You did not. Instead, you made non-specific (as well as snide) statements about restrictions on the first amendment. Sure there are restrictions: which specific one is this? Again, cite me the Constitutional law that backs you up, and then we'll talk.
More to the point, the situation we're describing is not that the "bad people" lose their Constitutional rights, but that the *victim* loses her Constitutional rights. So your original statement remains just baffling, because you still haven't cited what particular Constitutional (or for that matter, legal) right the boys would be losing.
The idea that "no one ever argues that they are unconstitutional" is (unless you can give me the total list of all gag orders in comparable situations - juvenile rape cases - for the past 40 years) a statement of opinion, not fact, and can be dismissed. It's also irrelevant: when a judge orders you not to say something under penalty, then it is a first amendment issue. It might be a losing first amendment issue - again, cite me specific case law to support your apparent position that it's a losing argument - but it's obviously a first amendment issue.
You've also not addressed the glaring double standard in your claims, raised in my second paragraph @14, where *because the boys can't be held accountable for obeying all laws*, it's reasonable to *ask the girl to be accountable for obeying all laws*.
19
If I were that girl's mother, I'd be tremendously proud of her right now, and I would back her up every step of the way (which it seems like both her parents are doing).
22
What kind of shitty parent lets an 8 year old stay out riding after dark much less until 10:00PM?
24
@21 and 22 I read that there was a six year-old among the crowd targeted in Aurora, Colorado during the Batman shootings. I imagine it's the same sort of parent.
25
@24
More or less, but not exactly. While both are irresponsible, only one is dangerously, arguably criminally, so.
It's reasonable to expect that if a small child is playing in the street after dark he might get run down. Reckless endangerment comes to mind.
It's not reasonable to expect that anyone would get gunned down in a movie theater at midnight or at noon.
Regardless, responsible parents have 6 year olds in bed long before midnight.
More or less, but not exactly. While both are irresponsible, only one is dangerously, arguably criminally, so.
It's reasonable to expect that if a small child is playing in the street after dark he might get run down. Reckless endangerment comes to mind.
It's not reasonable to expect that anyone would get gunned down in a movie theater at midnight or at noon.
Regardless, responsible parents have 6 year olds in bed long before midnight.
26
@24, 25. No way, midnight showings are exciting experiences and are usually perfectly safe. There's no parenting rules that say your kid has to be in bed by a certain time if there's something awesome going on during a particular night. Kids catch up on sleep much more easily than adults anyway. Victim blaming.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
It's Spring! Who's Ready for Street Harassment? by Cienna Madrid
-
SL Letter of the Day: Insane Demands by Dan Savage
-
SL Letters of the Day: Just Say No to DSGs by Dan Savage
-
New Gun Enthusiast... by Dan Savage
-
Bigot Florist Files Countersuit by Dominic Holden
-
America Doesn't Care About Black People by Charles Mudede
-
"Bus service shouldn't be optional—it should be a right." by Cienna Madrid
-
SL Letter of the Day: Gonna Boil My Laptop After Answering This One by Dan Savage
-
US Military Grants Itself the Power to Police American Streets and "Quell" "Civil Disturbances" by Brendan Kiley
-
Fucking NBA Rejects Kings Move to Seattle by Goldy
Stranger Personals
The Stranger
RSSSeattle Art & Performance Quarterly
A complete guide to Seattle's current art, film, dance, and theater season.
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (26) RSS