News-Record.com

Shepard's murder has become an urban legend and a rallying point for gays to demand special treatment, regardless of the fact that it's been misrepresented as a hate crime.
The Dems/libs can't afford to have the truth thrown up in their face.
I'm embarrassed at the way the N&R has unfairly attacked Rep. Foxx for her "crime" of speaking the truth.

I didn't read our news story as an "attack" on Foxx. It reported what she said and reactions to it.

Perhaps the Shepherd was a "hoax" in the literal definition of the term hoax, but it was vastly misrepresented for the reasons stated by Jaycee.

This revelation is not new. I heard about it years ago, but of course the ideological liberal media played it down as they always do when it goes against their agenda. And Puleeze don't tell me they have no agenda.

Simply look at the way Ms. Krazyfronia was ripped for having the EXACT take on homosexual marriage(?) as does our beloved president. How much flak has taken from the "mainstream" media? NONE!

" Doug Clark said:
I didn't read our news story as an "attack" on Foxx."

Look at the headline, Doug. It literally sneers at her statement and presents it as if she said something wrong.
Why wasn't it headlined, "Rep. Foxx exposes truth in Shepard case" or "Foxx discloses facts on Gay lie?"
I think we know the answer...because it wouldn't support the left-wing stance taken by the N&R on any liberal cause, regardless of the facts.

jaycee,

The headline as written is less slanted that your alternatives. It seems very clear from the reaction that Foxx's comments did irk gays and a lot of other people.

Did she expose the "truth" about the Shepard murder or disclose facts on "gay lie"?

She draws a conclusion based on the ABC News report. Personally, I found the ABC report well-researched and credible, but I can't say for sure that it represents the truth about the case. And if I can't be sure what the truth is, I also can't say absolutely what's a lie. I would be surprised if you can be any more certain than I am.

I also would question Foxx's detractors. What makes them so certain about their conviction?

This sad story appears to have more layers than was initially recognized. Exactly where the truth lies is very difficult to determine.

Doug Clark said:
"The headline as written is less slanted that your alternatives. It seems very clear from the reaction that Foxx's comments did irk gays and a lot of other people."

Ah, I understand now.
The N&R's overwhelming concern is not the facts or the truth, but to avoid irking left-wing special interest groups. Gotcha.

I said nothing of the kind. I said our headline was an accurate statement of what happened. You seem to prefer that we had stated an opinion in the headline, one that fits your point of view.

Come on, jaycee, can you say for certain what the "truth" is in this story?

A headline sets the tone for the story, it gives the reader the impression of what's to follow, it generates a mindset of what the reader will take away from the article.
Subtly "wordsmithing" a headline to cast the "facts" in a particular way is the first step in leading the reader down the path you wish them to follow and to the conclusion you with them to draw.
Sometimes a reader only reads the headline and passes it by. But the imprint on his mind of the intent of the headline will stick with him and he often accepts it as truth whether it is or not.
It's what you guys do.

Doug:

Credible report?

Was Aaron McKinney lying at the trial when he raised the "gay panic defense" at his trial or now when he claims to have been enraged by meth?

Was Kristen Price lying at the trial when she claimed that McKinney and Henderson were looking for a gay man to rob or now when she says that her earlier statement was a lie? Was she lying in an earlier "credible" 20/20 report when she said that Henderson and McKinney wanted to beat Shepard "bad enough to teach him a lesson, not to come on to straight people, and don’t be aggressive about it anymore?"

Was Lyndale Henderson lying to police when he told them that he and McKinney posed as gays to lure Shepard out of the bar?

BTW, saying that Shepard was "killed in the commitment of a robbery" understates the brutality of what happened. Shepard was first pistol-whipped THEN he was robbed then he was beaten again, mutilated, tortured, and left tied to a fence. Those last parts--the additional beating, mutilation, torture, and being left for dead, tied to a fence--are common in robberies, right? Shepard did not die until five days after the beating.

“We know that young man was killed in the commitment of a robbery. It wasn’t because he was gay"

Okay. So the facts that these two intentionally chose a gay bar to find a person to rob, and then later used "gay panic" as a defense for pistol-whipping the guy to death, was all just coincidence or poor courtroom tactics. Rrriiight.

Dave said it better than me. Ignore mine, read his.

Gentlemen, as I've said in going back and forth with jaycee, I'm not claiming to know the whole truth here. There appears to be some contradictory information, and some "facts" that some people seem sure of may not be facts at all.

For example, Steve, you gave me pause with your statement about the "fact" that the killers intentionally chose a gay bar. That's very damning ... except it appears not to be true, according to the original 20/20 report broadcast in 1998.

http://www.davidology.com/matthewshepard/matt-2020.html

There were no gay bars in Laramie then, or anywhere in Wyoming, 20/20 reported. In my quick scan of the Internet, it seems that some later tellings of the story inject the gay bar detail, which then becomes an accepted part of the narrative and strengthens the point some people try to make.

I always accepted the hate crime version of this story, having missed the 2004 20/20 follow-up and never having heard any of its findings repeated anywhere until Foxx's statement. When I read that story, I found the information worth considering -- apparently unlike many whose beliefs about this case remain unchangeable.

Dave, you suggest earlier versions are more credible than this later one. I don't have your certainty. It seems possible to me that a defendant at trial, when his fate is still to be determined, might lie in an effort to present circumstances in a way that might be most favorable to his case. Years later, when he's serving a life sentence with no chance of parole, what's the point of continuing to lie? Why not tell the truth at that time?

No question, the killing of Matthew Shepard was uncommonly brutal and sadistic for a simple robbery. It might be that anti-gay feelings account for that. There could be much more to it, as well, given information uncovered in the second 20/20 report pointing to a possible prior relationship between Shepard and one of the killers. That would alter the storyline that these thugs picked out a gay man at random to torture and kill.

The killing of Eve Carson was uncommonly brutal and sadistic, too, for a robbery. Less so, certainly, but still cruel and cold-blooded. Many heinous crimes are committed for reasons that are beyond our understanding.

I don't mean to defend Foxx. She never should have said a word about Matthew Shepard. But, since she did, it seemed worthwhile to look at the source of information she referenced. I found it worth considering, even if it challenges the widely accepted and fiercely defended version of events.

"There were no gay bars in Laramie then, or anywhere in Wyoming, 20/20 reported."

We're not talking about the Roaring Twenties here Doug, we're talking about the late 1990's. There may not have been any "on record" gay bars in Laramie or the rest of Wyoming at the time, but to claim they didn't exist is pure foolishness.

"When I read that story, I found the information worth considering -- apparently unlike many whose beliefs about this case remain unchangeable."

Okay, most of the sources quoted in that piece are either McKinney & his girlfriend or other citizens of Laramie.

For the former, this complete reversal of declared motive is highly suspect, to say the least.

For the latter, the city and its inhabitants have taken a lot of national media heat surrounding the issue of "gay bashing", and it appears (to me) that they would prefer the slightly less evil aspects of being perceived as having a meth problem. Which is a problem that many urban and rural areas have nationwide, so maybe it's not quite as "embarrassing". I realize I may be reaching somewhat with this, but denial can take many forms.

As far as "prior relationships", even if you work from the assumption that McKinney already knew Shepard, that also means he probably already knew Matthew was gay. And even if you accept the premise that McKinney was bisexual/exhibited homosexual tendencies, the suppression and denial of those tendencies has been known to trigger extreme rage. If that rage is directed at an openly gay person as some form of psychotic self-identity-defense mechanism, it's still a hate crime.

Steve,

You're telling me it's foolishness to say there weren't any gay bars in a town of 27,000 people in one of the country's most conservative states 10 years ago. You've simply decided that there must have been a gay bar in Laramie and, on that basis, you state as a "fact" that the killers purposely went to a gay bar to find their victim. That is supposition built on supposition, and it proves why we can't really be sure of what we think we know.

I haven't said this wasn't a hate crime, and except for the gay bar bit, which I think is erroneous, you may be right that it was. It's a matter of which of the totally contradictory statements by disreputable people you want to believe. It was a heinous crime, no matter what the original motivation. I can believe it's possible McKinney thought there were sufficient anti-gay attitudes in Laramie that his original defense might be most effective. That proved to be wrong. It's harder for me to believe that he later would have tried to concoct another story to improve his image for posterity, as if that might have mattered to him.

Other than her really stupid choice of words, Foxx's biggest mistake was drawing a definite conclusion about the case. She seems to be very narrow-minded about a lot of things. In regard to this case, I think everyone else who is resolutely fixed on a conclusion, and refuses to even consider information that challenges their set notions, is not very open-minded, either.

Okay, you'll probably consider the following anecdote as irrelevant, but:

Back in the mid-1980's when I was still in the Army at Bragg but going through a divorce, I would come home to Burlington on occasion just to see my kids and get away from Fayettenam for a few days.

More often than not, I would stop in at a little bar to have a few brewskies, shoot a few games of pool, and maybe find some female divorcee to, um, "chat with" some. :)

Anyway, one night I complained to the older lady tending bar, "You're killing me here. There's been like two girls come in here all night, and I couldn't get the time of day from either. If I wanted to hang out with a bunch of guys, I could have stayed at the base."

She laughed so hard she had tears coming down. In retrospect, I should have figured it out on my own, but I'm not the shiniest spoon in the drawer sometimes.

I realize Burlington is larger and might be slightly more progressive than Laramie, but it ain't no haven of acceptance, either.

Steve, that's a great story.

But here's the problem:

You're assuming there was a gay bar in Laramie.

You're further assuming the Fireside Lounge, where Matthew Shepard was, was that gay bar.

You're assuming once again the killers chose to visit the Fireside Lounge because it was a gay bar.

Then you're calling all those assumptions "facts" and building your view on this incident, at least in part, on that foundation of supposed facts.

That strikes me as much like expecting to find a willing woman in a bar filled with gay men.

Not to say it can't happen, but it's not logical.

Doug, even if you use this extremely conservative estimate of the % of the male population that is gay:

http://www.familyresearchinst.org/2009/02/the-numbers-game-what-percentage-of-the-population-is-gay/

that would mean around 270 gay men in or around Laramie. I think we can safely assume that a percentage of them will cluster in a public place like a bar, and one where they feel reasonably safe. Considering that Matthew Shepard was in the Fireside Lounge that night, it's not unreasonable to assume that the Fireside Lounge is at least one of the places gay men might cluster.

I guess maybe my use of the word "facts" was too strong and maybe wrong, but my assumptions aren't nearly as unlikely as "no gay bars in Wyoming". Come on.

OK, Steve, but I think you've expanded the definition of "gay bar." I thought you meant a bar that catered almost exclusively to gay people. Instead, you're talking about one where you're likely to find some gay people. In that case, there are a lot of gay bars in all cities.