Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I may be misunderstanding your intent, and if so I apologize, but when you make statements about shielding the wife from blame, and that she needs to come clean, it really creates the impression that you feel she has some moral culpability.
Keep in mind that the context of my comments was a press conference held by the suspect's wife and lawyers, where reporters are asking questions. The lawyers and wife maintained that this was simply a parking dispute gone wrong, which led me to wonder whether that simplistic explanation would face further scrutiny from the press.
I still don't understand why the wife didn't just say that her husband had anger issues, but that she never thought he would physically harm anybody, let alone kill them? While opening the door slightly to new questions, it would ratchet down the public tension quite a bit IMO.
It is known this guy didn't like religion and didn't like seeing it being practiced. Walking down the street one can not identify who is from which religion purely on looks, unless they are nun or priest except for Muslim females who wear hijab. So this guy might have hated all his neighbor & probably would have attacked them had they be walking around in their religious gear all the time but we know most people don't & even those who wear cross around their neck, its not that visual or obvious. But he saw these couple, the women wearing hijab & the sister wearing hijab, and they are walking/talking advertisement (reminder) of Islam. This is probably why the attacker went overboard with this couple instead of any other neighbor.
Had their religious not been so obvious to recognize, his hate would not have gone out of hand.
Or a Jewish man wearing a yarmulke or a Sikh man wearing a turban (and I know I'm missing a few additional references).
Quote:
Originally Posted by michgc
Well, I was being a bit facetious. Many people jumped down the throat of the media for describing them as Muslim yet no one jumped down their throat for any other descriptive term the media used, namely student. I believe this is because, being a student is for the most part a neutral term and no one really cared if the media used that term to describe them.
My point was that if the media cannot use a descriptive term like their religion because some believe that means the media is implying that they were killed because of it, should the media be allowed to use any descriptive terms in their headlines at all or do those descriptive terms also mean the media is leading the public to think that is why they were killed (i.e. for being students) Anyway, this is a bit off-topic, just an observation.
The media will use any term or description that generates readership or mouse clicks. During recent incidents involving Israel and Palestine, national media outlets would often interchange "Israeli" and "Jew" as if though it was the same thing. I was often stunned by how a casual reader could infer from many such articles that it wasn't about Israel conducting military operations against a terrorist organization but rather Jews killing Muslims. Imagine how it would read to describe our military actions in Iraq and Afghanistan as a "mostly Christian military force attacking Muslim extremists in their own countries".
We are all puppets on strings being toyed with by the media.
If my spouse just committed a triple murder, I don't think I'd be thinking or communicating very clearly at a press conference.
I agree, and I wouldn't be surprised if somebody told her after the press conference that she needed to get her own legal representation, and not be directed by her husband's lawyers.
And just to be 100% clear, I'm not suggesting that she is guilty of anything, just that her husband's lawyers are looking out for his interests, and not necessarily hers.
I agree, and I wouldn't be surprised if somebody told her after the press conference that she needed to get her own legal representation, and not be directed by her husband's lawyers.
And just to be 100% clear, I'm not suggesting that she is guilty of anything, just that her husband's lawyers are looking out for his interests, and not necessarily hers.
I think you are right. I also think she was probably influenced by Law Enforcement. Regardless of what turns out to be the REAL motives, I think they are (justifyably) scared to death that this will blow up into a huge issue about hate crimes and such. Even if the motivations are as stated, a parking disagreement, the potential for bad things to happen are big. Potentially an international kind of "big".
I understand why people are over-analyzing this. I'm not sure where I stand, and am trying to keep an open mind for now.
It is known this guy didn't like religion and didn't like seeing it being practiced. Walking down the street one can not identify who is from which religion purely on looks, unless they are nun or priest except for Muslim females who wear hijab. So this guy might have hated all his neighbor & probably would have attacked them had they be walking around in their religious gear all the time but we know most people don't & even those who wear cross around their neck, its not that visual or obvious. But he saw these couple, the women wearing hijab & the sister wearing hijab, and they are walking/talking advertisement (reminder) of Islam. This is probably why the attacker went overboard with this couple instead of any other neighbor.
Had their religious not been so obvious to recognize, his hate would not have gone out of hand.
Or, maybe they just parked in his space more often than his other neighbors.
Nobody knows but him, really.
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
If my spouse just committed a triple murder, I don't think I'd be thinking or communicating very clearly at a press conference.
Thank you. And she probably doesn't really like him much anyway... she'd already filed for a divorce, so they were having problems... which may also have contributed to this guy's bad mood.
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
Thank you. And she probably doesn't really like him much anyway... she'd already filed for a divorce, so they were having problems... which may also have contributed to this guy's bad mood.
Didn't she file for divorce yesterday after the press conference?
Didn't she file for divorce yesterday after the press conference?
The article I read seemed to imply that she'd already filed before that, but even if she didn't, it's likely they were having pretty major marital problems, no?
One doesn't just file divorce same day after one's spouse that one got along with fine otherwise commits a crime. I would think there would at least be a separation of some sort.
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
I may be wrong - but NC has a 1 year separation waiting period for divorce. You don't "file" typically until the separation period has elapsed.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
