By Nicholas Stix
Not only did the media not want to describe Milton’s killer (not to be confused with a “suspect”), but black DC Detective Det. (Jenelle?) Howard didn’t want to, either. Chief Cathy Lanier had to bend over and tell her to give the description. And while Det. Howard asked the public to call her with information, she never gave out a telephone number. Granted, she was nervous, but she still didn’t seem anxious to do her job.
Meanwhile, the media have refused to report on the perp’s full description. This censorship is due to black “journalists,” like the vic, and their racially segregated organization, the National Association of Black Journalists.
Chief Lanier was plenty disturbing, as well.
She said the vic was in the “wrong place, wrong time,” and was “certainly not the intended victim.”
No one should ever speak of a crime victim as having been in the “wrong place at the wrong time.” That suggests that what happened wasn’t a crime. Such speech should be limited to victims of freak accidents and natural catastrophes, which are not crimes.
Charnice Milton was murdered. She was in the right place at the right time—transferring from one bus to another, on her way home from work.
Chief Lanier emphasized that Milton was “certainly not the intended victim,” and then had to waffle, since that wasn’t helpful. Besides which, Milton was the intended victim—not of the first killer, but of the second. The shooter intended to kill the second gang-banger, but the latter grabbed Charnice Milton, fully intending for her to get shot in his stead. Which she was.
Chief Lanier also called the crime “random,” which it most certainly was not. One felon attempted to murder another felon, who grabbed Charnice Milton, and used her as a human shield. That means there were two murderers, and Chief Lanier should have decried the heinous nature of the crime, rather than indulging in pc clichés. Nowhere did I hear her vilify Milton’s killers. Lanier talked like a black woman, rather than a lawman, and that, too, was no accident.
The “human shield” aspect is a throwback to the 1980s. During the crack wars, drug slingers in New York City routinely grabbed little children, and even babies, using them as human shields in turf wars, and a number of those children and babies were shot.
I’m not suggesting that America’s cities are in danger of sliding back to the bad old days of the crack wars; they’ve long been back there. I don’t know when the slide began, because urban police have been using Fakestats since at least the mid-1990s.
When violent crime was supposedly at its lowest, in cities like New York, the authorities assured us that crime was at its lowest ebb since 1964. Back in 1964, however, New York City residents considered the conditions to be Hell on Earth, and were fleeing the city.
Whenever it was things slid back, we’ve been there since at least the night of November 4, 2008.
More at VDARE.
No comments:
Post a Comment