PayPal

Sunday, August 07, 2016

Jesse Matthews, the Media, and the “Great Black Hope” of Serial Killers

 

[Previously, at WEJB/NSU:

“Why are the Media Obsessed with Missing and Victimized White Girls, and Why Do They Pay so Little Attention to Black Crime Victims?”]
 

By Jerry PDX

There are exceptions to the formula of "obsessing over white girls," "ignoring black killers," and "paying little attention to black crime victims," though there are usually reasons why things don't always follow the script laid out by our PC-obsessed media culture.

Jesse Matthews, the murderer of Hannah Graham, received media attention even after it was revealed he was a black man. However, that is because it started out as a missing persons case that went national, the search for Hannah alone became a major story, and it was already too ubiquitous to deep-six after Matthews was apprehended, though I do think the media attention became somewhat muted and dwindled away faster than if the perp had been a "great white defendant." Also, the fact that Jesse Matthews was a serial killer tied in with numerous disappearances of other women was completely ignored by the mainstream news. If he had been white that never would have happened.

I stumbled onto an excellent timeline of Matthews history of rape and murder. It's from a TV station local to the crime: WTVR.

Don't expect it to be picked up by a mainstream national news service though, the big-time news players won't touch that aspect of the story.

We can go a little farther back to find another exception that doesn't prove the rule. Wayne Williams is another example. He's the only black serial killer in US history to receive major news coverage, though subsequent to his arrest, and the explosion in black serial killers afterward, the media has maintained what amounts to a news blackout of black serial killers.

No, for any of you out there who will say black serial killers have gotten news stories, what I'm saying is that the news gives them token attention only, downplaying and burying their stories in such a way that maintains the false narrative that only white men are serial killers.

Back to Mr. Williams, in his case there was a great deal of media hysteria over murdered children in Atlanta well before a black man was identified as the killer. The ball was already rolling, as it were, and couldn't be easily corked back up, though the false rumors of the KKK being involved or the assumption it had to be a "white man" fed the hysteria. Ultimately though, because of the hysteria, the media found itself forced to expose Wayne Williams as the "first and only black serial killer in the US." He became the "Great Black Hope" of serial killers, never mind there have been many others before and after, and quite a few far more prolific than him.

Here is the timeline of Jesse Matthews’ depraved rampage. He did seem to prefer white women but was equal opportunity, as long as they were young and pretty, that is. Too bad for the media he was black, they would have loved to fetishize him as a serial killing celeb.

N.S. According to Justin Lee Cottrell, in Rise of the Black Serial Killer: Documenting a Startling Trend (2012), over 80% of serial killers since 1980 have been black men.

Black Peoria has worked up a partial list of black serial killers in America.

As for Wayne Williams, I fell for the “Wayne-Williams-was-framed” hype several years ago, until I saw a 2010 CNN special hosted by, of all people, Soledad O'Brien.

O’Brien had an FBI polygraph pro go to prison to test Williams, who was very calm and composed … until the tests began. The tester asked Williams if he had murdered Nathaniel Cater, 27 (for whose murder he was convicted), and if he had thrown Cater’s body into the Chatahoochee River.

Williams answered “No” to both questions, and the polygraph gauged him as being dishonest in both cases. So, the polygraph man tested him again. Same result. So, Wayne Williams underwent, and failed, a third polygraph test. Three tests, three failures.

Meanwhile, in an interview with Soledad O'Brien, Williams came off as having delusions of grandeur. He asserted that he had been a CIA-trained assassin.

When Maynard Holbrook Jackson, Jr. was elected as Atlanta’s first black mayor, in 1973, Atlanta collapsed in violent crime and corruption, like every other black-run city. Black supremacists took and destroyed the police department, rescinding promotions of white cops, and giving incompetent blacks cops the answers to the sergeant’s exam. The white cops fled to nearby counties.

The murder rate exploded, as it always does when there are large proportions of blacks in a jurisdiction, and takeover of the Atlanta PD and prosecutor’s office meant that black killers and other criminals were now in a felon’s paradise. Murders did not get solved, and ever lower proportions of felons landed in prison, and justice was not meted out to them.

When thirty-odd kids, teenagers, and 20-somethings started turning up dead in 1979-1981, black Atlanta authorities acted the same way as black supremacist civilians: They blamed the “white devil.” One white man was stalking Atlanta’s black neighborhoods, and was responsible for all the murders. Never mind that, as white federal investigators learned, a white man couldn’t drive through said neighborhoods during daylight, without racist blacks jumping off from their porches, and staring him down.

Once Wayne Williams was arrested, charged, and convicted in two of the murders, the authorities declared that they had gotten the killer responsible for all of the murders. Did they explain how they could have been so wrong with their “white devil” story? Not at all. And as Chet Dettlinger and Jeff Prugh showed in their book, The List, the murders continued.

The “Wayne-Williams-killed-them-all” story was as baseless as the “white-devil-killed-them-all” story. Problems:

1: Blacks with any kind of freedom = massive violent crime;

2. Blacks in control of policing and prosecution means that professionalism and respect for law in those functions ends, and they become matters of complete caprice;

3. Meanwhile, as the Countenance Blogmeister pointed out (via David in TN), black serial killers benefited from the racial fairy tale propagated by the MSM and opportunistic lawmen like FBI profiler Robert K. Ressler, whereby virtually all serial killers were white men, and none were black. So, police would avoid hunting for black serial killers. Black serial killers doubly benefited, as political pressure by civil rights activists got them to pull back from black neighborhoods, thereby giving black cut-throats free rein—which was the point;

4. As time went on, the press intimidated whites out of calling police to report strange black men lurking about, or even committing crimes, by making it clear that it would destroy their lives (recall the Henry Gates Hoax); and

5. Due to diversity propaganda, white parents were cowed out of warning their daughters to avoid black men (Hannah Graham, et al.).

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

"though the false rumors of the KKK being involved or the assumption it had to be a 'white man' fed the hysteria."


Two things about this:

1. When the FBI became involved they sent agents [probably armed] cruising through the negro neighborhoods just to see what would happen. They were spotted an something negative happened in all cases. They were cursed, had something thrown at their car, called a name, threatened, panhandlers approached them, etc. So early in the case it was ruled out that a white man was the culprit. A white has not chance to enter a colored are and abduct so many colored kids.

2. Those negroes that said it was a KKK initiation were guilty of mirror imaging?

That is what would do [kill white] as part of a ritual if the roles were reversed.

You understand the mental mind set.

Anonymous said...

jerry pdx
There are people, mostly black, that believe Wayne Williams is innocent. Chet Dettlinger, a white man, believes Williams is innocent and has written a book about it. I haven't read it but have read some summaries online. It actually sounds somewhat credible on the surface. I have a problem with what I've read though. Mainly it's that you could construct a similar sounding argument regarding most any mobile serial killer. Problem with serial killers is that they kill people they have no connection with, leave little evidence and the only eyewitnesses are usually dead. Prosecutors have to piece together cases based on sketchy circumstantial evidence and the coincidence of somebody being in the proximity of so many murders. Exceptions are the kind that bury the bodies in their homes but I'm talking about mobile ones who kill then move on to another town or state, or work in a large populous city or vast geographic area.

There is a contention that Wayne Williams was blamed for some murders he couldn't have anything to do with and I think that is very possibly true, that does not mean he is not guilty of other murders though. Ted Bundy and Gary Ridgeway have some murders assigned to them that they likely didn't commit either but that doesn't mean they aren't serial killers either.

So yes, the evidence against Williams can be considered sketchy, it might not hold up to a strong critical analysis, but that's no different than most any other serial killer case. The only physical evidence they had against Bundy was bite mark evidence, which is notoriously unreliable. Only eyewitness evidence was one surviving witness who barely saw him and was of questionable credibility. IMHO the case against Bundy was even weaker than the case against Williams. Difference is that Williams is black which means sketchy evidence indicates that he is a railroaded black man. Virtually the same evidence against white serial killer like Bundy "be PROOF POSITIVE he be guilty as sin".

Difference between me and those racists is that I do think Bundy and Ridgeway are guilty, I don't desperately want them to be innocent because they are white.

Anonymous said...

It was thought some of those "children" killed were murdered by the parents to collect insurance money.

Anonymous said...

"So yes, the evidence against Williams can be considered sketchy, it might not hold up to a strong critical analysis, but that's no different than most any other serial killer case."

Carpet fragments were found on some of the bodies of those murdered that matched the carpeting as found in the home of Wayne. Also dog hairs that matched the breed of dog as owned by Wayne.

Anonymous said...

jerry pdx

to Anonymous
Yes, the carpet evidence and dog hair evidence was instrumental in his conviction but the defense claimed it was bogus, as all defenses would, depends on who you believe I guess. There can be questions surrounding the validity of fiber evidence but it was stronger evidence than the Bundy bite mark evidence, which is why I think the forensic case against him was actually weaker.

Ultimately, dna testing has been done on hairs found on one of the kids that was murdered, it was a match up to a 98% probability as being Williams hair. Modern dna testing has pretty much proven Wayne Williams is guilty.

Beverly Prather said...

I can explain this from a victims perspective. ITS ABOUT THE GREEN. I met this man several times thru the years, it was always connected to lawsuit money. This man was reported to VSP , yet they let him rape and murder white women for more than 15 years after that. Police have no problem abusing victims for lawsuit money, (in our case they have been doing it for years) and it would have been very easy to put one set of handcuffs on Matthews, to save the lives of those girls (since the police were all over the lawsuit money in connection to the case)

They were still "litigating" lawsuit money off his prior victims, while buzzards ate the dead body of Hanna Graham.

Stop the racial BS..............this is ABOUT THE GREEN......(no man should lose his daughter, while the courts litigate the cash)