See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Comments

1. #1
   On October 30th, 2007 at 4:17 pm, JHSII said:

   It will remain unsolved as long as the real racists can use it as a propaganda tool.

2. #2
   On October 30th, 2007 at 4:19 pm, sherlock said:

   Who has the tape and what statements have they made concerning what it show?

3. #3
   On October 30th, 2007 at 4:29 pm, chapoutier said:

   JHSII,

   I hope that you are not implying that New York’s Finest are in the liberals’ back pocket.

4. #4
   On October 30th, 2007 at 4:30 pm, Jaded said:

   I hope that you continue to stay on this “made up” story and do not let the school attempt to sweep it under the covers……like TNR attempted with their lies.

5. #5
   On October 30th, 2007 at 4:40 pm, Wade said:

   We have heard the end of this. The Peoples Republic Columbia University will never make those tapes available.

6. #6
   On October 30th, 2007 at 5:00 pm, tony the tiger said:

   Too bad their info security is better than the Pentagon, Congress and the Whitehouse… would’ve been on Utube by now if they were the “controlling authority”.

7. #7
   On October 30th, 2007 at 5:01 pm, Master Shake said:

   I guess they couldn’t identify the perp merely from the brief glimpse of hand that appeared as the door was opened, the noose was hung, and the door closed again….

8. #8
   On October 30th, 2007 at 5:36 pm, LifeTrek said:

   Thank you for asking about this – I have been wondering for the last week or so what the story was and why we haven’t heard what was on the tape. Should be fairly simple to make an ID shouldn’t it?
   DKK

9. #9
   On October 30th, 2007 at 5:46 pm, ShoreMark said:

   I guess they couldn’t identify the perp merely from the brief glimpse of hand that appeared as the door was opened, the noose was hung, and the door closed again….

   Very good Master Shake, very good

10. #10
    On October 30th, 2007 at 6:09 pm, blues said:

    Don’t the geniuses at Columbia realize that by not releasing the tape they are reinforcing the belief that incident was a hoax?
    Curious? Considering the principals-No,not really.

11. #11
    On October 30th, 2007 at 6:10 pm, AlohaGuy said:

    Since the police have them, would a freedom of information act request shake them loose?

12. #12
    On October 30th, 2007 at 6:22 pm, TMoney said:

    My money is on the ‘scam/hoax’ horse.

13. #13
    On October 30th, 2007 at 6:36 pm, JammieWearingFool said:

    Been wondering myself what happened to this case.

    The latest bias incident at Columbia went mostly unnoticed.

14. #14
    On October 30th, 2007 at 7:03 pm, Jim M. said:

    The silence is deafening, particularly from the alleged victim.

    If law enforcement was delaying this long in a situation where there was an actual hate crime, they would be excoriated. The victim, Al and Jesse would be staging their reenactment as the villagers in an old Frankenstein movie, complete with torches and pitchforks, closing in on the police headquarters.

    It is the lack of any follow up or well orchestrated race baiting in this situation that leads me to believe there was no crime. You can also bet there was something on those tapes turned over to the police that would lead a reasonable person to identify a suspect in the case. But we likely will never see the tapes.

    The tapes are evidence, and the property of Columbia. They cannot be released to the public in the absence of a public prosecution or with the permission of the University. It seems likely that Columbia saw something on those tapes which they did not want the public to see, which is why they delayed giving them up. Now that the police have them, the question becomes whether or not a crime was committed.

    I do not recall the victim filing a police report. The police responded to a report of a noose on a door. If Columbia made that report, Columbia can also refuse to prosecute. If there is no “victim”, there is no crime. Thus, the tapes will be returned to the University and the case will be dropped.

    While some may ask whether a crime was committed if this was a set up by the victim or someone close to the victim, I seriously doubt it is a crime in New York to hang a noose on the door of your own office. And if the alleged victim never filed a report nor gave a sworn statement to the authorities, there is little chance of any criminal prosecution.

    I may turn out to be wrong, but I find it very strange that there has been no push to get this resolved from the usual suspects.

15. #15
    On October 30th, 2007 at 7:32 pm, JammieWearingFool said:

    Jim M., some very valid points. As I noted yesterday, the school paper devoted four paragraphs to the most recent bias incident, but curiously does not seem to have any interest pursuing the noose incident, which three weeks ago garnered worldwide coverage.

    That speaks volumes.

16. #16
    On October 30th, 2007 at 8:34 pm, JHSII said:

    #3 chapoutier said:

    JHSII,

    I hope that you are not implying that New York’s Finest are in the liberals’ back pocket.

    No, not in the slightest. I’m saying that no matter how good New York’s Finest are, if they can’t get the cooperation of the real racists then there’s little they can do because the real racists can and will block them.

17. #17
    On October 30th, 2007 at 9:14 pm, Buck I said:

    Well.

    As a black man, I can say that the last thing I would do if somebody put a noose on my office door is cry to the media. I wasn’t raised to be a victim, and I wouldn’t want the perpetrator to get the satisfaction of getting national attention. I would want it handled internally, or personally(if it’s a threat, “want some, come get some”). As an adult, I wouldn’t want too much spotlight on the situation. Children are different…protection concerns and teaching tools.

    We’ll see how this turns out. If it’s a hoax, it’s disgusting and a setback. If it’s real, I hope MM posts what happen.
    Conjecture is silly and glib. See Bill O’Reilly on Hornbeck.(Kid was happy to be away from school, blah, blah…..B.S.)

18. #18
    On October 30th, 2007 at 9:58 pm, corona said:

    A coverup in academia?

    I’m shocked, shocked!

19. #19
    On October 30th, 2007 at 10:38 pm, Jim M. said:

    Conjecture is silly and glib. See Bill O’Reilly on Hornbeck.(Kid was happy to be away from school, blah, blah…..B.S.)

    I do not believe offering a reasoned opinion on an issue based on available facts, or lack thereof, is silly and glib.

    At this point in the investigation, the police have reviewed the tapes, conducted interviews, and obtained at least preliminary DNA information from the tests they conducted early on.

    In my view blind conjecture would be where you did not bother to assess all the pertinent facts or made an assumption based on a lack of factual information to support the premises that build your assumption. Jesse and Al have made a career our of that.

    Conjecture certainly was enough to put the Duke rape case front and center for months. Conjecture was enough to get the world press focused on a little town called Jena. Now that the facts are out on the former and coming out on the latter, both matters seem to have been driven by nothing more than conjecture.

    This case is different. It is the silence here that raises issues, particularly after the passage of a reasonable amount of time. Now, if we stick to the classic definition of conjecture, the discussion here probably meets that definition. But the process of conjecture is how crimes get solved, how theories in science are developed, and is part and parcel as to how the human mind works in exercising the faculty of common sense.

    If someone did hang a noose on the professors door, they should and will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. However, if this turns out to be a hoax or publicity stunt, to me that is more than a “setback”, and the perpetrators involved should likewise be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

20. #20
    On October 30th, 2007 at 10:59 pm, Buck I said:

    I don’t know Jim. Duke involved a witness/victim lie.
    Jena has involved conflicting eyewitness accounts, and different versions of the “truth”
    Here there’s nothing, but a rope on a door. The A.V. is the only witness, and she has been cleared thus far of any wrong doing. Some are inclined to be cynical and presume hoax. I’d rather wait to see how this plays out. I have no idea what the Columbia or NYPD S.O.P is for stuff like this. I’m in a wait and see mode. Some of you may be eating crow, and others may be able to to say “told ya so”. I’d rather check to see how it plays out.

    I’ll piggyback your point on any hoax should also be prosecuted to the fullest extent possible.

21. #21
    On October 30th, 2007 at 11:17 pm, Jim M. said:

    Buck

    Fair enough. As far as Columbia goes, at this point we are still presented with all the possibilities that existed at the very beginning of this case. And in a round about way, I believe I made that point.

    And if you think about it, in a way we do have a “witness” here – the video tapes.

    But it is strange that this disappeared from the mainstream just as quickly as it appeared. I think from our collective experience, something like this never seems to quiet down. Maybe we need to add extraterrestial interference to our list of possibilities here, since this is pretty unique.

    I’ll move from conjecture to pure speculation here, and offer that I do not believe an ivy league professor would pull a stunt like this. That is not saying they don’t do stupid things. After all, most of them ARE democrats.

22. #22
    On October 30th, 2007 at 11:21 pm, AlturaCt said:

    Gee, another for the ever growing “hoax” list?

23. #23
    On October 30th, 2007 at 11:57 pm, BrianNY said:

    #3 said:

    JHSII,
    I hope that you are not implying that New York’s Finest are in the liberals’ back pocket.

    Actually, the NYPD have been forced to make some very poor decisions by liberal politicians in the past.

    A side note – in the ‘Crown Heights Riot’ story that I linked to above, a 1991 Al Sharpton is quoted as calling then Mayor David Dinkins an “Uncle Tom” and “that n#gg#r whore turning tricks in City Hall.” Does anybody remember that?

    Umm, now what was it again that Sharpton was so outraged with Imus about…that he strong armed the man out of a job?

24. #24
    On October 31st, 2007 at 12:02 am, Etan said:

    On October 30th, 2007 at 9:14 pm, Buck I said:

    As a black man, I can say that the last thing I would do if somebody put a noose on my office door is cry to the media.

    Buck, I’m impressed by your integrity on not making this an issue and handling his quietly as a black man. I hope other blacks step up as you do and keep instances like this out of the media by not publicly crying about it.

    Victims, crybabies…never have impressed me much.

25. #25
    On October 31st, 2007 at 1:27 am, palladin said:

    Im suspicious that any video tapes (for the time in question) released will only show people with higher melanin content.

26. #26
    On October 31st, 2007 at 9:48 am, Eric_CharlotteNC said:

    Don’t the geniuses at Columbia realize that by not releasing the tape they are reinforcing the belief that incident was a hoax?

    Yes, but it’s only a belief if they don’t admit it. This is a page out of the Clinton playbook!

27. #27
    On October 31st, 2007 at 10:10 am, pressto said:

    I smell a cover up.

    First the University refused to release the security tapes to the police and then they finally backed down and did so. Since then not a single report about what the tapes showed and who the suspects could be.

28. #28
    On October 31st, 2007 at 2:48 pm, dmartin said:

    figures