Cleared by DNA

The Associated Press/Yahoo recently published an article on Cornelius Dupree, freed from prison after 30 years.

DALLAS – A Texas man had his conviction overturned Tuesday for a rape and robbery he didn’t commit after serving 30 years in prison, more time than any other inmate subsequently exonerated by DNA evidence in his state.

Cornelius Dupree Jr., 51, was formally cleared of the aggravated robbery with a deadly weapon conviction that had kept him behind bars from December 1979 until July of 2010. He served 30 years of his 75-year sentence before making parole in July. About a week later, DNA test results came back proving his innocence.

The media loves it when a black man is proven innocent through DNA.  It is their feeble answer to “hate facts” such as black men rape white women at alarming rates, while white men rarely rape black women.  When such stories make the headlines, it is as if to say that black men do not actually commit that much crime; rather, they are imprisoned for crimes they did not commit due to our “racist justice system”.

It is a good thing when a falsely imprisoned person is finally set free – and if Dupree, being a good man who got railroaded, threw a party at his release, I would be there celebrating with everybody else.  But it is not enough for the MSM to simply report good new.  No, they must embellish it with deceptions.

The initial paragraph tells us he was convicted of “rape and robbery”.  The reader must continue reading through paragraph 8 to learn that:

Dupree was charged in 1979 with raping and robbing a 26-year-old woman. He was sentenced a year later to 75 years in prison for aggravated robbery. He was never tried on the rape charge.

It would seem to me that if he was never tried for rape, then there could never have been a conviction for rape.  Or am I missing something?  But of course I am!  He was convicted for rape in the first paragraph, which everybody reads, but he was not tried for rape in the eighth paragraph, which few people read.  Now it all makes sense.  Silly me.

The other deception is far more subtle.  By bombarding readers with photos of the innocent black man, the message being sent is “the guilty party was not a black man”.  Instead, this is yet one more example of discrimination against black men.  But, if we read on to paragraph 12, we learn that…

Dupree and Massingill were arrested in December because they looked similar to two suspects being sought in another sexual assault and robbery. The 26-year-old woman picked both men out of a photo array, but her male companion did not identify either defendant in the same photo array.

So the woman, being white, confused one black man with another.  It is a fact that people of one race have difficulties distinguishing between people of another race unless they spend a lot of time with the other race.  So what actually happened was that the guilty black man remained on the lose, while an innocent black man was locked up.  But this scenario does not advance the cause of “black victimhood” – so it is only mentioned in paragraph 12, which most people never read.

Another factor to consider is that police, and prosecutors, find it much easier to pin the blame on people who already have criminal records.   Though I cannot prove it, I am fairly certain that most of those cleared by DNA evidence were “criminal types” before their false convictions.  Even if they were not guilty of the specific crime in question, the odds are they were guilty of other crimes.  Some of those other crimes were known to the powers that be, and so the new crimes (which they did not actually commit) were also attributed to them.  I am not saying that they deserved being locked up for crimes they did not commit, only that many of them were probably not upstanding citizens to begin with.  The public would have less sympathy for career criminals who get away with various crimes, but get falsely convicted for something else.  This would not make a good news story, so it would be omitted.

The media cannot honestly use DNA as a weapon in their war against supposed white racism.  The best they can do is take tidbits of unrelated good news, such as the above, and dress it up as if it’s a case against white racism.  By spicing it up, and presenting it a certain way, they are able to transform the story (in a subliminal way) into something it is not.

About jewamongyou

I am a paleolibertarian Jew who is also a race-realist. My opinions are often out of the mainstream and often considered "odd" but are they incorrect? Feel free to set me right if you believe so!
This entry was posted in examples of propaganda. Bookmark the permalink.

20 Responses to Cleared by DNA

  1. Your argument sounds good, but ….

    I did not really see anyone playing the race card in the yahoo news you linked to.

    There was no mention of prior crimes or convictions either, in the report. Of course, one could research the falsely accused’s past to see if there is any substance to it.

    False convictions for rape are very common, see http://falserapesociety.blogspot.com/

    • jewamongyou says:

      They frequently avoid mentioning race explicitly, but it is understood that way nevertheless. Subliminal messages only work when they are not obvious. There has always been a racial undercurrent to the issue of DNA exoneration. The Innocence Project, which is an organization working to clear people wrongly convicted, states:

      “More than 70% are people of color (61% African American, 8% Latino and 1% Asian), and about 30% are white.”

      So it is easy to understand why the leftist establishment embraces this mission within the context of “racial justice” – especially when you consider that mainstream orthodoxy believes that the racial disparity in convictions is due to white racism and not actual higher crime rates by blacks.

      • Steph says:

        Hmm…wouldn’t the more obvious explanation for such statistics and reporting be that they’re based on facts? Not that the liberal media is trying to poison everyone against whites? Not mentioning that the true culprit was black was not some sneaky move – it would have been weirder to insert, “THE CULPRIT WAS ALSO A BLACK MAN” in paragraph one. Contrary to what you seem to believe, the race of the true criminal is entirely besides the point.

        Interesting read: http://nplusonemag.com/causcasian-nation

  2. Pingback: Mainstream media and DNA evidence. | destructure

    • jewamongyou says:

      Good luck on your new blog (Fred?).

      • fred says:

        Thanks! It’s new so there’s not much there yet. But I intend to deconstruct a different social justice myth every couple of weeks. And I’ll either write an editorial or link one every few days so it doesn’t seem so long in between. I have a few pending but yours seemed like a really good one to start with.

  3. countenance says:

    One of the great untold stories about DNA evidence is that it actually solves a lot more heretofore cold case rapes and murders than it does exonerate falsely convicted people.

    I fully expect the author of this narrative to be rapped for implying that “they all look alike.”

    As an aside, many libertarians are concerned about the generous state authority to collect DNA evidence from those whose involvement with the CJ system is only tangential. However, I think it might help the libertarian cause in the future by preventing tragedies like these. I can’t help but think Mr. Dupree wishes that DNA technology was good enough 30 years ago and that the authorities had his on file for some relatively innocent pretext.

  4. Hail says:

    “it is as if to say that black men do not actually commit that much crime”

    You’ll recall that Michael Moore made this argument, with a wink and a nod, in “Bowling For Columbine”.

    High Priest of Diversity Tim Wise made the argument, totally explicitly, in his award-winning 1998 essay. “Whites are actually far more dangerous than blacks” is what it reduces to. It’s worth a read for its Zeitgeist value alone.

  5. Bay Area Guy says:

    The media also relishes in stories about white women who falsely accuse blacks of harming them.

    (the whole “acid hoax” comes to mind)

    This allows them to say, “see, blacks don’t commit many crimes, particularly against white people. They’re just framed by wicked racists!”

    • Steph says:

      Do you know why the media “relishes” these stories? It’s because the media reports stories that are shocking. The fact that white women falsely accuse black men of harming them is disgusting. The fact that the media appears to be the target of your outrage rather than the sickos generating the stories – well, it makes my stomach churn.

  6. jewamongyou says:

    Re: Steph, funny you bring this up; I was just pondering another post that deals more specifically with this topic. Look for it in the near future. It will be titled something like “Illusive black neutrality in the media”.

  7. kman says:

    It’s common for rapists to experience total or partial impotence during the rape. It’s very common for them not to ejaculate. Finding DNA other than the suspects does not proove his innocence. It may well mean only that the victim was sexually active. Investigators are supposed to account for things like that but some women may have secrets to keep. I’m betting that the innocence project has put some guilty rapists on the street.

    • Steph says:

      Not when the DNA matches the real rapist’s. You seem more disturbed by the “harm” that the Innocence Project causes to society than you are relieved that a number of innocent people are set free after years of imprisonment. That is disturbing, as is your spelling of “prove.”

  8. TabuLa Raza says:

    Steph-

    Are you Stephanie Smith?

  9. Ryan says:

    Steph seems like another wacko liberal who sees the tree and not the forest.

    • jewamongyou says:

      In all fairness, this particular post (of mine) can seem a bit paranoid to people who lack sufficient background. Human stupidity is certainly not a liberal and he, too, had trouble seeing my point. I should have explained some things first – so there will have to be a follow-up post.

      • Ryan says:

        I agree, and to someone who has not encountered such a viewpoint before might be taken aback, however some regardless of all logic or reason will still argue the point that all non-whites are pure clean souls and the devil rests in white people. Therefore, in this case the evil displayed by the commenters here, (white people) is just because one black man has been proven innocent. Since someone being innocent and set free is good, but in this case he being black, our complaints only reveal the wickedness in our selves.

        This is a very short sighted point of view that only someone indoctrinated in the culture of Political Correctness would defend simply because to their mind it makes them feel like they are in the right, and a force for good. When in fact they are the exact opposite. They are a force for ignorance and appeasal, not to non-whites but to the self-destructing white culture that bred it.

        People don’t just become mindless repeaters like this only because they believe themselves in the right, but it is also one part conformity to the standards of the day within our culture. Fifty years ago had we been southerners and rallying for blacks to attend our universities, this Steph who mindlessly follows the dictates of the day would be defending segregation.

        One part conformity, one part believing the entire establishment is behind her, and all of it mindless kowtowing. There is probably nary any critical thinking, or independent thought, time to move along.

  10. Pingback: Are “people of color” ignored by the media? « Jewamongyou's Blog

  11. ComplexMeme says:

    So what actually happened was that the guilty black man remained on the lose, while an innocent black man was locked up. But this scenario does not advance the cause of “black victimhood” – so it is only mentioned in paragraph 12, which most people never read.

    Sure it would: If you’re more likely to be locked up when actually innocent, is that not bad for you?

    It seems like the trial in this case was mistaking a confident identification of the race of the perpetrator for a confident identification of the perpetrator itself. Given that the key mistake in that case was clearly a confusion of race with individual identity, is it controversial to say that the misjudgment made in the case is a consequence of racism? And it shouldn’t be controversial to say that consequence was negative: No one should be in favor of an innocent man being locked up and a guilty man going free.

    • jewamongyou says:

      It advances the cause of that particular black’s victimhood, but not of blacks on the whole since the actual perpetrator was also black.

      As for the misjudgment, and confusion between one black man and another, being “racism”, I don’t see how it would be so – unless one defines “racism” very broadly to include a lack of skill in distinguishing between members of a different race. If that is the case, then most humans are racist. As for the consequence being negative, you’ll get no argument from me; like you, I don’t favor the innocent being locked up and the guilty being free.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s