Scott McConnell writes
every other week in Taki's
Top Drawer/NY Press
Scott
McConnell's NY Press Columns (archive)
January 10, 2001
Unfit to Print
By Scott McConnell
The
news reached me over New Year’s weekend. A horrible
murder took place in Wichita, KS, 10 days before
Christmas. It had received virtually no coverage
beyond the local news.
The
victims–three men and two women, white and in their
20s–were gathered in a home in a middle-class
neighborhood. Two were teachers; two were engaged; one
intended to become a priest. At 11 in the evening, two
black men, Reginald Carr, recently released from
prison, and his younger brother Jonathan, allegedly
forced their way into the house, abducted the five at
gunpoint, drove them around in two cars, forcing them
to withdraw money from ATMs. Then they took the
victims to a soccer field and forced them to kneel in
the snow. They undressed the women, and raped one or
perhaps both of them. Then they shot all five
execution-style in the head. Four died, but one woman
lived. Bleeding from her wound, she ran naked through
the snow for a mile, miraculously reaching a house
where she got help. The suspects were arrested the
next day.
Wichita
is shaken and mourning. A thousand people turned out
for the funeral of one victim, Jason Befort. Rev.
James Dieker, celebrant at the funeral Mass, told
those gathered to look not for vengeance, but to the
wisdom of Jesus on the cross: "Forgive them,
Father, for they know not what to do."
Assuming
that the criminal justice system will do its duty,
those words may be the right ones. Yet in the current
national context–with a divisive confirmation
hearing looming for John Ashcroft and leading
Democrats littering the airwaves with incendiary
charges about the racist Republican heartland–some
questions about the (non)reporting of the murder need
airing as well.
If
Michael McDermott’s shooting of seven in their
Wakefield, MA, office on the day after Christmas
deserves front-page treatment, or if James Byrd being
dragged to his death by three white attackers should
become a symbol of national shame, why don’t
Americans know about Wichita?
They
don’t because the victims were white, the suspects
black. National news editors prefer a different
script. Despite the raw drama of the story–the
killers might still be at large were it not for the
heroic effort of a woman raped, shot and left for dead
in the snow–it doesn’t conform. What does fit are
stories like the Byrd murder: since he was hideously
dragged to death by three white men in 1998 The New
York Times alone has made references to his
killing in 102 separate stories, most published before
the NAACP spent millions on a national campaign to
boost black voter turnout by linking George W. Bush to
the crime.
Occasionally
facts are invented to fit the script. Several years
ago, America’s evening news viewers were inundated
for months with stories about an epidemic of burnings
of black churches–carried out, it was charged, by
racist whites. A federal investigation eventually
concluded there was no racist conspiracy behind the
church fires, indeed no epidemic of arson at all: just
a normal rate of fires, some in white churches, some
in black, some set in insurance scams, some as pranks,
some because the arsonist wanted to become a hero by
reporting a fire he had himself set.
But a
few civil rights and anti-hate "watchdog"
groups hyped stories of the black-church arson
epidemic, probably for their own fundraising purposes,
and the press lapped it up.
If
asked, many editors would claim that one sort of crime
(a racially motivated killing like James Byrd’s)
deserves substantial coverage because it is a
"hate crime," while the murder of four
Wichita young people is not. The distinction is both
false and pernicious. First, though no bias crime
investigation is under way in Wichita, there is no
reason whatever to think that a murder involving so
much gratuitous and symbolic humiliation of the
victims (forcing one to watch the rape of his fiancee
in his last moments) is not motivated by
"hate." Indeed, what might a thorough hate
crime investigation turn up? Could the suspects have
been stirred to anger against whites, for instance, by
Jesse Jackson’s overheated charges that vicious
racism was at work in the Florida election?
The
hate-crime rubric itself is a blueprint for corrosive
double standards. In law, it requires classifying
crimes purportedly motivated by certain kinds of
"bias" as more grave and deserving of
serious punishment than others. The dual standard at
once weakens a force that could unite Americans of all
races and cultures (horror at crime) and threatens to
transform the criminal justice system into an arena
for exacerbating the country’s fault lines of race
and ethnicity.
I suspect some promoting the dual standard feel virtuous and
progressive–that they are advancing the
multiculturalist cause by hyping news of crime of one
sort and suppressing another. Some might see whites,
and particularly the sort of straight, normal
heartland Middle American types, as obstacles to
desired social change and not deserving of very much
sympathy. Others simply adapt to prevailing newsroom
expectations, internalizing the double standards.
Either way it’s a shameful spectacle, which does no
honor to American journalism.
January
10, 2001