Fox4 deserves a Thumbs Up for taking 5:39 minutes on Tuesday — a huge amount of time in a nightly newscast — to examine the Willingham case. Although he provides no new information. Ray obviously tilts to the seemingly unanimous opinion in Corsicana that Willingham was guilty, and so I found his report informative. I remain sceptical of the jury verdict and deeply suspicious of the reasons Rick Perry panicked at the idea of an honest airing of the evidence pro and con. Be that as it may, in devoting so much valuable airtime to the story, Fox4 did a public service. Here’s the segment:
18 comments
Off-topic question for Wick: Why do you insist on the British “sceptic” instead of the US preferred “skeptic”? Are you gonna “neighbour” us too?
I also salute Fox 4 for devoting so much time to the story, but did they interview anyone who has doubt about the verdict or Willingham’s guilt? That would have made it a more balanced story.
I hope he follows up with a similar piece on the state forensics board and its sudden shakeup.
It can’t be proven that he didn’t do it. But the fact remains that it wasn’t proven that he did do it.
And whether or not he was a grade-A sonofabitch has no bearing whatever.
Rick Perry doesn’t trust government, except on this issue he trusts it blindly. I don’t know if an innocent man was executed or not, but I do know Perry is guilty of stonewalling.
I implore everyone to contact their state representatives to encourage them to speak out against Perry trying to make Texans look like ignorant, science fearing, hicks.
Another day, another instance of D magazine using the old trick of putting a politicians name alongside a controversy to associate the two in the public’s mind whether it’s deserved or not. Nice to see D has such solid media ethics.
Daniel:
You labor under a misconception of the standard of proof in a criminal case. The prosecution doesn’t have to prove anything. It just has to convince the jury beyond a reasonable doubt that the available evidence supports a conviction.
@ Doug
I think Perry himself did a damn good job of putting his own name alongside a controversy when he replaced the head of the commission and three of the commission members. And then when that new commission head cancelled the review of the new report at the last minute? It’s D Magazine’s (and every other media outlet in Texas, for that matter) job to report on something that seems that suspect.
@amanda…Totally agree. Perry puts his image/name on issues that make him appear “tough” on borders, and crime. When it came time to stand by a decision, he took extreme measures to shut down review.
Gov. Hair’s latest comments blame the media and nine judicial bodies. As governor, the buck stops with HIM. He opened the door for political musings by replacing the panel.
He’s got an excuse and finger to point for everything. It’s easy to bully a rookie state trooper, not so easy to bully millions of registered voters who are asking some tough questions.
Perry seems to think it’s legit to execute a guy for being an abusive drunk. I support the death penalty, but only when it’s applied equally, fairly, and legally in every instance.
I guess that’s why channel 4 felt compelled to put Perry front and center in their story the way D magazine and other local blogs, who just happen to be opposed to Perry politically, have done. Oh wait, they didn’t. In fact, Perry isn’t mentioned at all in the channel 4 story. Maybe that’s because politics wasn’t behind the channel 4 story. But hey, D magazine is just “asking questions” right? Much like that other paragon of media ethics who Wick grew to admire so much during the election, Andrew “who’s Trig’s mama?” Sullivan. Maybe D can attribute some false quotes to Perry while they’re at it. Never let facts get in the way of a good story, right D?
Geez, Doug. More people than D are asking these questions. What is it with Republicans? They’re suspicious of anyone on the other side of the political fence, I guess. But they throw out accusations like so many political Johnny Appleseeds (birthers, deathers, teabaggers) and yet whe you ask them questions they go all postal on folks.
Maybe you’re right, though. Let’s us just have a look at the documents the governor examined and see what he based his decision on. Oh, right: The Republican response is something like ‘It’s un-American to ask that question.’
Only thing is, Doug, that you’re wrong on this one.
Unlike Gov. Perry, I do not know whether Willingham did, indeed, murder his children. I would need to see all of the evidence to make a judgment about that. The question of whether Texas executed an innocent man is therefore unresolved at this point.
I AM sure, however, that Gov. Perry has something to hide, otherwise, why fire the official state commission (originally appointed by him) that is investigating the matter and replace them with people whom he must know will protect and defend him? Do any of you remember the “Saturday Night Massacre” of Richard Nixon? When he tried to fire the government official who was investigating the Watergate crimes?
Thankfully, we don’t have to worry about impeaching Rick Perry if he has committed wrongdoing–we have an election coming up that will do the job nicely. So, media, keep up the good work, and expose Perry if he is wrong, or vindicate him if he is right. That is your job, I believe.
Yeah, i know. Media outlets who go after Rick Perry are heroes speaking truth to power while ordinary citizens who protest the governments attempt to takeover 15% of the economy are “teabaggers”, or “un-American” as Nancy Pelosi calls them. Oh, you didn’t know that no less than the Speaker of the House of Representatives had called those attending Tea Parties “un-American”? Guess your memory isn’t so long after all is it?
I believe Rick’s trying to deep-six this investigation, at least until after the election. If he wins re-election he can then say that “the intelligence was flawed” or somesuch thing to let you know it wasn’t his fault, and then he’ll say it’s time to move on. If he was president, he could then bestow the Medal of Freedom on that person.
As for the teabaggers, Doug, I remember when a million people marched against the Iraq War, and the media didn’t cover it. Y’all need to get in line if you think you’re being abused. While you’re in line, think about the 8 years you allowed W. and Dick to assault the Constitution. For someone y’all think is out of her depth, you sure get upset about the things that Nancy Pelosi says. Cry me a river.
Doug, touche, you win. Here we all were trying to steer the conversation toward Rick Perry — talk about off-topic! — while conveniently ignoring the elephant in the room: Nancy Pelosi.
Oh, and Barney Frank. Somehow.
@ Brandy: “Sceptic” looks prettier.
I hate to point out the obvious but the Willingham house would fit inside Wick’s new corner office. Any father that wanted his children to live could have easily held there breath for the 5-10 seconds it would take to run the 10-20 feet to pick up the two babies and the toddler and carry them to safety.
It seems odd that the article in the New Yorker and the ABC Nightline show did not report that Willingham failed a lie detector examination, that the two year old was found in the bed that Willingham supposedly was sleeping in, that Willingham was more upset about his dart board than the death of his three children, that he admitted to his father that he had lied to the investigators about rescue attempts and that he confessed to Stacy.
Stacy was constantly abused by Willingham and it probably took her months if not years to let her guard down and not fear that he was going to get out and come and kill her as well. Maybe some day she will talk but I doubt it unless she is forced to.
It is a shame that Willingham was white otherwise all of the Perry attackers could have made him a racist as well as a no good, sand bagging, deep sixing REPUBLICAN
I’m sorry I missed this earlier but we did, indeed, provide new evidence. The affadavit from Stacy’s brother in which he relates what he took to be a confession by Willlingham, the polygraph examination and result – and video never seen before on TV. I’m also pleased to see that the Dallas Morning News (today front page) have taken the time to go through the original police statements and trial testimony. Cameron Willingham’s innocence – as we pointed out a couple weeks ago — is far from clear.
Thanks for the nice words.
Richard Ray
Fox 4
I meant to write “the Dallas Morning News (today front page)and others have taken the time…
Sloppy copy editing here. Sorry.
Richard Ray