lifeblood: listlogs: 2004-11e


=========================================================================
date:         mon, 29 nov 2004 02:07:46 -0500
reply-to:     lisalisaa <lisalisaa@earthlink.net>
sender:       indigo girls mailing list <indigo-girls@lists.netspace.org>
from:         lisalisaa <lisalisaa@earthlink.net>
subject:      re: nigc 20/20 mathew shepherd interview
in-reply-to:  <20041129050152.6b6847ab38@lists.netspace.org>
mime-version: 1.0
content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

i watched it too. i am a journalist, and i was left feeling uneasy by the
piece. i wondered about judy shephard's comments. she did appear to be
agreeing and saying it didnt matter why it happened, matthew was still dead.

i also found it troubling that 20/20 didnt indicate whether it had tried to
verify the limo driver's contention that matthew told him he was hiv
positive just before he was killed. it just hung there. was it true? did
20/20 not get access to the records? or were they denied the information?
did i miss this?

the interview with mckinney's girlfriend and the limo driver, tho, seemed to
detract from 20/20's theory. if mckinney is a closeted gay man or even
bisexual and hates himself because of it, it doesnt seem much of a stretch
that he could beat matthew in a meth haze because matthew was gay.

self-loathing doesnt preclude a hate crime. and in the end, it's society
that would cause aaron mckinney to hate himself if he is bisexual.

> from: automatic digest processor <listserv@lists.netspace.org>
> reply-to: indigo girls mailing list <indigo-girls@lists.netspace.org>
> date: mon, 29 nov 2004 00:01:45 -0500
> to: recipients of indigo-girls digests <indigo-girls@lists.netspace.org>
> subject: indigo-girls digest - 27 nov 2004 to 28 nov 2004 (#2004-341)
>
> there is one message totalling 40 lines in this issue.
>
> topics of the day:
>
> 1. nigc 20/20 mathew shepherd interview
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> date:    sun, 28 nov 2004 16:41:35 -0500
> from:    denise draper <jingles31@excite.com>
> subject: re: nigc 20/20 mathew shepherd interview
>
>> was judy shephard<br>also interviewed?  how did she react to this?
> this was the response posted on the matthew shepard foundation webpage by his
> parents:  http://www.matthewshepard.org/2020_statement.html
> 20/20 response
>
> statement from judy and dennis shepard concerning 20/20 upcoming report on the
> murder of matthew shepard
>
> on november 26, 2004, 20/20 will air a piece that promised 'new information
> and facts' about matt's beating and subsequent death. dennis and i reviewed an
> advance copy of the show and were dismayed and saddened by the tabloid nature
> of the show, its lack of serious reporting of facts in evidence, and the
> amateurish nature of asking leading questions to the people who were
> interviewed.
>
> i, too, was asked by 20/20 for an interview and agreed to do so to ensure that
> all of the facts were correctly stated.  my only stipulation was that our
> legal advisor sean maloney, matthew shepard foundation board member and former
> senior white house staffer, had to be included in the interview to share his
> legal knowledge and expertise regarding matthew's murder.  he was quite
> eloquent in stating the facts pertaining to matt's case, his knowledge of hate
> crimes in general, and in debunking 20/20's attempt to rewrite history.  as
> you may or may not know, sean was deleted from the interview entirely.  the
> editing by 20/20 of my interview seems to leave out all of my relevant
> comments regarding the potential bias of the show and my deliberate restating
> of the facts of the case clearly ended up on the cutting room floor. my
> remarks were reduced to a few very personal maternal comments taken out of
> context to make it appear as if i agreed with 20/20's  theories. that couldn't
> be
> farther from the truth.
>
>
> this same subjective editing occurred with dave o'malley's interview.  dave, a
> captain with the city of laramie police force at the time, was laramie's lead
> investigator in the case and worked in tandem with rob debree, the lead
> investigator for the albany county sheriff's department, to bring the case to
> trial and to provide the evidence necessary to convict both russell henderson
> and aaron mckinney. (both law enforcement officers are in complete agreement
> with the facts as stated during the trials.)
>
> dave gave ms. vargas a detailed account of the case.  he described the
> elements of hate and gay bias that were found during the extensive
> investigation and were substantiated in the large body of evidence collected
> for this case.  dave's comments were severely edited.  perhaps they were left
> out because he did not give ms. vargas the answer(s) she needed to maintain
> her 'new' theory concerning the murder.  one of the most glaring omissions in
> the piece was the transcript of aaron mckinney's in-custody interview which
> took place a few days after the murder.  this occurred before any 'line of
> defense' had been established by legal counsel for the two defendants.  had
> that document been included, it would have shown an un-rehearsed and
> unemotional anti-gay account of the events before, during, and after leaving
> matt tied to the fence.
>
> despite their promotional efforts to the contrary, 20/20 has not presented a
> 'new' theory.  much of this information was included in a harpers magazine
> cover story in 1999.  what is new is the unfortunate downslide of a reputable
> news magazine show when its highly respected host retires.
> 20/20 has sacrificed years of professional journalistic ethics and values for
> a stab at revisionist history ... and ratings.
> ----
>
> i watched it, and the reporting was horrible.  at one point they tried to say
> that one of the boys (i don't remember which) was a closeted bisexual, and
> therefore he can't be homophobic...
> draper
>
> _______________________________________________
> join excite! - http://www.excite.com
> the most personalized portal on the web!
>
> --
> please do not send long non-indigo girls-related forwards to the list.
> indigo girls faq and indigo girls mailing list faq:
> http://www.pixelopolis.com/ig
>
> ------------------------------
>
> end of indigo-girls digest - 27 nov 2004 to 28 nov 2004 (#2004-341)
> *******************************************************************

--
do not quote other peoples' entire messages when replying to the list.
indigo girls faq and indigo girls mailing list faq:
http://www.pixelopolis.com/ig
=========================================================================
date:         mon, 29 nov 2004 23:29:56 -0500
reply-to:     lauren schwartz <larsac31@hotmail.com>
sender:       indigo girls mailing list <indigo-girls@lists.netspace.org>
from:         lauren schwartz <larsac31@hotmail.com>
subject:      vligc for sale
mime-version: 1.0
content-type: text/plain; format=flowed

hello all
i have a vintage lay quiet awhile (danielle howells old band) tshirt that id
like to find a happy home for. its navy, the tag has been cut out but its
somewhere between a l and xl, has "lay quiet awhile" in red on front with
yellow birds and on back has "1994 grits and brits cultural domination tour"
along with tour dates/places. it has been worn in, but is showing no fading
and only slight cracking on bird images... it still has a lot of life left
in it... make me an offer, dont be shy.
email me at
larsac31@hotmail.com

--
do not quote other peoples' entire messages when replying to the list.
indigo girls faq and indigo girls mailing list faq:
http://www.pixelopolis.com/ig


home | appearances | articles | bootlegs | discography | fanzine | faq | fun | listlogs | official | socs | songs | videos | youtube