John Ridley, Please Fix Your Incorrect "Statement Of Fact"

[Shana A]

John Ridley, Please Fix Your Incorrect "Statement Of Fact"
by: Autumn Sandeen
Sat Apr 25, 2009 at 10:00:00 AM EDT

http://pamshouseblend.com/diary/10613/fix-your-incorrect-statement-of-fact-john-ridley

I'm a little frustrated.

John Ridley, over at the Huffington Post (in his piece  Tragically, Transgender Identifiers Have a New Martyr), assumed something that wasn't proved about Angie Zapata -- Ridley assumed a fact as true when that isn't what we know as fact about Angie Zapata's murder.

Let me walk through where Ridley assumed things as true about Angie Zapata's behavior that just aren't  in the record (emphasis added):

[ilikepotatoes]

It's the Huffington Post, of course it's going to have incorrect statements.

[tekla]

Two thoughts, no, three. 

First, there is a huge difference between 'facts not in evidence' in a trial, and facts. 

Two, fixing the errors in the HuffPo would take more time then they spend putting it together.

Third.  As far as I could tell (I only look at about 25 sources on a regular basis, i.e. daily) HuffPo was the only major Internet News Provider to even cover the story at all.  I never even saw any mention of it on SFGate (not a major INP, but you would think in the Bay Area it would be more likely to get coverage then say, Dallas) so assuming facts not in evidence might be wrong, on the other hand, they cared enough to cover it.  Can't have everything.