The Times' story is a total of 847 words. The story is about a trial where all of the defendants were found guilty of 108 counts of funding terrorism and money laundering. This was the second trial following an earlier mistrial.
In other words, the story is how the first jury got confused and couldn't agree--neither on guilt nor innocence. Apparently, the second time around the prosecutors did a better job (what most observers think) and/or they got lucky with a better jury.
What we found jarring when we read the Times story, though, was how laden it was with the defendants' claims of "vicitmization". What follows is a careful analysis of the Times' editorial bent:
First, here is the picture (same size) that goes with the online story:
Zolfa Elaydi, center, with her children Fidaa, left, and Jihad,
reacting to news that the leaders of a Muslim charity had been convicted on Monday in Dallas.
In other words, the story is how the first jury got confused and couldn't agree--neither on guilt nor innocence. Apparently, the second time around the prosecutors did a better job (what most observers think) and/or they got lucky with a better jury.
What we found jarring when we read the Times story, though, was how laden it was with the defendants' claims of "vicitmization". What follows is a careful analysis of the Times' editorial bent:
First, here is the picture (same size) that goes with the online story:
Zolfa Elaydi, center, with her children Fidaa, left, and Jihad,
reacting to news that the leaders of a Muslim charity had been convicted on Monday in Dallas.
Source: SANE
 |
Posts
