The Mirecki case is over.
The trail has gone cold in the investigation of a roadside beating reported late last year by a Kansas University professor.
Douglas County Sheriff’s Office spokeswoman Lt. Kari Wempe said Thursday that detectives had finished their paperwork related to religious studies professor Paul Mirecki’s report that he was beaten by two unknown men on Dec. 5, 2005, on a roadside south of Lawrence.
The office has not identified any suspects and, unless any new leads come in, the investigation is finished.
At the time, Mirecki was under fire for comments he had posted online critical of organized religion.
It was simply absurd to think that good Christians might have resorted to physical violence, after all.
I am SHOCKED!, SHOCKED!, I say, to discover that the authorities have not tracked down, prosecuted and convicted Mirecki’s attackers.
Did the police return his computer yet?
And I’m shocked (/sarcasm) that the article didn’t get the facts right. His comments weren’t critical of organized religion. They were critical of fundamentalists–in fact he specifically criticized them by name.
The Lawrence Journal World has never been a respected news organization.
Let me get this straight.
There is essentially no evidence whatsoever, and you’re upset the police are shelving the case?
Grow up.
Yours, TDP, ml, msl, & pfpp
You mean evidence for assault, or evidence about who committed it?
Let me get this straight.
There is essentially no evidence whatsoever, and you’re upset the police are shelving the case?
I don’t think I’ve ever seen PZ Myers so upset!
I don’t know what evidence there is of an assault at all (bruises and abrasions are reported, I haven’t seen photos–and don’t need to), but I have read several googled links, and they seem to agree there is no dispositive evidence of any assaulter’s identity.
Unless the perpetrators talk and it gets back to the police, the assaultee is SOL.
What does this guy (the poster), want the police to do, make it up and frame someone?
Of course, since he made this crack:
“It was simply absurd to think that good Christians might have resorted to physical violence, after all.”
…The original poster, whatever his competence in his field, is sounding like an idiot.
Yours, TDP, ml, msl, & pfpp
And of course it’s impossible to consider the possibility that Mirecki made the whole thing up.
After all, it’s not like we’ve seen any college professors (or associate professors) spewing manic, spittle flecked invective towards people who subscribe to religious beliefs or anything..right?
>It was simply absurd to think that good Christians
>might have resorted to physical violence, after all.
It may be helpful to remember that Mencken referred to
the Ku Klux Klan as “the secular arm of the Methodist
Church.”
After all, it’s not like we’ve seen any college professors (or associate professors) spewing manic, spittle flecked invective towards people who subscribe to religious beliefs or anything..right?
…or fundamentalist wingnuts resorting to violence, self pity over perceived persecution and denial.
Man they really came out of the woodwork on this one PZ.
I’m sure the police did everything within their power to dig up clues and track them down (wink wink nudge nudge).
BTW, did they return Mirecki’s computer, or supply any justification for siezing it in the first place?
Ah, it all comes clear. It was representatives of the KKK that beat him up. I certainly wouldn’t be happy to be associated with the Methodist Church either! ;-)
And of course it’s impossible to consider the possibility that Mirecki made the whole thing up.
Given the forensic evidence, yes.
But then again, physical evidence often isn’t given much weight by a lot of people in these debates.
This is not complicated, this is not a case of wingnuttery (not right wing nuttery anyway).
There is evidence the man was roughed up. There is no evidence he roughed himself up. There is no individualized evidence of who roughed him up, so the police are dependent on loose lips.
They hear nothing, they close the case.
That’s perfectly reasonable.
Yours, TDP, ml, msl, & pfpp
Yeah, I’m not sure how the police could have caught anyone. With no ID, there’s not much to be done. Like it or not, that happens.
I don’t get the computer thing, though. What’s the deal with that?
It was the Christians, and the bicyclists.
It’s quite clear to me from the comments here that it is a mistake to expect compassion, charity, justice, or fairness from Christians today.
But then, that just bears out a lifetime of experience.
“By their fruits you shall know them.”
Teresa:
Compassion, charity, justice and fairness aren’t Christian virtues. They’re human virtues, completely uncorrelated with any particular breed of organized superstition. They inhere in individuals, not in abstract ideologies.
Those who believe otherwise are usually the first to abandon said virtues at the slightest whim.
I’m agreeing with Mr. Perkins. There had to be some report on it because it was high profile. I’m sure, were it not for that, they wouldn’t say anything and it would be another police case unsolved.
It happens all the time, on cases with far more evidence to their favor than this. And that’s fine – the man made his stand, got roughed up, and continued to stand. Give him his PC back and it’s ended well.
So I’ve noticed.
Myers today:
“It was simply absurd to think that good CHRISTIANS might have resorted to physical violence, after all.” (my CAPS)
Myers yesterday:
“I’ve seen the ones where the authors have pulled the ATHEIST label off of her tattered scarecrow and replaced it with JEW or GAY; this is a common rhetorical technique that is used to illustrate that when you remove the kneejerk contempt that the label elicits, the dependency of the argument on bigotry becomes more apparent.”
Interesting.
I’m not sure why you think it interesting. Do you think I find it unlikely that an atheist could commit physical violence?
I don’t see anything to indicate that the police closed the case because of its content, although it’s possible and even likely that they are biased on the subject of Mirecki.
There’s no evidence that could lead to suspects, and little likelihood of such evidence being found. What exactly do you expect them to do in that situation?
Well, I’m not surprised that they couldn’t find any evidence, and it’s possible that they didn’t look as hard as they might have, but I do think that PZ is taking a bit of a cheap shot. Unless there’s some *specific* evidence that they ignored a credible lead because they just weren’t interested in solving the case?
It wouldn’t be the first law enforcement organization to refuse to investigate a hate crime because they agreed with the perpetrators, certainly, but I don’t think the existence of such cases should equate to an assumption that *every* hate crime is swept under the rug and covered up by law enforcement. Police are entitled to a presumption of innocence too – at least departments that don’t have a well established pattern of widespread corruption.
Let me get this straight.
There is essentially no evidence whatsoever, and you’re upset the police are shelving the case?
Grow up.
hehe… digs up an old post from 6 months ago.
Who needs to grow up again?