Back in August, a police officer shot a black teenager in Ferguson, Missouri. According to media accounts, the teenager was unarmed and shot from a distance, suggesting an egregious case of police brutality. That’s what it seemed like even to conservatives like Rand Paul and to this blog. But the testimony of two eyewitnesses, the autopsy results, and other forensic evidence has proven that this was not what happened. It turns out, the teenager was attacking the officer and was shot during a scuffle, during which the assailant was trying to get the officer’s gun, followed by a brief chase and the teenager rushing the officer.
This was the finding of the grand jury investigating the case, so no charges against the officer are being filed. Keep in mind that a grand jury is run by the prosecutor’s office and that the authorities had every incentive to make the officer a scapegoat to prevent the kind of riots that broke out in August. And yet the jurors were going by the facts.
Nevertheless, riots have erupted. Businesses are being looted, police are being fired upon by automatic weapons, and Ferguson is basically being burned to the ground.
I know that the local protesters do not believe the legal establishment. I’ll be curious to see if political liberals –who often claim to be “the fact-based” or “the reality-based” or “the science-based” community–will side with the protesters, despite what the evidence proves.
Since postmodernists believe there is no objective truth, that truth claims are nothing but political constructions, I suspect they will. They will think that the legal system constructed a plausibility paradigm that suggests the police officer is innocent in order as an imposition of their power. And they will think nothing of constructing an alternative politically-motivated truth-claim of their own. [Read more…]