[ SECRET POST #2804 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2804 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.











Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 064 secrets from Secret Submission Post #401.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 1 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 1 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 1 2 - unrelated .gifs ], [ 1 - posted twice ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

DA

um

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twinkie_defense

that is the actual term, nonny

[(Anonymous)]

i'm aware it's the actual term. what i'm saying is that it's an inaccurate term and essentially an urban legend that had little to do with the actual trial of Dan White.

[(Anonymous)]

ok, it sounds real pretentious and forced-stupid to be like "that's not what it actualfax was!" when someone uses the term. it's like asking someone who calls someone else a "faggot" and informing him it's a bundle of sticks. you knew what they meant, don't be facetious

[(Anonymous)]

i don't know. to me, it pretty much read like they were using it in the very specific context of the actual trial. not as like, a general reference or term being used in a different context. they're talking about the actual trial of Dan White and in that context, it's an inaccurate narrative of what happened. i'm not being facetious and i'm not being intentionally obtuse (and hopefully not unintentionally obtuse). it's just not correct.

[(Anonymous)]

except that's what it was actual historically in real life trufax called, in the very specific context of the actual trial. did you not see them use quotation marks to actually quote people or what?

[(Anonymous)]

they said that White only spent a couple years in jail because of the Twinkie Defense

that's factually incorrect. there was no twinkie defense. people said there was but there wasn't. ergo, it is not true that White only spent a couple years in jail because of it, because it never existed.

more broadly, it's a term that contributes to an inaccurate understanding of what actually happened during those events. i think they could probably make the point that there was a widespread (possibly correct) perception that White's sentence was more lenient than it could have been because of underlying homophobia in the San Francisco establishment but, like, don't be factually incorrect about historical events and then expect no one to say you're wrong

[(Anonymous)]

the term "Twinkie Defense" is the catch-all term for all the stuff you just described: arguing "diminished capacity" based on ridic stuff compounded with people being willing to accept the BS as fact or whatever reason. you are a useless pedant

[(Anonymous)]

it wasn't a ridiculous defense, though. that's kind of my point. it was a legitimate argument, and the twinkies were one minor piece of evidence for it, and using the term "Twinkie Defense" plays into a narrative of events that's incorrect in significant ways.

[(Anonymous)]

I think a lot of people found it ridiculous though considering in the aftermath of the trial:

"As a result of Dan White's trial, California voters changed the law to reduce the likelihood of acquittals of accused who knew what they were doing but claimed their capacity was impaired."

According to wikipedia at least...

[(Anonymous)]

sorry, what? you don't think "i went, armed up, climbed through a window, and shot people i considered rivals and enemies in politics who i blamed for my failures but it wasn't murder, it was depression" isn't ridiculous? cali revoked diminished capacity after that for a reason

[(Anonymous)]

not ridiculous in the sense that it was the law on the books, and it was correctly applied. he had diminished capacity, the law said to treat diminished capacity this way, that's how it was treated. it might have been a bad or a ridiculous law but that's the fault of the person who wrote the laws.

[(Anonymous)]

oh boy, we got a cultural relativist here.

if it wasn't ridiculous why did cali revoke the law afterward? hint: because it was ridiculous all along

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, but when you look at how the law was applied and the selective interpretations based on who the victim was…well…you can see why some people found it ridiculous I hope.
Anyway, when I used the term, I was using it to describe the context of the time -- that a gay politician was assassinated and that his killer got off too lightly compared to others whose mental state was comparable to White.

[(Anonymous)]

DA

>not ridiculous in the sense that it was the law on the books, and it was correctly applied

but yes, ridiculous in essentials, and that's why it was ridiculed with the term "Twinkie Defense."

Q.E.D.

[(Anonymous)]

DA

It's "a catchall term coined by reporters during their coverage of the trial of defendant Dan White for the murders of San Francisco city supervisor Harvey Milk and mayor George Moscone." I don't know what else you want when people are using the exactly correct term.

[(Anonymous)]

for people not to be wrong? i guess?

it was a catchall term that became popular in the press, but it wasn't accurate for what actually happened in the trial, and since they were specifically talking about the trial...

[(Anonymous)]

It's what it was called by the press, regardless of the fact that their definition was wrong.