On Tuesday, the City of Ludington Daily News (COLDNews) printed a letter in the reader's forum decrying 'Fake News' as an oxymoron.  The letter is written by unapologetic liberal, Deb Del Zoppo, who goes on to deride the typical right foils: Trump (implicitly), Giuliani, Conway and Fox News.  

Del Zoppo's Opus

But despite this being a common theme among left-leaning articles and opinions throughout the nation, it's false. News is defined as "newly received or noteworthy information, especially about recent or important events".  This information can be true (aka accurate) or false (aka fake), and quite often it can be false from respected news sources because news agencies often value the scoop over the accuracy.  'Fake' and 'news' are not contradictory to each other, no more than 'accurate' and 'news' are, and thus is not an oxymoron.  

For example, at a national level let's consider the 2013 Navy Yard shooter, an event that took place before the term "Fake News" was in vogue.  The Atlantic post shows the evolution of the news on this tragedy over time when it posted updates. 

The original post declared 10 people injured, multiple gunmen, assault rifle.  Later posts debunk the multiple gunmen, declare Rollie Chance is the lone gunman (oops, 20 minutes later), AR-15 used (not an assault rifle), but then seek two additional armed suspects, Aaron Alexis identified as shooter, no AR-15 but handguns and rifle used.  Eventually it was learned he took one gun from a victim.  The number of victims change over that time as well:  6 people killed, 4 dead (8 wounded), 12 dead, 13 dead.

As you see in that article, multiple respectable news sources reported as fact many things that proved to be wrong over time.  Earlier this year, President Trump gave out fake news awards to those in the media who had written falsely, showing that even in non-emergent situations, false or misleading reporting can take place, intentionally or not.  

I unintentionally purveyed fake news about the death of Gail Brittain, the 66 year old pedestrian hit by a car on the night of August 29th on Ludington Avenue at Jackson Street.  I wasn't alone, the initial call into 911 said the woman was naked and she had been clothed.  I accepted the Mason County Press' version of facts about the driver who wrote that LPD Chief Barnett said the car "entered the intersection at Jackson Road".  Using 'at' instead of 'with' was misleading, and yet it seemed that had the driver been on Ludington Avenue, they would have saw the woman crossing the street.  The other source I used was non-committal on this fact:  "the driver... was on Ludington Avenue when they hit the woman".  That was obvious from the picture.

I developed a scenario presuming the car was travelling up Jackson and came to a conclusion that the driver should have noticed this woman crossing the street.  The fact, however, was that the driver was going west on Ludington Avenue and hit the woman who seems to have been in the process of crossing the avenue at the crosswalk, who seems to have had a bright white cloth bag in her right hand and white shoes which should have made her visible to anybody paying attention.

 

Such are the conclusions I can draw from the full police report (Brittain Fatal Accident), a disappointingly incomplete seven page document along with a crash investigation conducted by the sheriff's office along with several photographs.  

The driver was Cody Anthony-Daniel Toles, a 19 year old going to West Shore Community College.  He had his younger sister in the passenger seat and her friend in the back seat according to Cody, they were both minors.  He  says he was going to drop off the friend at the beach and then head back home.  But then something happened after going through a green light at Jackson Street which will affect his life and his sister's forever:


Crossing the street, Gail Brittain is struck by Cody, the initial impact being in the middle of the driver side bumper, her body winds up crashing into the windshield in front of Cody's sister.  Cody's two narratives taken by two different officers varies slightly.  He tells LPD's Dave Maltbie that he 'saw something dark in front of him', he tells LPD Officer Hecko that he 'did not see anyone'.  The story he writes himself varies even more (18-4060 statement.pdf).  The evidence would point to the Hecko interview being the most likely.  The discrepancy seems important, since they don't bother to check his smartphone which he says was just playing music.

As noted, the Dispatch log had there originally being a naked woman in the road.  This was incorrect, she had reportedly wore a black top and jean pants.  On impact, the shirt went up the pants went down; because of the warm weather, she wasn't wearing undergarments, but she appears to have been carrying a flashlight, which broke into three pieces:

This flashlight was likely in her left hand, away from the initial impact.  This is because in her right hand she was carrying a bright white reusable bag, which she was likely still holding according to documentation.  

The bag had been carrying returnable cans/bottles, which she cashed in at The E-Z Mart across the street, on her way back home, it was carrying her sole purchase, a 24 oz. Natural Ice beer.  We can deduce this by the saturation of her bag at the bottom:

 

And then seeing the condition of the beer can.  You will observe the pop-top has not been used, but the can effectively experienced a ripping force, with some torque, as if it may have been hit, exploded and wound up where it eventually did.  The beer's explosion looks to have exploded the bag indicating a lot of force to shoot the can as far away as it ended up, this would happen if the bag was hit first:  

Which was at point 69 below.  The full inventory of where everything went on the map below can be found here.

To me, physics indicates that Gail was hit inside the crosswalk as the brake marks (53-59), the veering, and items start appearing just after that (such as the windshield glass at 72).  The pictures do not show her garments, but her reflective white shoes and bright white bag moving across the street should have been picked up by any attentive driver many seconds before this impact happened.  His written statement indicated he wasn't paying a lot of attention to the roadway.

But surely Cody Toles' inattentiveness was not the only cause of this accident, you may say, because, after all, Gail shouldn't have been in the middle of the street when the light was green.  Subsequent investigation has been fruitful into showing that it is highly likely that Gail Brittain started crossing the avenue right after the lights on Ludington Avenue turned red, signaling it was time to cross.  

Why did it take her so long to get to the fourth lane so that the light was green?  The answer is she didn't take that long at all-- and you can test this yourself.  If you hit the pedestrian signal button, the red light on Ludington Avenue allows you 32.6 seconds to cross; however, if you don't hit that button and just wait for the stoplight to turn red on Ludington, the stoplight only allows 14.6 seconds to cross-- 18 seconds less.  That's a big difference, even a strident pace won't get you across.  

Thus, when I noted it took about 12 seconds at a strident pace to get to where Gail was hit, this older, encumbered woman would probably take a few seconds more, at which point, the light would have turned green, and inexperienced drivers with an alleged night-blindness and definitely not paying attention to driving, like Cody Toles, would have considered the avenue as their runway.  

The police do not tell the public relevant facts or bother to do forensic exams on Cody's phone or his vehicle's crash data, or even follow-up on why his story varies in this fatal accident.  Nope, they allow rumors to exist that Gail Brittain may have been naked, drinking, and carelessly crossing the street.  This too-intentional fake news sullies her memory and dulls the egregiousness of the tragedy that led to her demise and too-early funeral.

Views: 466

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

From the photo of the auto and the drivers statement the physics is all wrong. 

According to the drivers statement ,"I swerved to the left trying to avoid her".

Then look at the photo of the auto.

The bumper on the drivers side is damaged.  The windshield on the passenger side is shattered.

If the driver turned to the left and the way the bumper and the windshield sustained damaged, he would have been turning into her.

Turning to the right he would have been turning away from her and even if she was hit the bumper in the same place, she would have either struck the drivers side windshield or missed the car completely.

So by turning left he was in fact turning into her. If he didn't turn to the left would he have avoided the collision completely?

The driver also states,"I tried to hit my breaks but had little time for it".

In light of his statements it is a wonder he hasn't been charged with some kind of moving violation.

Another case of selective reporting of an event by the local media.

I thought a similar thing, shinblind.  The car is in the turning lane of the eastbound lane.  That says a lot right there.  Why did he swerve south?  And his statement says his sister said something funny.  He could have been looking at his sister or her friend in the backseat.  Whatever his violation or not, he will be fined for life in his mind and hopefully won't be messing around with music and joking while driving.  Sad all around.  Another thing, Gail, seems to have been a conscientious person, carrying a flashlight.  Thanks X for the report and at least you admit your inadvertent fake news, unlike other reporters who write fake intentionally.

RSS

© 2024   Created by XLFD.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service