I love bashing the Ny Times. Part of it stems from their amazing resources being wasted on dumb subjects or important articles that get washed by the need to protect the lib narrative. The NY Times shining moment was their reporting after 9/11, which showed what the 'best' newspaper in America could do with an earth shattering event in NYC that changed the nation and world. They just did a short blurb on a gang rape of an 11 year old in Texas and really dropped the ball. Others have pointed out the obvious blindness to the reporting.
1. They only get quotes from a person who knew the defendants "These boys have to live with this the rest of their lives". - Well if they had not raped a 11 year old girl, they wouldn't have to live with it the rest of their lives. What about her life? Why is this woman trying to turn these young men and teens into victims?
2. They sort of blame the 11 year old victim.
3. The reporter himself asks how these young men could be drawn into an act like this. As if there is an intangible force that persuaded them to commit rape rather than say no and call the police.
The Houston paper happens to mention how some in the community are now threatening the girl and her family. Because if she can't testify, defendants can get off. The community is also circling the wagons around the defendants despite video and photo evidence. Sickest part of it all:
The bastards videotaped it on their cell phones.
UPDATE: It gets even worse. Now complete jack asses (news article here) are descending on the town, blaming the victim, circling the wagons around the defendants, and of course playing the race card. Disgusting.