Mirecki and the Facts
by MikeGeneIn light of all the outrage that has been sparked by Mirecki's story, it is important to remember that there is really only one known fact about this story – very early Monday morning, Dr. Mirecki checked in at a hospital with some minor injuries and was released.
The sheriff's report, which is classified as an aggravated battery, says that Mirecki suffered minor injuries. It says the incident started about 6:20 a.m. and was reported about 6:40 a.m. Here
"I'm mostly shaken up, and I got some bruises and sore spots," he said. Here
KU religious studies professor Tim Miller said he saw Mirecki on Monday and that he looked "scraped up." Here
Meanwhile, Mirecki appears to be doing well after his hospitalization Monday morning. According to KU spokesperson Lynn Bretz, he even taught his class later that day. Here
Also, there were mistakes in the original reporting:
The Douglas County Sheriff's Office initially labeled the attack on Professor Paul Mirecki a hate crime. But the office removed the title today, calling the labeling a mistake. Lt. Kari Wempe said that the error occurred Monday morning when the attack was reported. Officers wrongly transmitted the information over the police radio, she said. It is not classified as an aggravated battery.
That's all we really know, people.
December 7th, 2005 at 6:16 pm
I'm sorry but this is looking fishier by the moment! Mirecki said he "got the hell beaten out of him", but he lectured the same day. And what about the metal bar? Seems like the bar they came at him with had feathers on the end normally used for dusting ones furniture!
I'm sure there are more chapters to come in the Mirecki saga and I for one can't wait! From the very moment he hit the head lines a couple of weeks ago its been gripping stuff.
Comment by willo — December 7, 2005 @ 6:16 pm
December 7th, 2005 at 6:23 pm
The whole thing does seem like the theater of the absurd. Roving gangs of ID thugs! And the timing is certainly pretty suspicious. But unlike a lot of folks on the other side (as listed in another post here on TT), I'll wait before making a final judgment. If it did happen as described, there's a youth pastor in Kansas who needs to be looking for a new job.
Comment by Foyle — December 7, 2005 @ 6:23 pm
December 7th, 2005 at 6:30 pm
Foyle, are you suggesting that one of the suspects is a youth pastor? What would lead you to that suspicion? I ask because Mirecki described his attackers as both men "30-40" years old. These weren't juvenile delinquents according to Mirecki himself.
Got any info on that? Thanks.
Comment by Joy — December 7, 2005 @ 6:30 pm
December 7th, 2005 at 6:41 pm
Hi Joy,
I think Foyle is referring to this:
Comment by Krauze — December 7, 2005 @ 6:41 pm
December 7th, 2005 at 6:55 pm
Ah, so. Information was sketchy at best yesterday when this hit the news/blogosphere. Had me worried for a minute that they might have been students at KU or one of the other two universities in Douglas County. It being dark and all, it's a little hard to tell how old someone is (particularly if they're flailing you with fists and cans of spray paint…)
Just being facetious on the spray paint, my way of saying I don't buy the idea that it was a lead pipe or tire iron one bit – Mirecki would have had some significant lumps, not just "bruises and sore spots."
This thing gets curiouser and curiouser…
Comment by Joy — December 7, 2005 @ 6:55 pm
December 7th, 2005 at 7:36 pm
http://www.campusreportonline.net/main/articles.php?id=79
Hmmmm… a similar case?
Comment by Stuart Harris — December 7, 2005 @ 7:36 pm
December 7th, 2005 at 7:59 pm
Joy,
Krauze is correct. When I posted on this the ages had not been released. Perhaps I should simply say "pastor."
In any case, if the assailants do turn out to be Christians who go to church more than once a year, the leaders of those churches will have to take some responsibility. This is exactly the kind of behavior church should prevent. But as I say, the backgrounds and motivation of the individuals involved hasn't been demonstrated yet.
Comment by Foyle — December 7, 2005 @ 7:59 pm
December 7th, 2005 at 7:59 pm
Ok, what is also factual in this story is the reporters are seeking a clarification on a perceived discrepancy, and Mirecki is declining to comment.
I will add, this can be confirmed by the Sheriff if he investigates phone company records or calls to his dispatchers. They might even be able to identfiy the location of the call within 500 feet!
Now, let's say Mirecki did NOT call from the road side, what 's he thinking? "Gee, I just got attacked and got the hell beat out of me, I won't call for help and try to get the police on those bad guys as soon as possible. I'll just drive to the hospital for my minor wounds and wait, even though the responsible thing is to get those blood thirsty fundies brought to justice as fast as possible."
If he called from the roadside, would the cops direct him to the hospital? I think the cops would be there in minutes at the crime scene.
Also, in a high tension situation, is not the natural inclination even after an attack, to seek some comfort from law enforcement and make a call that two strangers just tore into you?
So we have some facts that we really want clarified:
1. did mirecki call from the roadside (that is independently verifiably by any number of means)
2. did mirecki NOT call from the road side, but just drove to the hospital and then the athorities were alerted
I think the reporters, sense a detail about the events that Mirecki is uncomfortable disclosing. The other point is, the Sheriff's office was quite open about reporting that:
Salvador
Comment by Salvador T. Cordova — December 7, 2005 @ 7:59 pm
December 7th, 2005 at 10:29 pm
Link to a Map of The Crime Scene
Ok, the map indicates the distances of only a few miles involving the most important landmarks ( Mirecki's home, KU, the Hospital, and the Crime Scene).
If this is a residential neighborhood, did Mirecki decide to scream as loud as possible that he's being assaulted? I guess it was an isolated road only a few miles from the university. Good idea to pull over as far away from possible witnesses as possible and step out of your car on a cold (below freezing) morning.
Salvador
Comment by Salvador T. Cordova — December 7, 2005 @ 10:29 pm
December 8th, 2005 at 1:05 am
While there are reasons to be skeptical, let's stick close to the facts. Remember, Mirecki may have indeed been assaulted.
Comment by MikeGene — December 8, 2005 @ 1:05 am
December 8th, 2005 at 3:47 am
I'll add to what Mike said by noting that I don't buy the psychologizing that Mirecki should have gotten a license plate or waited for the police at the scene of the crime. It's easy, sitting in front of the computer monitor, to reason out what you would have done and said in that situation. But if Mirecki was assaulted, I can't blame him for being shocked and confused, and acting less than 100.00% rationally.
Comment by Krauze — December 8, 2005 @ 3:47 am