Investigators struggle to build murder case in death of US Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick

Source: CNN.

In the big scheme of things this may be a minor story, but it also is an apt case study in media perfidy.

Of the five deaths reportedly related to the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, that of Officer Sicknick’s is the only one widely portrayed as murder by violent protesters. We have all been exposed to overheated media reports alleging that Sicknick was bludgeoned to death by a Trump supporter with a fire extinguisher. In fact, the mental image of that allegation has been used to symbolize the murderous intent of Donald Trump himself. Now we learn the allegation is false.

Media perfidy resides in the fact that Sicknick’s bludgeoning by fire extinguisher was known to be unsubstantiated from the very start. There were no credible eyewitnesses. There was no video. There were conflicting reports. And yet media sources repeated the story. Until they no longer could.

The other four deaths that day were of protesters, all but one of them a death of geriatric origin. That’s a truer symbol of the Capitol protest overall than the violence of the riot.

30 thoughts on “Investigators struggle to build murder case in death of US Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick

  1. You seem to think that somehow it is significant that there is confusion about how this officer died. It is not. He was alive on January 6th. He was dead on January 7th. He lost his life defending the government. There were more than 100 police officers injured, 15 or more hospitalized and several with lifelong injuries. The videos we have all seen of the violent mob rampaging through the Capitol looking for officials to capture, murder or hang tells us that we were very, very lucky that the carnage was not far worse.

    You talk about “media perfidy” for no apparent reason. The various national news media organizations reported as best they could in a chaotic situation. And, it is noteworthy that you are now quoting reporting by “fake news” CNN who apparently are not trying to cover up their past “perfidy” as they share with you what is known now.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. “The various national news media organizations reported as best they could in a chaotic situation.”

      No, they didn’t. The best reporting would have been to wait until they knew what they were reporting.

      How many people have died as a result of the rush to report the death of George Floyd as a murder when it now seems likely that he died as a result of his own exertions on top of his preexisting cardiac fragility.

      Sometimes the right thing for the media to do is to wait until they have the facts before rushing in front of a camera. .


      1. Uh, do you believe in the free market or don’t you. For-profit media companies cannot make any money if they let others report on a story while they wait for better or more complete information. And, even if, in an ideal world they would wait, their failure to do so is not evidence of “perfidy.”

        I will let your silly spin about the death of George Floyd stand on its own merits.

        Liked by 2 people

        1. Seeing JTR write about media “perfidy” almost made me spit my coffee out.

          I’d list the sources he uses that serve up nothing BUT perfidious nonsense but it would take up too much space…

          Liked by 3 people

          1. …”a known lie”

            Seriously? You calling out the media for an allegedly “known lie” when for four years every KNOWN lie spoken by T**** was excused by you.

            Beer out the nose hysterical.

            Liked by 3 people

          2. Apples and kumquats. You didn’t hold T**** to ANY standard of truth telling for four years. The PRESIDENT should be held to a higher standard. You gave T**** pass after pass after pass fr his documented 30,000 lies, but Biden doesn’t get the same consideration.

            Hypocrisy hypocrisy hypocrisy. Clean your mirrors off and see it for yourself.

            Liked by 2 people

          3. You don’t see a difference between politicians spinning the truth, or outright lying, and the press doing the same thing?

            The press is supposed to be our defense against spin and deception. If they become a party to it, where do we go?

            It is because the press cannot be trusted that we have Qanon


          4. It is because people are gullible enough to believe in things like Q and the Libertarian party.

            You gave T**** a complete and total pass for 4 years. You continue to do so. You are the one guilty of spin and deception. The problem is you are only deceiving yourself.

            Qanon , who’s entire mantra begins with the deep state is a bunch of Jews and Democrats who are pedophiliac baby eaters and T**** ‘s the only one who can save us from them.

            Issues with trust in the press go back way before Q even existed.

            Who is gullible?

            Liked by 1 person

          5. “The press cannot be trusted.”

            Uh, the press has not changed. There have always been and still are news organizations with slants reflecting every perspective on every issue.

            What has changed is having a lying con man in the Oval Office defending his failures and crimes by attacking those reporting on them. We have Qanon not because of any failures by the legitimate media but because of those attacks on the free press – in itself an Impeachable offense IMHO – by Donald Trump.

            Liked by 1 person

        2. Silly question.

          Known lies should get no air at all. THAT is the basic problem with right wing media such as Fox News.
          They disseminate known lies every single day. For example, they repeated reported as FACT that the 2016 election was stolen from Donald Trump. THAT is an example of “media perfidy” if there ever was one.

          Now with respect to the death of officer Sicknick, what “known lie” was reported and by whom? Or in the case of the killing of George Floyd, what “known lie” was reported and by whom? In this later case, most of the reporting and the inflammatory power of the story was based on video where people could see with their own eyes the killing in question.

          Unless you have credible answers to these two questions I will note that once again you are very free with unsubstantiated slanders

          Liked by 3 people

        3. RE: “In this later case, most of the reporting and the inflammatory power of the story was based on video where people could see with their own eyes the killing in question.”

          There is no such video.


          1. There is no such video in the case of Brian Sicknick. The Floyd video is irrelevant to Sicknick and, in any event, whether Floyd’s death was a homicide is a matter of dispute.


          2. I was very clearly referring to the inflammatory video showing how George Floyd was killed.

            So now, instead of simply saying “Oops, I misread your post” you try to pretend the subject raised by Tabor was not the subject I was addressing. Again I am tempted to say “What a jackass!” But I won’t.

            I will note however that there is no dispute that the death of George Floyd was a “homicide.” None whatsoever.


            Liked by 1 person

    1. Forget the evidence. Supporters of the ex-president could care less about the carnage and its specifics.

      “The insurrectionists had no choice” or so goes the storyline.

      “I got mad. I mean, these police officers had every right to use deadly force. They should have used it,” he said. “The people in charge of securing the Capitol let the country down.” L. Graham

      The president had no responsibility to defend against all enemies foreign and domestic?

      Liked by 3 people

        1. He was watching it live on TV. No mind reading or time machine required.

          And you continue to excuse bad behavior because of a few regulations rolled back and a bunch of radical justices and judges appointed.

          Liked by 1 person

      1. RE: “The president had no responsibility to defend against all enemies foreign and domestic?”

        Only in a vague way. Remember that the response to the riot was the responsibility of Capitol Police, who report to Congress, not the executive.


        1. A vague way?

          Of course, there is the defense.

          This allows a few hours of watching the carnage, then praising the “patriots’ and attacking Pence.

          In a non-vague way.

          SMH as some say, but of course he didn’t want to call of the insurrection. The mob was tantalizingly close to Pence, that turncoat. Congressmen calling, texting and begging the president to do something. Heh, heh…he’s got Congress by the short hairs so maybe NOW they will listen to him.

          Liked by 3 people

      1. Again what was asked for and by whom?

        We do not have shock troops garrisoned in DC.

        The letter Mr ROberts posted yesterday explained what the police thought they needed and what reserves were on hand.

        What was asked for that was possible?


        1. I have tried to show an tell you on these things but your refuse to follow up (But you sure dug deep to find something to refute the Lancet article I linked to the other day).

          The Kool-Aid is drunk and the effects are fully ensconced in your brain.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. “So, you have no answer”

            Your feigned ignorance is more tiresome every time you play that card. No, we do not have “shock troops” stationed in DC but there are National Guard units in DC and Maryland who were in position where they could help protect the government. As early as December 31 the DC Mayor asked for National Guard help for the day of the “Save America Rally.” Maryland GOP Governor Hogan had his NG ready to roll early in the insurrection but could not get the green light from the Trump administration to deploy them.

            On the day, Trump had the full power to deploy the National Guard to help end the siege. He delayed using it even after it was clear that a violent insurrection was in progress. In the end, it has been reported that it was Mike Pence, fearing for himself and his family was the one who cut through the obstacles and got the Guard rolling.



            Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s