From the video, I can only hear officers demanding that she get out of the car. Whether there were other commands that didn’t get captured in the video audio, I don’t know. Still, going by the video, you are correct. Would it change your view of the incident if the officers were indeed shouting conflicting commands? Or is this particular point not relevant?
Yes, it would change my view; it’s an important point, though not the sole one.
25Hour’s description of the incident with Good is strategically misleading in multiple ways. I picked this specific point because it was the most unambiguously false. In the counterfactual world where it was true, it wouldn’t fix the other points, but it would (and should) shift how I think about the incident.
Whether there were other commands that didn’t get captured in the video audio, I don’t know
I think this is a bit too charitable. First, we have multiple videos, and the audio from Ross’s video is pretty comprehensive and clear.
Second, if we’re speculating, isn’t it possible that Good herself said “I’m going to deliberately run you over and kill you”, and it just wasn’t caught on the audio? (Obviously she didn’t; that’s my point.) Like, if we can invent possible dialogue options in the face of actual video/audio, then it’s hard to see what evidence could ever be convincing.
Again, just to be clear: none of this means anyone has to conclude “ICE is good/bad!; I’m purely arguing about false factual claims in the article. If 25Hour’s thesis is “ICE is manufacturing chaotic situations as an excuse”, and then supporting that with events that literally did not happen, then that’s not a good thesis and needs to be identified as such.
From the video, I can only hear officers demanding that she get out of the car. Whether there were other commands that didn’t get captured in the video audio, I don’t know. Still, going by the video, you are correct. Would it change your view of the incident if the officers were indeed shouting conflicting commands? Or is this particular point not relevant?
Yes, it would change my view; it’s an important point, though not the sole one.
25Hour’s description of the incident with Good is strategically misleading in multiple ways. I picked this specific point because it was the most unambiguously false. In the counterfactual world where it was true, it wouldn’t fix the other points, but it would (and should) shift how I think about the incident.
I think this is a bit too charitable. First, we have multiple videos, and the audio from Ross’s video is pretty comprehensive and clear.
Second, if we’re speculating, isn’t it possible that Good herself said “I’m going to deliberately run you over and kill you”, and it just wasn’t caught on the audio? (Obviously she didn’t; that’s my point.) Like, if we can invent possible dialogue options in the face of actual video/audio, then it’s hard to see what evidence could ever be convincing.
Again, just to be clear: none of this means anyone has to conclude “ICE is good/bad!; I’m purely arguing about false factual claims in the article. If 25Hour’s thesis is “ICE is manufacturing chaotic situations as an excuse”, and then supporting that with events that literally did not happen, then that’s not a good thesis and needs to be identified as such.