"We told her we beat substantial odds by hanging the jury, convictions are far more prevalent."The article today by Maddie Hanna "Why Did Genocide Case Falter?" underlines this once again. In that article David Simon, a lecturerer in the genocide studies program at Yale University, makes two baseless statements:
"he thinks the Rwandan government is capable of pressuring witnesses overseas, although he believes allegations of that influence are exaggerated."
"even if the government isn't bribing or forcing witnesses - "the kind of things that people allege loosely a lot" - incentives exist for testifying against accused genocide participants"I take issue with both statements in italics while they neither reflect traditional media coverage nor my own coverage of the Kobagaya, Munyenyezi and Basebya cases.
Coverage of both the Kobagaya and Munyenyezi case by traditional media was certainly not biased in favor of the accused! On the contrary I should add! I am pretty confident David Simon won't be able to point out one example in US press coverage of exageration of Kigali's influence or "loose allegations" to that effect in both trials. Instead media coverage was heavily stacked against both Kobagaya and Munyenyezi.
First, even though Kobagaya was completely acquitted of playing any role in the genocide whatsoever, Lynn Tuhoy wrote february 23 2012, at the start of the Munyenyezi trial (!), that the jury "locked on whether Kobagaya had played a role in the genocide". A false statement or "loose allegation" while:
"Three jurors told The Associated Press after the verdict that they unanimously rejected allegation Kobagaya participated in the genocide"Maddie Hanna writes today as if Kurt Kerns makes unverifiable claims concerning the outcome of the jury trial in the Kobagaya case:
"Kobagaya's attorney, Kurt Kerns of Wichita, said jurors told the Associated Press they didn't believe Kobagaya was involved in the genocide, despite witnesses who testified he forced Tutsis to march up a mountain to be killed."Again, the FACTS are presented in a way that casts doubt on Lazare Kobagaya's involvement in the genocide.
Secondly, when investigating murder, detectives (and the journalists in their slipstream) allways search for a motive. Sofar mainstream media coverage of the Kobagaya, Munyenyezi and Basebya cases has ignored the role these cases played in shaping Kagame's path to election rigging in 2010. Not one article in mainstream media on any of these cases mentions this easily verifiable FACT (a fact that sets these cases apart from other genocide-related cases).
David Simon's claims that allegations against the current regime in Kigali of pressuring witnesses are "spread loosely around alot" or "exagerated" are not only incorrect, it's actually the other way around. In reality these allegations were mostly ignored or downplayed in coverage by mainstream media of these three cases and sofar I am the only source that has pointed to the role these cases played in shaping Kagame's path to election rigging in 2010.