After yesterday's post about the police video of the 6 year old from Newport News, I tuned in to some usual podcasters. One podcaster and his guest laughed through watching the video. One is a lawyer to whom I have been listening since Lawtube. I do not usually find him offensive but he does have strong opinions and lawyer takes. His avatar guest, who makes regular voice appearances, must be young. In my opinion, avatar is very stupid and clueless. I do not know his channel.
It seems they had no knowledge of the cases so ignorant would also apply. Did they find JT funny? How about the staff member sitting, holding the child whom had just seriously wounded her co-worker? They mocked her.
About 47 minutes into this podcast, the commentary on the school shooting begins. They discuss for about 15 minutes. I tuned out after the segment.
https://www.youtube.com/live/GOrYbMWNSF4?is=YbJ60vqfyQZ6xqft
I do not find controvery in general offensive if it is based on some review of the case. The laughter, for obvious reasons, (my blog and book explain) is part of the problem. Lawyers do not get it still. Avatars may not be real.
This is another link on Youtube of the police apprehension of JT. News outlets ran it, some laugh ( is avatar a man with fat?)
Credit to them for at least discussing it, But...
Jesus wept.
https://youtu.be/tBwjR_d9UiI?is=gjcIAZ01sskduX27
How about you?
Marian R. Carlino
October 8, 2026