556
submitted 2 weeks ago by andros_rex@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

I’m not seeing any mainstream media coverage. They’re trying to pass this off as a suicide.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 95 points 2 weeks ago

This would be the first acknowledged US lynching since '81. 1981.

[-] brendansimms@lemmy.world 74 points 2 weeks ago

they'll call it a suicide and keep the last acknowledgement in the 80's.

[-] mic_check_one_two@lemmy.dbzer0.com 25 points 2 weeks ago

Yup.

Dude had defensive wounds like bruises and a broken arm. Anyways, it’s definitely suicide, so we don’t have to look into it any further /s

[-] Buelldozer@lemmy.today 50 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Dude had defensive wounds like bruises and a broken arm.

Citation needed especially since the Coroner's department has specifically refuted this.

[-] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world 15 points 2 weeks ago

I think they were joking about that like people say someone committed suicide with two shots to the back of the head. But thanks for posting that article, it does say the coroner didn't find any evidence of assault so far.

[-] Buelldozer@lemmy.today 26 points 2 weeks ago

I think they were joking about that

Nah, there's a pile of misinformation circulating on social media claiming that the deceased had broken arms / legs / bruises / etc.

People unthinkingly gobble it up because it fits their world view. Farther down in the comments here you can find people already claiming that it's a cover-up / conspiracy because the Coroner's Statement (he's black BTW) doesn't jive with what they want to believe.

[-] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago

The comment you are referring to is unedited and ends with a /s Commonly used as a tag for sarcasm in case they thought someone may mistake it for being serious.

[-] primrosepathspeedrun@anarchist.nexus 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Maybe but let's wait for a reliable source before citing somethong transparently aligned, unqualified to know what a defensive wound looks like, and known for lying-like a coroner.

I genuinely cannot think of a less reliable source.

[-] QuoVadisHomines@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 weeks ago

I really wish more people learned the lesson from Columbine where the media narrative from the start and the eventual FBI psych profile were at extreme odds with each other. Many crimes fit this mold where our initial impression is not what actually happened.

Well, cops said cops are innocent. Must be true.

[-] QuoVadisHomines@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 weeks ago

That's not what was said. What they claim is that there are no defensive wounds. The police aren't suspected in this case at this time.

Right. Cops have declared themselves not suspects.

[-] QuoVadisHomines@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 weeks ago

There’s no reason to suspect them

Of course. They declared they aren't suspects. I don't see what we disagree on here. Either you're being very irrational and looking for a fight or I'm being very stupid and missing something.

Well yeah. Look at people who try and fail to kill themselves. Usually no fresh defensive wounds. Clearly that's what they're always missing.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago

Would Epstein have been considered Lynched?

[-] Juice@midwest.social 6 points 2 weeks ago

Would have to be acknowledged

[-] TheMinister@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 weeks ago

There have been numerous apparent lynchings in recent years. But they always say “no foul play expected”

this post was submitted on 16 Sep 2025
556 points (100.0% liked)

News

32583 readers
2774 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS