Home Store In Memoriam Deborah Newsletter Forum Topics Blogfeed Blogroll Facebook MySpace Contact Us About

FOX News Reporter Megyn Kendall So Biased, She Deserves A Bonus From The Duke Lacrosse Team

Reported by Ellen - April 21, 2006

In my post about Wednesday night’s (4/19/06) Hannity & Colmes discussion of the Duke rape case, I jokingly wrote that FOX News reporter Megyn Kendall’s coverage was so skewed in favor of the white Duke defendants that you had to wonder if she wasn’t moonlighting as their defense attorney. On last night’s (4/20/06) show, she seemed to be stumping for a bonus. If so, she certainly earned it.

Kendall dispensed with any pretension of fairness or balance right from the start when she honed in on the flaws in the prosecution case and stayed there for the entire discussion. She began by mentioning the “most damning” evidence against the prosecution, the “cell phone records, credit card receipts and so on that appear to prove that one of the named defendants, Seligman – Reade Seligman – was NOT AT THE HOUSE (her emphasis) as of 12:19. I talked to the cabdriver myself today. He’s got receipts to prove that he picked up Seligman at 12:19… That puts Seligman in that house with the stripper for at most a 15 minute period… That’s 15 minutes for him to commit what SHE alleges is a 30-minute gang rape… That’s a problem for the prosecution.”

Alan Colmes was the only person on the panel who seemed interested in discussing why the rape accusation may be legitimate. The other panelists were defense attorney Mercedes Colwin and Ann Coulter. Comment: As far as I can determine, Coulter has no credentials either in criminal law or sex crimes other than the fact that she is a suspect in Florida for having committed voter fraud and she is reputed to have quite an extensive history of sexual activity.

Colmes asked wasn’t it possible that other people in the house committed that crime during that timeline? (Comment: I think he meant along with Seligman).

Kendall didn’t bother to consider what Colmes was asking or what other scenarios might have occurred. Instead, she made it clear that the viewers should conclude that the accuser had lied and Seligman was innocent. Kendall replied, “Indeed it’s possible, but of course, SHE is the one who is saying this is the guy among others.” Reciting the timeline, Kendall said, “So if he committed this 30-minute gang rape, I don’t know when he did it.”

Later in the discussion, Colmes came back to that point. “Megyn, we still have a situation where (the accuser) said there were three participants… One of them only had a short window, but nevertheless there WAS a window within which something COULD have happened. There are other people that she says were involved that don’t conform to the particular timeline of Seligman. So to simply say based on that, ‘nothing could have happened,’ would NOT be an accurate statement, right Megyn?”

“That’s true,” Kendall acknowledged. But she quickly added, “However, it would be a dream… to defend said unnamed third defendant because it would be so easy to cross-examine the victim and exploit her testimony.” The usually vapid Kendall came alive describing the possibilities. However, in her zeal to destroy the credibility of the accuser, Kendall completely overlooked the point of Colmes’ question – that if there was more than one rapist (as has been alleged), that there could have been a 30-minute gang rape where one of the gang was present for only 15 minutes.

Shame on you, Megyn Kendall! You’re going to the doghouse.

Comments
Post a comment




Remember Me?


We welcome your opinions and viewpoints. Comments must remain civil, on-topic and must not violate any copyright or other laws. We reserve the right to delete any comments we deem inappropriate or non-constructive to the discussion for any reason, and to block any commenter for repeated violations.

Your email address is required to post, but it will not be published on the site.