The car belonged to the woman who called the police. He had stolen her keys and taken the child who was in the car which is what she reported to the police. She was his “girlfriend” and also the one who had a protective order placed on him for sexual assault earlier. The child in the car was hers and he was supposedly the father.

Also in one of the videos it is clear that when he rounded the front of the car he had a knife called a ‘karambit’ in his left hand.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Jacob_Blake

Whose car was he trying to get into? He had previously been accused of trying to steal a rental car from the woman who called the police. Was this a rental car? If so, who rented it? The Woman who called the police to report that he was violating the order of protection? Was it legally his car? Did it belong to one of his other “girlfriends”?

The other related question. Whose children were in that car. I have never seen any mention of Blake being married. Were these really his children? On what basis? Any paternity suits? Were they the children of one of his Baby Mommas?

I haven’t read every report about the case, so I might have missed this information. Or maybe, the only way this info would have been made public would have been during the police trial that is not going to happen.

Despite the shellacking the Left gave him for being sane and reasonable, he doesn’t have any inclination to ask himself, “What else are they getting wrong?”

Gell-Manning Amnesia to the max.

Changers, such as Neo and others we’ve heard from, don’t seem to have that affliction – they can see that if someone lies to them regarding things they know something about, then that someone is quite possibly lying regarding things they don’t know about as well.

I wonder if that’s some kind of innate personality trait: either you have it or you don’t.

There will be many, many demagogues furious with this decision. They have unfettered access to Twitter. In addition the Garland family’s ROI on CRT publications could suffer. And Slo’ Joe’s tanking administration is always looking for another racially charged distraction.

Evidence? Please! The pain and sadness felt by Blake, his family and the wider ‘community’ is more than sufficient evidence. ‘Lived experience’ don’t you know?

Given all of the above, a swift reversal on this decision is not unlikely.

Turley linked Zorn’s substack, and there were actually two posts there which discuss the situation. On the Open Thread, I excerpted quite a bit from the one linked by Turley, and noted that it applied directly to this topic, and the prior post was also relevant.

Here are the posts in chronological order, and Turley’s at the end for completeness. They should be read in full (scroll down through Zorn’s entries to the “main feature” of his “compendium” posts).

https://ericzorn.substack.com/p/panelist-interrupted

https://ericzorn.substack.com/p/moving-on-not-quite-yet
(this one also mentions the Rittenhouse case further down; he believes it’s a slam-dunk self-defense, but allows that you can’t predict jury verdicts anymore)

https://jonathanturley.org/2021/10/09/chicago-journalist-cancels-appearance-with-blistering-response-to-depauls-student-editors-and-faculty-advisor/#more-179303

Bottom line(s) from Zorn:
First post:

I was and remain concerned that I appear to have folded here, to have granted my critics the dreaded “heckler’s veto.” They wanted to prevent me from appearing at the forum and I’m guessing they felt some satisfaction to learn that in light of their objections I would not appear. They may even be telling themselves that my refusal to participate in whatever performative confrontation they had in mind signaled an acknowledgement that I have forever forfeited the right to speak on any topic at any public forum, and also signaled my fear of having to address their concerns.

But no, of course, as I hope I’ve made clear here.

I strongly dispute the characterization of that column and of my body of work, and I further consider it beyond troubling that the expression of opinions that may differ from the opinions of certain students or even the majority of students ought to bar someone from speaking on campus on any subject whatsoever. The inability of the intolerant to distinguish between poisonous hate speech and differences of opinion, tone or emphasis is troubling and it’s hardly limited to this one minor example of attempted cancellation.

Any meaningful commitment to diversity includes a commitment to diverse viewpoints.

Second post:

Sorry not to be moving on, as requested, but I’m not going to cede my reputation and good name to anyone who makes a public stink about what they think I wrote rather than what I actually wrote and who tries to deny me the opportunity to speak to a willing audience. Universities are not alone among the institutions that need to find a template for dealing with differences of opinion and dissent, and surrendering to loud voices and Twitter mobs should not be part of that template.

I recommend you read “MIT Abandons Its Mission. And Me.” an essay posted this week by University of Chicago geophysicist Dorian Abbot, and to heed his conclusion:

It’s time to say no to the mob….This is not a partisan issue. Anyone who is interested in the pursuit of truth and in promoting a healthy and functioning society has a stake in this debate. Speaking out now may seem risky. But the cost of remaining silent is far steeper.

Turley:

The fact is that these students already had their learning experience from academics like Thrasher and others in journalism. Writers, editors, commentators, and academics have embraced rising calls for censorship and speech controls, including President-elect Joe Biden and his key advisers.

This movement includes academics rejecting the very concept of objectivity in journalism in favor of open advocacy.
…

In the end, the campaign succeeded. Other students will not be able to hear the views of Zorn and these students will not be “apprehensive” over the appearance of someone with opposing views. That could be what they have “learn[ed] from their experience.”