Question about WCAU & Today Show

[Nertz!]

I saw on the Phillyist blog today an article about the widow of Philadelphia Police officer Daniel Faulkner, the Philadelphia police officer that was murdered by the terrorist Mumia Abu-Jamal in 1981, who was on the Today Show yesterday with Michael Smerconish talking about the book they wrote about her life and the pain the supporters of the terrorist who executed her husband have made her life hell.
They had some screen grabs and the screen grabs showed a crawl, but WCAU doesn't do a crawl. What is up with that?
Take a look here:
http://phillyist.com/2007/12/07/daniel_faulkner.php

 

[Julius Leonard Marx]

I saw on the Phillyist blog today an article about the widow of Philadelphia Police officer Daniel Faulkner, the Philadelphia police officer that was murdered by the terrorist Mumia Abu-Jamal in 1981, who was on the Today Show yesterday with Michael Smerconish talking about the book they wrote about her life and the pain the supporters of the terrorist who executed her husband have made her life hell.
They had some screen grabs and the screen grabs showed a crawl, but WCAU doesn't do a crawl. What is up with that?
Take a look here:
http://phillyist.com/2007/12/07/daniel_faulkner.php

Ah, pardon me. Don't you mean "alleged terrorist?"
Some say he was defending himself. From what we've seen with "New York's finest," that's entirely possible.
But I wasn't there and I don't know. Unless you were, neither do you.

What is surprising here, is that TV and radio news are generally pro cop (until overwhelming evidence for police misconduct comes from other sources and then TV does a 180 and takes credit for discovering "the truth.")

 

[imhomerjay]

Ah, pardon me. Don't you mean "alleged terrorist?"

Hardly alleged. He was tried and convicted, with the verdict never overturned. Under the law, he is a murderer. His time to fry is long overdue.

 

[Julius Leonard Marx]

Ah, pardon me. Don't you mean "alleged terrorist?"

Hardly alleged. He was tried and convicted, with the verdict never overturned. Under the law, he is a murderer. His time to fry is long overdue.

You have more faith in the legal system than I do. I keep seeing these stories about people wrongly convicted. You trust cops more than do. I keep hearing about cops lying and falsifying evidence, especially to cover for each other. And I keep hearing about instances of police brutality.

Besides one person's freedom fighter is another's terrorist. Terrorism is what people in an intolerable situation resort to when they have no other options. I am Irish-American. My people have been labeled "terrorists." Terrorism is one of those things where something is a crime because the ruled assume the prerogatives of the rulers. If Faulkner (a minion of the state) had shot Abu-Jamal, under identical circumstances, would you still have a problem with it?

This happened 18 years ago and this woman is still being the grieving widow? Maybe it's time for her to move on. But she and Smerconish (who comes off here as opportunist out for self-promotion) apparently intend to keep milking this for all it's worth.

 

[imhomerjay]

Ah, pardon me. Don't you mean "alleged terrorist?"

Hardly alleged. He was tried and convicted, with the verdict never overturned. Under the law, he is a murderer. His time to fry is long overdue.

You have more faith in the legal system than I do. I keep seeing these stories about people wrongly convicted. You trust cops more than do. I keep hearing about cops lying and falsifying evidence, especially to cover for each other. And I keep hearing about instances of police brutality.

Besides one person's freedom fighter is another's terrorist. Terrorism is what people in an intolerable situation resort to when they have no other options. I am Irish-American. My people have been labeled "terrorists." Terrorism is one of those things where something is a crime because the ruled assume the prerogatives of the rulers. If Faulkner (a minion of the state) had shot Abu-Jamal, under identical circumstances, would you still have a problem with it?

This happened 18 years ago and this woman is still being the grieving widow? Maybe it's time for her to move on. But she and Smerconish (who comes off here as opportunist out for self-promotion) apparently intend to keep milking this for all it's worth.

I have great faith in the legal system. It is far from perfect, and I am quite aware of cases where it has gone wrong. However, those cases do not prove the guilt of all who work within the system in an effort to protect us all. You know, those minions of the state I would be willing to bet you would still call if you were to be robbed or assaulted.

If we assume that because one person has been wrongly accused or convicted that the entire system is suspect, should we not release every criminal? Rapists, murderers, thieves---let's let them all back in to the community because one of them, somewhere, may have been in jail for the wrong reason. Let's have no law enforcement whatsover, and let God sort 'em all out on judgement day.

Not one defender of Mumia has produced a credible shred of evidence to exonerate him. And despite tying the court system in knots for years, not one appelate court has overturned the conviction.

Mumia being a radical and a broadcaster critical of the police does not prove a conspiracy to frame him for Officer Faulkner's murder, just as it doesn't prove Mumia gunned him down in cold blood. The evidence presented at tiral did that.

As for his widow, it is neither your place nor mine to determine the proper length of grief for someone whose life partner, the person they thought they would rasie a family and grow old with, was executed for no reason other than being out on the streets to protect the likes of you and me. Tell us, is eight days the proper period to be angry? Is it six months? Two years? When, exactly, does that pain subside? It is a normal reaction to want closure for what happened to her, and that hasn't happened yet.

The problem here is not that she is a grieving widow after eighteen years, it is that the case continues to drag on after eighteen years. If she wants to tell her side of the story, more power to her. I had the pleasure of talking to her once, and I applaud her for her courage and conviction to stand up for her husband's memory.

I applauded Barsky for his stance on the Mumia case, and I applaud Smirconish for continuing to stand up for the side of Officer Faulkner.

 

[Julius Leonard Marx]

I have great faith in the legal system. It is far from perfect, and I am quite aware of cases where it has gone wrong. However, those cases do not prove the guilt of all who work within the system in an effort to protect us all. You know, those minions of the state I would be willing to bet you would still call if you were to be robbed or assaulted.

If we assume that because one person has been wrongly accused or convicted that the entire system is suspect, should we not release every criminal? Rapists, murderers, thieves---let's let them all back in to the community because one of them, somewhere, may have been in jail for the wrong reason. Let's have no law enforcement whatsover, and let God sort 'em all out on judgement day.

Not one defender of Mumia has produced a credible shred of evidence to exonerate him. And despite tying the court system in knots for years, not one appelate court has overturned the conviction.

Mumia being a radical and a broadcaster critical of the police does not prove a conspiracy to frame him for Officer Faulkner's murder, just as it doesn't prove Mumia gunned him down in cold blood. The evidence presented at tiral did that.

As for his widow, it is neither your place nor mine to determine the proper length of grief for someone whose life partner, the person they thought they would rasie a family and grow old with, was executed for no reason other than being out on the streets to protect the likes of you and me. Tell us, is eight days the proper period to be angry? Is it six months? Two years? When, exactly, does that pain subside? It is a normal reaction to want closure for what happened to her, and that hasn't happened yet.

The problem here is not that she is a grieving widow after eighteen years, it is that the case continues to drag on after eighteen years. If she wants to tell her side of the story, more power to her. I had the pleasure of talking to her once, and I applaud her for her courage and conviction to stand up for her husband's memory.

I applauded Barsky for his stance on the Mumia case, and I applaud Smirconish for continuing to stand up for the side of Officer Faulkner.

Thank you for well thought-out and well expressed reply.

There is a good deal more uncertainty about this entire matter than partisans on either side are willing to admit. And yes, a lot of people on either side are keeping this thing going all this time.

I am not comfortable with indiscriminate use of the word "terrorist" (in an earlier, post your's). But since communists are no longer available to politicians as the designated bogeymen to deflect questions and criticism, I guess were a stuck with terrorists to fill the role.

 

[imhomerjay]

I have great faith in the legal system. It is far from perfect, and I am quite aware of cases where it has gone wrong. However, those cases do not prove the guilt of all who work within the system in an effort to protect us all. You know, those minions of the state I would be willing to bet you would still call if you were to be robbed or assaulted.

If we assume that because one person has been wrongly accused or convicted that the entire system is suspect, should we not release every criminal? Rapists, murderers, thieves---let's let them all back in to the community because one of them, somewhere, may have been in jail for the wrong reason. Let's have no law enforcement whatsover, and let God sort 'em all out on judgement day.

Not one defender of Mumia has produced a credible shred of evidence to exonerate him. And despite tying the court system in knots for years, not one appelate court has overturned the conviction.

Mumia being a radical and a broadcaster critical of the police does not prove a conspiracy to frame him for Officer Faulkner's murder, just as it doesn't prove Mumia gunned him down in cold blood. The evidence presented at tiral did that.

As for his widow, it is neither your place nor mine to determine the proper length of grief for someone whose life partner, the person they thought they would rasie a family and grow old with, was executed for no reason other than being out on the streets to protect the likes of you and me. Tell us, is eight days the proper period to be angry? Is it six months? Two years? When, exactly, does that pain subside? It is a normal reaction to want closure for what happened to her, and that hasn't happened yet.

The problem here is not that she is a grieving widow after eighteen years, it is that the case continues to drag on after eighteen years. If she wants to tell her side of the story, more power to her. I had the pleasure of talking to her once, and I applaud her for her courage and conviction to stand up for her husband's memory.

I applauded Barsky for his stance on the Mumia case, and I applaud Smirconish for continuing to stand up for the side of Officer Faulkner.

Thank you for well thought-out and well expressed reply.

There is a good deal more uncertainty about this entire matter than partisans on either side are willing to admit. And yes, a lot of people on either side are keeping this thing going all this time.

I am not comfortable with indiscriminate use of the word "terrorist" (in an earlier, post your's). But since communists are no longer available to politicians as the designated bogeymen to deflect questions and criticism, I guess were a stuck with terrorists to fill the role.

I agree re: the overuse of "terrorist" as a label. Not all muderers are terrorists in the common use of the word. Insomuch as actions of murders can often be used to send a "message" to others (whether it's 'stay off my drug corner' or 'don't talk to the cops' or whatever), it may be a technically accurate term. However, I would submit what is (sadly) common thuggery has enough differences from the likes of the Al Queda--not to mention the likes of the Oklahoma City bombers--that the label of terrorist should be more reserved for those operating on larger, more organized scales.

 

[Evangelist]

Abu-Jamal has NEVER offered any explanation as to what happened on that fateful night/morning. Nor has his brother. And Abu-Jamal has had AMPLE opportunity to tell his side of the story. There are other witnesses who testified that Abu-Jamal killed Danny Faulkner. I believe he is guilty.

As for Michael Smerconish's representation of Mrs. Faulkner, he has always done so on a pro bono basis. Both his and Mrs. Faulkner's proceeds from the new book, Murdered by Mumia, are going to the Danny Faulkner Foundation, which assists family of people who die violent deaths. Maybe he does get publicity for it, but he doesn't profit from his assisting Mrs. Faulkner.

 

[Vandelay]

Getting back to the question at hand, the screen grabs appear to be from WNBC.
The big image seems to have the end of "NEWSCHANNEL 4" in it and the small image has sports scores for NYC area teams.