In this video, Deputy Kyle Dinkheller is murdered. It is hard to watch, but there is a reason we have to do it: the dead deputy is without influential friends in this world, but the jitbag who engages him in this video was celebrated for the rest of his life. Which fortunately ended on a vinyl-covered slab on the 13th, as the citizens of the great state of Georgia put Andrew Brannan down like the rabid dog he was. Dinkheller left a pregnant wife and kids (a son was born after his death, and will never know his father). The murder took place on 12 January 1998. The Laurens County Sheriff’s Office was a relatively early adopter of dash cams, and so Brannan’s prosecutors had this to work with, and his defense had this to explain away:
The explanation the flailing defenders chose is that Brannan couldn’t help doing this because he was a Vietnam combat veteran. Stew on that for a minute; we’ll come back to it.
A fact seldom mentioned in the media is on the same video recording, before this particular clip begins. Dinkheller didn’t stop Brannan for “no reason,” or because he was on some kind of cop power trip. He stopped him because he clocked the man driving that junkbox pickup at 98 miles per hour. Yeah, this guy shot a cop for stopping him for speeding.
In the end, he got what was coming to him. Among the witnesses that watched Brannan make a seamless transition from jitbag-in-prison to jitbag-in-perdition were 20 deputies from the Laurens County Sheriff’s Office. Kyle Dinkheller’s friends and co-workers waited 16 years for the ACLU’s efforts to make this crime pay to fail out, and the ancient lex talionis to find its fulfillment.
Of course, the criminal groupies haven’t stopped pining for Brannan just because Brannan has achieved progressive nirvana, to wit, a carbon footprint of zero. Naomi Schavin, one of the no-experience-less-talent writers hired by the flailing New Republic recently (yes, the publication that has a long history of running with fabrications, and that just published a movie review by a reviewer who had only seen the movie’s trailer, that New Republic), has a shallow and disorganized piece in the magazine. Her point? Veterans with PTSD should be, if not exactly excused for murders like this, at least exempted from execution. She’s talking specifically about this Captain Kangaroo-lookin’ butt blossom.
Watch the video again. Schavin deliberately maximizes Brannan’s irrationality (actually, he looks less like a nut job, and more like just a common-and-garden sphincter muscle, to us). And she minimizes his crime, and elides the fact that it was Brannan unilaterally who made every esclatory move in the fight:
Brannan’s reaction escalated rapidly from taunting Dinkheller to screaming at him, culminating in a firefight that left Dinkheller dead.
“REaction?” What? And, “Culminating in a firefight?” Our hairy combat-vet hiney. Watch the video again, don’t accept Schavin’s lies about it. She’s missing a few steps, this lying reporter. Brannan’s actions — not reaction — escalated from taunting, to screaming, to pulling out an M1 Carbine and shooting, to cold-bloodedly executing his wounded, defenseless victim. But he’s the one that has Schavin’s sympathy. Maybe the gun made him do it! Being twaumatized as a vet made him do it!
Well, who really gives a hairy rat’s ass what made him do it? Two million guys (and tens of thousands of gals) served in Vietnam and didn’t whack a deputy thirty or forty years later, so it’s not like society’s holding him to an impossible standard.
And then there’s the whole firefight thing. Brannan attacked Dinkheller without warning and put nine rounds into him (and plenty more into random terrain), where the deputy just nailed Brannan in the brisket once (fortunately, enough to make him easy to catch). That’s an ambush, not a firefight. Firefight implies a degree of contact among rough equals.
It’s not just that Schavin is illogical, irrationally inverse in her thinking (in her mixed-up, tossed-up, never-come-down world, Dinkheller deserves death, and Brannan release and “treatment”). But she’s also thoroughly dishonest (look at how she misrepresents Brannan’s attack on the deputy). She accepts the PTSD bullshit from Brannan’s lawyers, the usual criminal-loving murder fanboys.
So, what would she have done?
…precautionary measures to keep his community safe … like removing his firearm…
Oh, we saw that coming…. Guess what? His community is now safe, sweetheart. And no firearms were harmed during the application of suitable treatment of this toxic bipedal pathogen.
Got any more advice for the grown-ups’ world, child?
…governors might consider staying all executions of veterans with the diagnosis [PTSD]….
Like hell. How many PTSD diagnoses are being ridden for a disability by phonies, pre-existing nutballs, and guys like Brannan, who are just turds who can’t function in civilization?
Being a vet didn’t make him do that. Nothing you can see or do in combat can make a guy do that. It’s what a guy is, what a guy is inside, that makes him do things like that.
Of course, there are guys suffering with post-combat stress, real guys with real troubles. But most of them are dangers to no one, and the ones who are, unfortunately, dangerous, are primarily hazards to themselves. If Naomi Schavin knew combat vets, a species one seldom encounters in the coffee houses of Manhattan, salons of Georgetown or writers’ lofts anywhere, she’d know that. And in absolutely no case is PTSD the excuse for murder that she and other pro-criminal campaigners make it out to be.