Jesus, this guy is obsessive.
1) I read and re-read Patterico’s initial post several times when composing my response to it. He says I wrongly wrote that he left out a portion of his excerpt of Dunphy’s post. Apparently, I skipped over that portion several times. I’ll take his word for it. Consider this a correction. The rest of the post stands.
2) He’s declaring victory in his critique of my articles on the Jimmie Duncan case. Incorrect. I didn’t respond to his nonsense because his critiques are misleading, quote from opinions to cases that had nothing to do with Duncan’s criminal trial, and otherwise leave out information that undermines his case. This is partly because he got much of his information from summaries of the evidence in judicial opinions (including dissenting opinions) and not from the actual trial transcript (odd, because he has (wrongly) criticized me for doing the same thing in the past). His critique of the second article basically amounted to dismissing my reporting of police-coerced testimony, prosecutorial misconduct, and the withholding of exculpatory evidence as “pro-defense spin.”
It would take a many-thousand word blog post to explain what’s wrong with his critiques, after which I’m sure he’d respond with another many-thousand word post. I don’t have the time or the interest in getting into that. If he wants to consider my reluctance to engage in an exchange of pedantics to be a grand victory for him, let him.
3) I blocked Patterico from reading my Twitter feed because he has a strange obsession with me. My Twitter feed is where, in addition to linking to my other work or the occasional news story, I write about my dogs, or complain about the WiFi at whatever airport I’m at, or write about a delicious dinner I just ate at some restaurant. When he tried to subscribe to it, I didn’t see a reason why a guy who clearly hates me would or should have any interest in what I’m eating for dinner. Nor did I really feel like reading a blog post in which he meticulously explains why what I ate couldn’t possibly have been as delicious as I described it on Twitter, calls me a liar, and demands a retraction. I’m exaggerating, but only a little. In the past, Patterico has referenced a blog post I once put up about an event in my personal life to try to delve into my psychology to explain why I have the opinions I do.
So I really didn’t feel like having the guy use old Twitter posts in some future attack on me. I figured if Patterico wants to see what I’m writing about politics or news events, or what I’m reporting, he can read my blog. So I blocked him. This was many months ago. That he has saved up my blocking of him all this time to now throw up with a giant graphic and expose! at the top of his latest blog post is weird. That he found a way to get around the block and is reading my feed anyway is, again, obsessive and creepy.
4) I haven’t responded to point (1) because in the last 36 hours, I’ve been working on a breaking story, had a lunch appointment, had a drink with a friend, and for the last 12 hours have had a massive migraine. Henceforth, I’ll try to be more comprehensive out my daily routine in my Twitter feed so Patterico can keep track.
5) You’d think I’d have learned by now that responding to this guy in any way invites hours of wasted time delving into tedious parsing, rehashing months- or years-old debates, and responding to personal attacks. And, apparently now, discussion of my Twitter feed. Lesson (finally) learned. This idiot doesn’t merit a response. If one of his inevitable future attacks on me includes allegations meritorious enough that a blogger or commentator I respect picks up and reposts, I’ll respond. Otherwise, it’s just not worth it. I’m sure Patterico will respond to this post, and will then take my failure to respond to that response as a concession of defeat. And I will let him.
6) Because of aforementioned migraine, I won’t be blogging any more today. Consider this an open thread.