We Debunked Snopes Philando Castile Fact Check
Snopes Philando Castile Debunk Inception
Ever since we posted our article, “Philando Castile Was an Armed Robbery Suspect,” we have been getting a lot of messages about how Snopes.com has debunked our article and we should be ashamed of ourselves. The fact is, these people are wrong. This problem appears to have been created by people too lazy to read past the headlines. Allow us to debunk the debunking of our article. That’s right, debunking inside of debunking; it’s debunk inception!
For reference:
Blue Lives Matter original article is here: Philando Castile Was an Armed Robbery Suspect
Snopes’ article is here: Snopes Article on Philando Castile
To kick this off, let’s first address that Snopes is just a fact checking blog, and Snopes does make a reasonable attempt to post factual information. However, their writers are as prone to mistakes as any other blogger. We will be using Snopes’ popular true/false rating for this article.
False: Snopes Philando Castile article proved Blue Lives Matter’s article wrong
Snopes didn’t address our article or the information in it directly at all. Snopes took aim at the Conservative Treehouse, which is a conservative blog that went a bit overboard on speculation.
True: The gun in Philando Castile’s lap was unidentifiable as the gun used in a robbery
Snopes disputed Conservative Treehouse’s claim that the gun on Castile’s lap looked like the same gun used in the armed robbery. Our officers, who all have extensive experience with guns, all agreed that Castile had a gun. However, the footage of the gun does not make it distinguishable as the gun in the robbery security footage. We agree with Snopes on this matter.
NOTE: Blue Lives Matter never made a claim in our article that Castile’s gun was the one used in the robbery.
True: Diamond Reynolds was seen holding the same type of cigarette brand that was taken in the robbery
Both Snopes and Conservative Treehouse agreed that Diamond Reynolds was seen holding Newport cigarettes that matched the brand taken in the robbery, but this appears to be irrelevant. Newport represents over 10% of the market share for cigarettes. Geographical areas tend to have greatly increased sales of the region’s favorite brand. We’re told that Newport is extremely popular in MInnesota. The only thing that is confirmed by Reynold’s cigarette possession is that she smokes.
NOTE: Blue Lives Matter did not include any information about Reynold’s smoking habits in our article.
Snopes Philando Castile Article: Photobombing white guy who’s offended by second hand smoke
Likely False: Philando Castile did not have a concealed carry permit
Snopes took on the Conservative Treehouse claim that Castile was never issued a concealed carry permit, because the Ramsey County Sheriff never issued him a permit. While the Ramsey County Sheriff indeed said that they never issued a concealed carry permit to Castile, that does not mean that another jurisdiction did not issue him a permit. Snopes got a little sloppy after that point and claimed that there was proof that Castile had a concealed carry permit, because an anonymous tipster told a newspaper that it was so. We expect that the reputable newspaper actually confirmed their source and that their information is likely valid, but an anonymous source is far from proof.
NOTE: Blue Lives Matter did not make any claim about Castile having a valid concealed carry permit or not. Hopefully by now you are catching on to the theme that Blue Lives Matter didn’t make the claims that Snopes is disputing.
Mostly True: Philando Castile wasn’t wanted for armed robbery
Snopes disputes that Philando Castile was wanted for armed robbery; this is where we wade into a murky gray area of legalese. Prior to the traffic stop, Castile was not identified as the armed robbery suspect, because the armed robbery suspect hadn’t been identified at all. Snopes is right that Castile wasn’t wanted for armed robbery. However, it turns out that the reason for the Casile traffic stop was to attempt to identify the possible robber.
NOTE: Blue Lives Matter never claimed that Castile was a wanted person.
This can get complicated, but I’ll try to explain. Law enforcement officers are allowed to detain people when there are specific and articulable facts and circumstances to believe that a crime may have been committed, or is about to be committed, and that the person being detained may be the one responsible. This level of evidence is referred to as “reasonable suspicion.” Officers could not have stopped Castile without reasonable suspicion. All of this means that, based on the facts and circumstances that were known to the officers at the time that they stopped Castile, they had reason to believe that Castile may be responsible for the robbery. We do not know what facts and circumstances were known by the officers at the time of the stop, but we do know that the officers believed that the level of evidence that they had was enough to suspect that Castile may have been the robber.
That entire paragraph didn’t fit on a headline, so we simplified it and referred to Castile as a “robbery suspect” because the officers suspected him of committing the robbery.
Conclusion
Snopes didn’t actually debunk, or really attempt to debunk, any of the information in our article.
Now think about that smug Facebook friend who decided to post the Snopes article in response to our Philando Castile article. Feel free to lob this right back at them.
To get more articles like this directly in your inbox, sign up to our newsletter:
Do you have any stories that you'd like us to cover? Would you like to write a guest article? Submit your ideas to [email protected]
Brendan Doran
The NYT has published an important article that establishes 2 things.
1. That lethal violence is not used disproportionately but that non-lethal force is used with racial disparity against Black men.
2. Motive: it’s the rough handling. Note this is my conclusion and not their explicit statement -the key last paragraph.
Revenge for insults is human and understandable. So is lying about why you’re angry. It is inadvisable however to lie in justifying killing when asked what justifies a campaign of it. It’s not police shootings. It’s police rough handling.
The key grievance is below – this is the author of the study Dr. Fryer.
““Who the hell wants to have a police officer put their hand on them or yell and scream at them? It’s an awful experience,” he said. “I’ve had it multiple, multiple times. Every black man I know has had this experience. Every one of them. It is hard to believe that the world is your oyster if the police can rough you up without punishment. And when I talked to minority youth, almost every single one of them mentions lower level uses of force as the reason why they believe the world is corrupt.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/12/upshot/surprising-new-evidence-shows-bias-in-police-use-of-force-but-not-in-shootings.html