Paul Embry 
Member since Nov 13, 2018



  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Recent Comments

Re: “The good fight

Hyper-explanation as an occasional literary device can be entertaining; humorous even. It has the added benefit of granting the writer license to re-frame an ongoing dialogue. For instance, if a columnist condescends to an audience by explaining some common sense process, he/she can then fudge certain components of said process and anchor weighted or biased points to them later. Adopting this voice also does the speaker the boon of allowing him/her the assumption that she/he is speaking from a position of superiority.
This can be leveraged in the pursuit of humor, as all satire has its roots in derision of some kind; or it can be parlayed into an ersatz licensure of moral authority, undeservedly bolstering the author's ethos. (If things that haven't occurred to us are such old hat to the columnist we're reading, shouldn't she or he be heard on other subjects?) So sparing pomposity is, indeed, an option an opinion writer should consider.

To assume this voice in perperuity, however (and with no exception granted to a very possible mitigative claim to mere laziness), is misguided.

Respectfully offered, Shredder, if it is a respected writer you wish to be, abandon the pretense and declare that you find us all hopelessly dim, or (preferably) adopt a less arrogant literary method. We're all tired of feeling like you think we should thank you for these half-assed diatribes. What we'd thank you for is some sincerity and some now-and again-appreciation of the many good things that happen around here.

4 likes, 2 dislikes
Posted by Paul Embry on 02/10/2019 at 12:37 PM

Re: “DA declines to charge former Paso police officer accused of sexual assault

Consensual sex leaves the same evidence behind as forcible sex. Proving rape in these circumstances becomes simply a matter of the complaining witness' ability to convince a jury (beyond a reasonable doubt) that forcible sex occurred, because any evidence can be reasonably explained away as evidence of sex, but NOT as evidence of a rape. In these cases, the credibility of the witness becomes paramount, and the trial is often as traumatic as the crime that required it -- especially if the complainant does not convince the jury.
A prosecutor will have amassed reams of information about the specifics of any case that will not be available to a commenting public. That is why we won't always understand a given decision, and why we must, ultimately, elect prosecutors who can be trusted.
We have achieved that here in Mr. Dow. We should all realize that our assessments are performed with the assistance of incomplete information, while the DA's office has total information.
Additionally, a rush to trial with a shaky case will eliminate the chance to try the accused should further evidence develop.
I, for one, am in favor of Mr. Dow's fiscal responsibility in passing on this case, even knowing there would be a flap. He could have just as easily brought the case and wasted a grip of time and money on a losing case in the name of political expediency.

1 like, 5 dislikes
Posted by Paul Embry on 11/13/2018 at 2:40 PM

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.

© 2019 New Times San Luis Obispo
Powered by Foundation