In the wake of the National Justice Party’s second protest in defense of Ethan Liming, the White teenager brutalized by a gang of adult blacks in Akron, Ohio, the mainstream media has maintained a deafening silence. Until now.
The Akron Beacon Journal, the hometown newspaper for the Rubber City has finally decided to break the editorial void one week later, but while the National Justice Party has dedicated its efforts to reveal the facts behind this tragic case, the Beacon Journal chose a different route, one rife with outright lies, petty character smears, blatant obfuscation of the facts, and heinous attempts to gaslight an American public still dizzy from the loss.
Amanda Garrett, a twenty-year veteran reporter for the ABJ, just published a trio of biased articles regarding the Ethan Liming case, each more subjective than the last. In them, she weaves a shockingly false narrative that postulates the idea that the three black killers of Ethan all acted in self-defense under Ohio’s Stand Your Ground Laws. As a result, they should then benefit from the same praise and not-guilty verdict given to Kyle Rittenhouse, the young man acquitted for the self-defense shootings of three Antifa terrorists in Kenosha, WI, in 2020.
Only those possessing low information could possibly believe such an outrageous false equivalency at face value. Rittenhouse accurately shot three men who were legitimate threats, two fatally, while Ethan was unarmed and peaceful the night he was pummeled to death.
As a media outlet that has been covering the Ethan Liming story since its tragic inception, the Hyphen-Report feels obligated to dissect all three of the Akron Beacon Journal’s latest articles and dismantle their smear campaign against not only the deceased Ethan Liming, but also the pro-White advocacy group who has taken up his posthumous fight for justice. Amanda Garrett penned these anti-White diatribes in an effort to run damage control for the legal cases of three black criminals, all currently walking free despite their explicitly violent crimes.
Article #1: Ethan Liming case: 5 things we know about the teen’s death and the aftermath
When the National Justice Party marched for the second time in front of the Stubbs Justice Center, they passed out informational fliers to the public. The fliers provided a list of easily digestible facts about the Ethan Liming case that many people may not have known about. The first of Amanda Garrett’s articles appears to be a direct challenge to the flier issued by the National Justice Party, as well as a soft confirmation that the Beacon Journal obtained one of the fliers themselves.
But while the pro-White advocacy group stuck to cold hard facts about the case, the Akron Beacon Journal instead published an array of truths mixed in with curated talking points from Jon Sinn, a defense attorney for violent black criminal Deshawn Stafford.
The article describes a version of events that paints Liming as a cruel bully, preying on three innocent basketball players merely looking to defend themselves from what they believed was an attack with a real automatic weapon. Now seeking to evoke Ohio’s new Stand Your Ground Laws, The Beacon Journal’s narrative would have you believe that Stafford and his violent ilk are the actual victims and that the word of Jon Sinn is the only authoritative voice on the matter.
Even though the Splat R’ Ball gun used by Ethan Liming’s friends—one white and two black—was colored florescent orange and makes little to no sound compared to a real firearm, and even though Ethan never shot the water gun himself, the Beacon Journal employs Sinn’s story by reporting that Ethan picked up the water gun and fired it after his friends had begun to flee the scene.
This version of the story is wildly different from reality, which places Ethan in the role of peacemaker, trying to broker a truce between his underage friends and the predatory, adult blacks looking for blood after a harmless prank was played by Ethan’s friends.
Regardless of the intentions, implying that a dead teenager deserved his fate because he was engaged in youthful horseplay is a reckless narrative and ultimately irrelevant. In the end, Ethan was selected from a group of multi-ethnic teenagers and beaten to death because he was White. The footprints which were permanently stamped into his chest wall according to autopsy reports, automatically betray a self-defense narrative.
The Stafford brothers and Donovan Jones lynched Ethan Liming because they believed they could get away with it, and with assistance from the Akron Beacon Journal, they just might do so.
Article #2: Were 3 Black men charged in Liming’s death standing their ground?
In this article, Amanda tries to take the conversation far away from the topic of White victimhood and instead muddy the intellectual waters with a discussion of the partisan politics of Ohio.
In 2020, Republican lawmakers passed Stand Your Ground laws, expanding the rights of victims of violent crime to exercise self-defense. Amanda, once again quoting defense attornies and platforming their twisted vision of the events, sucks the reader into a quagmire of political and intellectual what-ifs.
What is self-defense? What constitutes justifiable self-defense and what doesn’t? What if these blacks are just like Kyle Rittenhouse? What about the racial disparities in claiming self-defense? What about the political ramifications of three blacks capitalizing on a Republican law? Remember Trayvon Martin? Remember George Zimmerman?
“If you were rooting for Kyle Rittenhouse, you ought to be rooting for Deshawn Stafford as well. Kyle Rittenhouse had a gun and he got to claim self defense. Why doesn’t that apply to a kid in Akron who has no gun and only has a basketball?” -Jon Sinn
By blasting the reader’s train of thought with a million different logical conundrums and references to unrelated topics like a shotgun, the Beacon Journal is attempting to make this story as complicated as it possibly can, and stymie any White solidarity that could arise from something as serious as an anti-White lynching taking place in its hometown.
You must read past the anti-White smokescreen that the Beacon Journal is attempting to raise to confuse you. In reality, the story is not a complicated one. Ethan was an unarmed White teenager killed by three black adults and sustained injuries that could not be possible if it were a mere case of self-defense. Talking about anything else brings the accused closer to freedom and Ethan further from justice.
Article #3: Ethan Liming: The changing narrative about his death outside I Promise and the aftermath
In the longest of the three articles, Amanda wastes no time in employing some creative license, giving a full rundown of the events of Ethan’s murder on June 2nd and doing her best to compose a symphony of self-defense overtones on behalf of the accused.
By painting Ethan and his friends as wandering thugs who set an “ambush” with “powerful, rapid-fire toy guns” and “spraying them with dozens of gel pellets that may have been frozen so they caused more damage,” the Beacon Journal instills doubt in the innocence of Ethan Liming, and sensationalizes the water gun prank played upon the three “basketball players.”
The story continues, inventorying the content of Ethan’s Kia and mentioning “two bags of marijuana and a digital scale in the glove box” reported by a Defense attorney. While none of this information is relevant to the case, the Beacon Journal wants to disassociate a moderate reader from the cause of Ethan Liming in any way that it can and will go as low as evoking reefer madness paranoia if it has to.
Then, Amanda Garrett starts—and fails—to weave a bizarre narrative of a Police conspiracy working in favor of Ethan and the prosecution. First, she alludes to the idea that because Police were quick to report Ethan’s killing as a “brutal assault,” and by waiting eight days to mention the water gun prank at the very onset of the crime, the Police were somehow unfairly profiling the accused. Second, by sourcing comments made by the Akron chapter of the NAACP, the article attempts to label the Police as racist for holding a press conference altogether.
“I applauded the fact (Mylett) clearly said in the beginning that it wasn’t about race…however, we also had to look at it funny because you’ve never done a press conference before,” Hill said recently. “Why were they doing it now?”
Defense attorney Eddie Sipplen said that Akron Police attempted to ‘thug-i-cize’ the accused. By not mentioning the “attack” by the water gun, he claims the police were framing it so the only victim that night was Ethan, ignoring his defendant, Donovan Jones, who should be considered a victim too.
The article gives us a view into Sipplen’s defense strategy, a bold anti-White mixture of lies and race hucksterism, looking to play on the liberal heartstrings of a demoralized White nation as countless black criminals have done before him. Sipplen even has the audacity to question the million-dollar bonds originally issued to his client, insinuating that they were done so out of racism, and not because his client committed an act of savage barbarism against a seventeen-year-old White kid.
“For me and some folks I’ve spoken with, how do you go from minding your own business, being law-abiding citizens, to being vilified in the system and then given such high bonds even though you’ve never been a criminal?” Hill asked.
The Beacon Journal reports on all of this with a straight face, despite Akron Police Chief Steven Mylett having made the now infamous claim that Ethan’s killing wasn’t racially motivated before arrests had even been made!
How could a law enforcement agency be considered racist and unfairly treating black defendants if its very actions have done nothing but help their case the entire time? The answer is simple. It can’t. But that doesn’t stop the Beacon Journal from trudging on with its incessant crusade to cast as much doubt as possible on the question of Ethan’s innocence.
By implying, through repetition, that the accused are being mistreated by “the system,” however minimally, defense attornies want to stockpile plenty of ammunition needed to defend the murderers while keeping the ire of the public tampered down to a manageable simmer.
Attacking the National Justice Party
By now, no one can deny that the only organization with the moral courage necessary to defend a White victim in 2022 is the National Justice Party. Having successfully marched to demand justice for White victims in the racially motivated Waukesha Christmas Parade attack, as well as coming out in support of Jupiter Paulsen, the White girl killed by a black immigrant in Fargo, North Dakota, the NJP wasted no time in its support of Ethan Liming.
But because the topic of White advocacy is a third rail in American political and social discourse, mainstream media outlets often have to weigh the pros and cons of reporting on the National Justice Party’s activities altogether. Do they dare mention this “white supremacist” group and risk exposing its morally just values to everyday White people? Or do they coat it in silence and allow the NJP to operate their marches and demonstrations unopposed?
In the case of the Akron Beacon Journal, they decided on the former, devoting ample space at the tail end of their article to besmirch the pro-White activists while quoting the dubiously founded Anti Defamation League as a primary source.
But while the Beacon Journal was quick to denounce the NJP’s actions in Akron both times it marched for justice, claiming their intentions were merely a “rallying cry” for “White supremacy,” it once again attempted to employ a game of mental disorientation for the reader.
In just a few paragraphs, it mentions the Unite the Right rally, uses trigger words like “white supremacy,” refers to the shut-and-closed case of criminal delinquent Jayland Walker, and plies mental trickery in order to dazzle and stun a reader into a place of moral complacency. When it mentions the National Justice Party’s stance on Ethan Liming’s murder, notably that Ethan was targeted for his race, the article merely states that the claim is false, without any evidence or citation needed to refute the claim.
If that doesn’t work, the Beacon Journal is totally willing to drag out tired character smears against NJP leadership in an attempt to spoil the pot. By labeling Chairman Mike Peinovich as a “white-nationalist shock jock,” it is attempting to equate the pro-White efforts of the party with degenerate tomfoolery common with the likes of the jew, Howard Stern. But while Stern is famous for tossing slices of bologna at the backsides of strippers and serenading black women for the size of their breasts, Peinovich is famous the world over for embarrassing journalists just like Amanda Garrett, and for being a dogged defender of the rights of White people. The Beacon Journal hopes the reader doesn’t connect these dots.
It is not clear if the NJP has any members in Northeast Ohio, but their protest went largely unnoticed.
Overall, the Journal’s collaborative efforts, which reify system narratives established by both Police and defense attornies, seek to take advantage of a low-information public in the hopes all three accused will walk away free from any accountability.
But the Beacon Journal’s ultimate goal in providing cover for three violent criminals is not the welfare or well-being of the criminals themselves. Instead, its mission, steeped in anti-Whiteness, is to keep the third rail of White advocacy as lighting hot as possible for as long as possible. The National Justice Party, and by extension every White person in America, cannot be allowed to gain political power or any legitimacy that can threaten the precarious status quo, even in a place as politically insignificant as Akron, Ohio.
Reporters like Amanda Garrett are merely doing their job, albeit poorly, of enforcing social norms and keeping the idea of White advocacy as an unauthorized opinion that comes with it a heavy veneer of low social status. But things are changing, and if the National Justice Party’s surging protests are any indicator, papers like the Akron Beacon will have to come up with something better than gaslighting, victim blaming, character smears, and outright lies to slow the momentum down.
I read all 3 of the articles by Garrett, and agree they are biased, almost malicious; the self-defense argument is particularly absurd — I emailed her about one of her previous article, but she did not reply (a couple of other reporters did).
She also says this about the Trayvon Martin case:
“In Martin’s case, a member of a community watch program in Florida saw Martin, who was Black, walking through the neighborhood in a hoodie and reported him to police as a suspicious person. A few minutes later, the man confronted Martin and shot and killed him. ”
The truth is that Zimmerman had given up on following Martin and was walking back to his vehicle when he was confronted and punched by Martin, whom Zimmerman then shot in self-defense as Martin was on top of him, punching him in the face and banging his head on the pavement — even the wildly biased Wikipedia has these facts, which came out during the trial.
But I think the following part of the flyer is unlikely to be true:
“Ethan was stomped so hard that FOOTPRINTS were left on his chest, and the back of this skull was crushed”
It is virtually certain that Liming’s occipital was fractured when he was stunned by a punch to the head/face and fell backward, hitting his head on the concrete — this is the same thing that killed a few victims of the ‘knockout game’, as I mentioned in a previous comment.
I have seen reports that Liming was firing the toy gun — now here it says he wasn’t, and was acting as a peacemaker when the was assaulted — ? — I don’t know, I wasn’t there, and at the moment I am not sure what to believe — I hope the truth about what really happened that night will come out eventually.
The only certain thing is that Liming is dead, and someone, perhaps more than one person, is responsible for his death and should be held accountable.
Very true. As the reporter says, the details of the story are constantly changing, but if people stick to what they know is correct, and do not get bogged down in the shifting narratives, changed only by the media, we are left with the same result. A dead white kid with injuries that do not support self-defense. Everything else is minutea.
No, it was definitely not self-defense; that’s bullshit — just defense lawyer posturing, repeated obediently by midwit reporters who above all else follow the narrative, and seek to absolve black criminals as far as possible — they’re all scum.
Even though a big majority of criminal cases are resolved via a plea bargain, I have no idea what will happen here — given the racial dynamic and the reduction in charges, which gave some momentum to the defense, maybe they will decide to risk a trial and hope for acquittal.
But the facts clearly support a conviction for at least involuntary manslaughter, and since it seems likely that is the most serious charge that will be placed before any court/jury, one which normally carries a max sentence of 10 years, you may see something like a guilty plea in exchange for a 5 year sentence — if I was a defendant or a family member, I would think very hard before declining any such offer from the prosecution.
I’m so fed up with hearing about Blacks and black criminals (to say nothing of white victims) — such a waste of societal energy.
Look at the Beacon Journal’s BS stories about Andrew Walls, currently facing assault charges for defending himself because he used the “n word” while drunk and trying to defend himself from multiple creeps. They had no issue with an edited 30 second video, but refused to show the unedited videos from other sources, included this one from the bar’s door camera that is edited down to the relevant 4 minutes, not 30 seconds of slanted BS. https://rumble.com/v12oi9l-andrew-walls-did-nothing-wrong..html
Thanks, I missed this case.
Saying the n word can (and today obviously will) be seen as provocation, and provocation has long been recognized as a reason to reduce criminal charges — I wrote a comment about that recently on the Unz site — link
I’ve mentioned several times in comments here that the tragic death/killing of Ethan Liming was likely due to an injury that is not all that uncommon: an uncontrolled fall backward after being stunned by a punch, resulting in a skull fracture and fatal brain injury.
Such a case happened just recently in NYC:
$15,000 reward offered in connection with killing of NYC taxi driver
After the gang assault, Gyimah stood up and was punched by a man wearing a black T-shirt and black pants with a yellow stripe. He fell to the ground backward and hit his head on the sidewalk, the footage showed, according to sources. He was not seen moving again, they said.
[…] to intentionally disregard anything, simply because the public has not been made aware of so many key facts in this tragic case. It’s an interesting phenomenon that the only people speaking to the press […]
Race should be taken out of the equation. This is a very sad story, but how can the three basketball players NOT have been standing their ground? The narrative of Liming as peacemaker seems untrue. Instead it appears he was driving three friends around the neighborhood. They had two SplatRBall guns with frozen water pellets (these cause bruises and bleeding and can blind you if you’re hit in the eye), along with two bags of marijuana and a balance scale in the glovebox, and they were shooting anyone they saw. They chose to attack the basketball group with these pellets. The basketball players were terrified but couldn’t get away because the court was fenced and the four high school boys blocked the only exit. When they realized the guns were toys, they tried to force their way through the exit. Liming then shot Deshawn Stafford in the face and the four high school boys attacked the basketball players. These kids were out looking for trouble. If Liming had been stomped to death, as was the original narrative, his chest and head would have been caved in. Instead, he had just one broken bone — on the back of the head. This appears to have been caused when he fell back after a punch and hit his head on the ground. Other than that, he had a black eye and one shoe print (probably from a kick). Reverse the races, and you would no doubt support white kids playing basketball who were assaulted by black kids. Take race out of the equation and look at this objectively. Clearly the basketball players had to defend themselves from a gang assault by a group whose intentions were unclear.
Further, I should add that it is not appropriate (and is probably libel) to talk about the basketball players as “criminals.” They have not been found guilty. Two of them have no criminal records at all, while the third has a juvenile record comprising three relatively minor offenses. This article assumes guilt for Liming’s death, when what is now known suggests that the basketball players acted in self-defense. Does Liming have a criminal record? If he had scales and two bags of marijuana in his car, he was probably dealing, and kids shooting others with SplatRBall guns are being charged with aggravated assault and taken to juvenile detention centers. Police have been trying to crack down on these shootings.
[…] the facts behind the slaying of Ethan Liming. Originally reported on the pro-White log site Hyphen-Report, the following article below covers several other murky attempts made by the paper to peel away the […]