Did WaPo Question Man's Murder Conviction Because Racial Slur Provoked Him?


Which is a more heinous crime: The murder of a woman, or uttering the “n-word?”

Common sense says that the death of a human being is not just more serious than a racial slur, it isn’t even close to being in the same category.

In the strange world of social justice, however, it looks like some people believe a racially-charged curse word now justifies death… at least that’s what a bizarre response from The Washington Post seems to imply.

“Robert Coleman was convicted of second-degree murder in Virginia for punching Fedelia Montiel-Benitez so hard that she ended up in a coma and died ten days later,” explained The Daily Caller.

That’s murder, no matter how you slice it — but a WaPo journalist seems to think that attacking and killing someone might be more tolerable if the victim said something mean.

Watch: Matt Gaetz Hilariously Torches Democrat Senator Accused of Bribery on House Floor

“A reporter for The Washington Post seemed to suggest on Wednesday that a murder conviction was unjust because the victim used the ‘n-word’ before she was attacked,” The Caller continued.

The controversy began with a tweet posted by The Post’s official Twitter account. “He said he punched a woman for calling him the n-word,” the post said. “A jury called it murder.”

They probably called it that because it was. During Coleman’s trial, jurors heard that after a verbal argument with Fedelia Montiel-Benitez, the man chased after her and struck the woman with a punch so powerful, it put her into a coma.

Do you believe the Wash. Post was trying to downplay this crime?

She never woke up. Ten days later, she was dead.

Washington Post journalist Rachel Weiner seemed sympathetic to the convicted murderer in her article. Even the first sentence seemed meant to downplay the assault: “The verbal exchange lasted only 45 seconds. Robert Coleman threw one punch.”

The reporter, like the convict’s legal defense team, appeared to imply that if the victim said the “n-word” during the altercation, a violent and deadly attack from Coleman was more justified.

Here’s the problem: There isn’t actually any evidence that the slur was said… and even if it was, an ugly word does not excuse assault and murder.

“Prosecutors successfully argued that the woman did not know enough English to use the word, and even if she did, Coleman was not justified in hitting her,” the Caller explained.

AOC Grilled While Supporting Autoworkers' Strike - Someone Noticed What She's Driving

Persecuting attorney Bryan Porter may have summarized the issue best inside the courtroom. “In an all-too-often repeated theme, a tragedy unfolded because of a defendant’s inability to tolerate a perceived slight.”

“Verbal arguments should never devolve into physical altercations because physical altercations often bring devastating consequences,” the prosecutor said.

That’s an important lesson that many people need to learn… or re-learn.

The Washington Post may not have meant to imply that a rude word justifies a woman’s death, but that’s certainly what their description looks like. It’s shockingly close to a social justice nightmare where people can get away with anything as long as they cry racism.

With frustrating frequency, the left pushes a world where feelings supersede facts and being offended justifies anything — up to and including physical violence.

We must stop pretending that words are the same as actions, or every semblance of order and justice will be lost.

Truth and Accuracy

Submit a Correction →

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

, , , , ,
Benjamin Arie is an independent journalist and writer. He has personally covered everything ranging from local crime to the U.S. president as a reporter in Michigan before focusing on national politics. Ben frequently travels to Latin America and has spent years living in Mexico.