The Washington Post’s
about the death of Edgar H. Smith, the murderer whom William F. Buckley helped spring
from prison, contains a typical phrase that reveals how liberals think about crime and punishment:
[Smith and his wife] lived in a northern New Jersey trailer court with their infant daughter, also named Patricia, when he had the ill-fated encounter with Zielinski.According to prosecutors, Mr. Smith offered her a ride the night of March 4, 1957, drove her to the sand pit and beat her to death when she resisted his sexual advances.
What? Smith “had the ill-fated encounter with Zielinski?!”
No, Zielinski had the ill-fated encounter with Smith.
And for all the hullaballoo about “rape culture,” that “ill-fated encounter” line, which reverses the truth, combined with this one—“he beat her to death when she resisted his sexual advances”—almost sounds as if Zielinski’s brutal murder were her fault. If she only hadn't resisted, he wouldn’t have beaten her to death, and he wouldn’t have “had the ill-fated encounter.”
As for Buckley, my guess on his support for Smith is this: Buckley enjoyed the role the contrarian, and reveled in shocking his audiences, like the bad boy in the classroom. That’s how he got famous in the 1950s, after all.
Thus, he admitted smoking grass, albeit in international waters so he wouldn’t break U.S. law. He wrote for pornographic magazines. And as Christopher Buckley told us,
whipped it out and peed out the door
of his limousine as it zoomed down the road.