OMITTED

What the news leaves out.

← Omitted front page

Vermont Man Convicted of Shooting Palestinian Students

3 sources · updated 2026-09-23
Left 67% Center 0% Right 33%
2 left · 0 center · 1 right

What happened

In November 2023, the month after Hamas's October 7 attack on Israel began the Israel-Gaza war, Jason Eaton, 51, shot Hisham Awartani, Tahseen Aliahmad, and Kinnan Abdalhamid, three students of Palestinian descent, as they walked near his home in Vermont speaking Arabic and English and wearing keffiyehs. The three, who had attended school together in Ramallah and were visiting for Thanksgiving while enrolled at Brown University, Trinity College, and Haverford College, were wounded; Awartani was paralyzed from the waist down. Eaton did not deny being the shooter but pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity, with his lawyers arguing he had fallen into psychosis after losing a credit-union job and believed the CIA and Mossad were instructing him over the radio to shoot someone. After a week-long trial, a jury unanimously rejected that defense and convicted him of attempted murder; he awaits sentencing and could receive life in prison.
Sourcing check · Partly on the record · 3 articles

1 of 3 articles cite a named source for the story. It was on the record from the first report.

What these terms mean and how they're counted
On the record · names a source 1 of 3
On the record means the article cites a source by name for the story's main claim: a person, or an institution speaking officially, such as a company statement or a named agency's spokesperson. The opposite is an unnamed source. The count is how many of the counted articles cite at least one such source; the names are everyone named across them, each once however the articles spell it. Here: Jason Eaton and Joshua O'Hara
Primary evidence · cites a document or data 2 of 3
Primary evidence means the article cites a record you could check yourself: a court filing or ruling, a dataset or report, a recording or transcript, an official statement or press release, market data. A quote is not a document. The count is how many articles cite one. Here: court verdict, court ruling
Credits another outlet 0 of 3
The article says the story comes from another outlet's reporting (“first reported by Reuters”). Those articles relay the story; they are not independent confirmation. Here: Each article presents its own reporting.
Unnamed sources 0 of 3
The main claim is attributed to people who are not identified: “people familiar with the matter”, “officials said”. The count is how many articles do this.
How it developed
When the first report landed and whether it named anyone; when the first named source and the first document appeared. Here: First report Sep 21, 19:25 UTC by BBC, naming its source. First document in the first report, from BBC (court verdict).
Not counted 0
Opinion, analysis and video pieces, and articles too short to assess. Every count above is out of the counted articles. An article republished under a new headline is one article.
This is about who is cited, not whether the story is true. Each source below says what it names. How we count
Omitted — what each side leaves out

Unpacked

Right-leaning coverage omits the wartime timing and the victims' visible Palestinian markers, leaving a reader unable to judge whether the shooting looked targeted. The men were wearing keffiyehs and speaking Arabic near Eaton's home the month after the Israel-Gaza war began, BBC reports. That same account places the attack amid a rise in Islamophobia and antisemitism. Eaton shot them on an evening walk in his neighborhood and later claimed insanity, per the Washington Examiner. The shooter's delusion is spelled out in left-leaning BBC coverage and not in right-leaning coverage. He said the CIA and Mossad were speaking to him over the radio, BBC reports. The same defense is called a "psychotic episode" in the Washington Examiner. Did prosecutors argue he targeted the men because they were Palestinian, or only that he was sane when he fired?
Bottom line

You would not know the Vermont victims were wearing keffiyehs if you read the Washington Examiner. BBC put that marker in the same conviction story as the Israel-Gaza timeline.

The receipts — 6 facts one side's coverage lacks
  • The victims were wearing keffiyehs and speaking a mix of Arabic and English near Eaton's home contextin BBC · absent from right-leaning coverage
  • Hisham Awartani was paralysed from the waist down individual casein BBC · absent from right-leaning coverage
  • The jury returned a unanimous verdict legal rulingin Washington Examiner · absent from left-leaning coverage
  • The shooting spread fear through Arab and Muslim communities in the United States contextin Washington Post · absent from right-leaning coverage
  • Eaton lost his job at a credit union weeks before the shooting individual casein BBC · absent from right-leaning coverage
  • The conviction is presented as coming after the Oct. 7 attack contextin Washington Post · absent from right-leaning coverage
The Left View
Left-leaning outlets treated the verdict as accountability for an attack on Palestinian students that they placed in a post-October 7 climate, not as a stand-alone insanity case. The BBC located it "amid a rise in Islamophobia and antisemitism in the US" and lingered on Palestinian descent, keffiyehs, and the victims' courtroom reaction—Awartani in a wheelchair, smiles and hugs after the verdict. The Washington Post headlined the conviction as coming "after Oct. 7 attack" and said the shooting "spread fear through Arab and Muslim communities in the United States."
The Right View
The Washington Examiner framed the outcome as a criminal-law result: a unanimous attempted-murder conviction after Eaton "admitted to carrying out the attack" and a psychotic-episode insanity plea failed. Palestinian identity appeared as a factual label for the victims rather than the story's organizing frame, and the account did not embed the case in Islamophobia, communal fear, or the Israel-Gaza war.
Our Take (balanced)
The left's strongest argument is communal meaning: the Post's claim that the shooting "spread fear through Arab and Muslim communities in the United States," paired with the BBC's "rise in Islamophobia and antisemitism" framing and the victims' visible Palestinian markers, is the evidence offered for reading more than a lone delusional assault. The Examiner's strongest point is the trial record itself—an admitted shooting, a rejected insanity defense, and a unanimous guilty verdict—which supports treating the story as settled individual culpability. The central unresolved tension is whether throwing out the insanity claim closes what the shooting was, or whether the post-October 7 setting still defines it.

3 sources

More stories

The week's bottom lines, in your inbox

One email a week: the five stories that mattered and what they actually mean. Free.