You know you're in trouble when this is how you begin an explanation of why you were right:
Random House Webster's College Dictionary defines...
At issue: Jeffrey Lord's self-defense from criticism by fellow conservatives of his claim that Shirley Sherrod was a liar because she described the brutal slaying of her relative Bobby Hall by Sheriff Claude Screws as a "lynching."
Lord tries to argue that the murder couldn't have been a lynching because the dictionary's definition of lynching reads: "to put to death, esp. hanging by mob action and without legal authority." He argues in part that Screws was not part of a mob. Given that Screws was one of a gang of three murderers, Lord's argument is absurd, especially because the definition he cites does not require mob action nor does it require hanging, but it gets worse. Lord also argues that because the Supreme Court -- on narrow, technical grounds -- overturned Screws' conviction of violating Hall's civil rights, that Screws did in fact have legal authority to murder Hall.
Second, the Supreme Court specifically said the Sheriff and his deputy and a local policeman acted "under color of law." Which means they had legal authority.
Of course, there's always the fact that the State of Georgia refused to indict Screws for homicide, even though everybody knew he'd killed Bobby Hall in cold blood. I guess in Lord's strange little world, this means Screws had the proper legal authority to murder Bobby Hall. But that tells you more about what's inside Lord's mind than it does anything else.