counter for tumblr

Dr Drew’s Clueless Whores Seek Enlightenment – Can You Help?


*** Click here to visit our Jodi Arias Is Innocent website ***

Ok… so being female, pretty and playing with your hair proves that you’re guilty now, does it?

You’d think so, watching the latest BS from Dr Drew…

Dr Drew is old enough (literally) to know better, although I’m not totally surprised. He is, after all, one of the radical clerics at the HLN mosque.

Anyways, in addition to his ridiculous ratings-driven stupidity, viewers were also treated to the stupidity of Shanna Hogan… an alleged journalist and true crime author.

When talking about Jodi Arias and Casey (around the 5.25 mark), she starts off by saying they were both women “who committed the most unthinkable acts imaginable”.

She supposedly covered the case extensively. Really? Which case?
After getting her started, Drew then interrupts her so he can describe the peculiar feeling he gets when watching a seemingly innocuous video of  Jodi & Casey playing with their hair. I think he needs to get out more.
To top it all off, Pat Brown makes an asshole of herself  too, mainly by making light of being abused and stating it shouldn’t be used as “an excuse” for anything.
So… if you want to enlighten either of these 2 evidently clueless whores… namely Shanna Hogan and Pat Brown, feel free to click on the links below and make their day:

Pat Brown – contact form

Sounds like they already have super-cute Jodi convicted. Had she been black, they’d never have even mentioned the case. Sound familiar? You bet.

You know me. I’m just calling it as it is.

Later folks,

*** Click here to visit our Jodi Arias Is Innocent website ***


  1. Enough with the comparisons. Jodi is very pretty though. Of course they are judging her guilty before the case even goes to trial. Just what I expected from HLN. I hope they don’t sentence this woman to death just because they think Casey got away with it. She deserves a fair trial. I’m not going to judge her.

  2. HLN is a low-rent network designed for the same demographic that watches trashy reality shows. Its ratings aren’t that impressive, so maybe Jeff Zucker will clean house there when he takes over CNN. Maybe he’ll wise up and fire the whole crew, Nancy Grace and Jane Velez Mitchell and Vinnie Politan and Dr. Drew. Turn HLN into an actual news channel rather than one that feeds on its trailer park audience’s morbid fascination with murder.

    • AMEN Harry!!! 🙂

      • I totally agree with Jon and Harry 🙂

        Not much of a comparison between Casey and Jodie other than the fact that they’re beautiful young girls who have and are being portrayed as commiting the worst crimes ever. I’m sure there’s more to this story as always.

        They’re comparing her to Fatal Attraction…what about the Japanese Horror film Audition 1999?

  3. Oh goodie we’ve added another opportunist to the bandwagon. I never heard of Shanna Hogan until I watched Diary of a Showgirl on 48 hours awhile ago. I researched the case a bit after that and found out that she wrote a book about Marjorie Orbin, a woman who was convicted of murdering her husband, but maintains that it was her boyfriend. Anyway, back on point. You can bet money on the fact that HLN will convict the next defendant they choose for their “news” segments, it is so predictable. Shanna Hogan is just another fool looking for money and popularity. Once she doesn’t even know that Casey Anthony was found not guilty, doesn’t recognize basic Constitution rights, or that there was no legitimate evidence, how can you believe she knows what she’s talking about? She is just saying these things because that’s what the viewers of Dr. Drew want to hear. They live in a fantasy world. She currently works for the Times Publications out in Arizona. I don’t know if I’d consider her a true crime writer, she’s written articles like any other journalist, but she’s only written one crime book (about Orbin) and it was just published in 2011!! Pat Brown is one of the worst guests on HLN and TruTV. She is always “profiling” people, funny she never seems to be right. In fact, sometimes when the show has another profiler on they say the opposite things. What she does is use her profiling background to legitimize the lies that come out of HLN’s anchors’ mouths. If you visit her website, she has a banner at the bottom of her homepage directing you to Nancy Grace’s HLN page. That should tell you everything you need to know right there. More bull. I’d just like to say, these shows pick the stupidest things to point out and it is usually very superficial, like what the person is wearing or how pretty they are. They probably do this because the facts usually don’t back up their claims. Sometimes I just want to jump through the screen slap them and say that is irrelevant you idiot, talk about the case or the law or something important! There are tons of reasons woman play with their hair, for instance playing with your hair is something women do when they are nervous, or its a habit, or they’re bored or they’re flirting, etc. etc. Maybe they like it. Playing with your hair doesn’t equal murder, that is so moronic. Dr. Drew gets a peculiar feeling when watching someone play with their hair, I think he’s been hanging out with Vinnie “Boobs” Politan too much. Of course, they would say in the affirmative that Casey Anthony and any other person not convicted committed the crime they were charged with because they believe that a pro-prosecution stance on television makes them money. Sadly, they seem to be right.

  4. I truly believe hln crew & nancy grace needs fired. If there is anything I can do to help get them fired plz anyone let me know. They are lying again to make Casey look guilty before her courts cases comes. Its not going to stop for they will go after anyone to make rating for their BS show. I want so much to get these ppl FIRED! We want news not lies and BS that they give us!

    • It’s poor ratings that may get them fired. And their ratings are awful. HLN is in the low 40s among cable networks overall and in primetime. Furthermore, it’s low rent audience profile means bottom of the barrel ad rates. Time Warner makes money from HLN, but not much. If they decide to clean house at CNN, seems to me HLN is going to see some changes.

      • I’m happy to hear that their ratings are awful. All they do is screech lies 24 hours a day.

        • They do have low ratings, but the problem is that other news agencies don’t and they actually get some of their information and ideas from these people. You hear it or read it on something more “reputable” and think it’s real because you also read it elsewhere problem is it originated in the mind of Nancy Grace and you don’t even know it. It is a vicious sensationalized circle!

  5. I hope so! It’s CRAZY BAD what these ppl do to flat lie and destroy someone. If I can help get these ppl fired PLZ LET ME KNOW!

    • I want them fired too Kelly, like you said I want real news, not someone’s trumped up opinion. They keep saying why would we pay for more of Casey Anthony’s lies (in reference to her having a book or other project), my question is why do people pay for your lies you hypocrites?! News agencies like HLN do better during high-profile cases like the Casey Anthony case. There were something like 6 million people that watched the verdict on TV, not to mention online. Nancy Grace had her highest rating during that period ever. Why do you think they try so hard to sensationalize these cases? It’s their money, they could care less about the facts when they see dollar signs. I looked at July 2, 2011 (during the prosecution’s rebuttal case) and compared it to Dec. 4, 2012. On 7/2/2011, Nancy Grace was number 1 in her time slot (as well as other HLN shows and HLN itself). She had almost 2 million viewers. Fast forward to two days ago, Nancy Grace was last in her time slot with 253,000 viewers. Quite a drop. The question I have is why do people watch Nancy Grace, who don’t normally watch her, during high-profile cases? Why not just watch the trial, why do you need other people to tell you what to think? Because that’s what Grace does, she doesn’t have any useful facts, guests, or interviews.

      • JA Kalskett says:

        Sometimes ppl don’t recognize propaganda and opinion-altering spins…including withheld info….when it is fed to them! Could it be merely co-incidence that there are 180 days between Father’s Day and Dec 11? And that the H-MS is 180 degrees from the truth?

        I don’t think so.

        • JA Kalskett says:

          not a pleasant thought, but…how hot does it get in the trunk of a car in the middle of June in Orlando?…180 degrees?

      • No matter how hard they try, HLN will never again see the kind of ratings they had during the Casey trial. That case was a fluke, a perfect storm of tabloid melodrama that won’t repeat. They are stuck as a low rated network with a small low-end audience with little appeal to advertisers. When your biggest star averages 250000 people in prime time you’re in trouble. My hope is that the new head of CNN will be pressured by his bosses at Time Warner to do away with HLN as it currently exists. Nancy Grace for sure isn’t worth what they pay her!

        • JA Kalskett says:

          What was it Cindy said? Something like…” People will sing your praises when this is all over” so ..I s’pect it isn’t over, and Casey will ‘likely’ bring the ratings up again, b-4 it’s over….like a tsunami in the wake of the HMS CayleeMarie.

  6. First things that jump out at me.

    1) This is nothing like Casey Anthony excepting that someone is dead and someone is going to be tried.
    2) Neither of them has dead eyes. They are both full of life and that is the thing that will make people hate them. It’s also part of what will draw people to them.
    3) HLN has no interest in a wrongly accused story as it develops. They might consider covering one after a person has been in prison for a while, but never will they take on a story where they think someone is being railroaded.

    • Lemme add the criticism of someone in jail participating in activities that are sponsored by the jail. The fact of the matter is if someone will kill another person, nothing else they do should be surprising. And if they didn’t kill someone, then what they do in jail is of little consequence except as it fits with one’s notion of how someone is supposed to behave.

      • Honestly, I didn’t see anything wrong with her participating in the jail sponsored karaoke event. They set you up for failure on these things. The media uses this to make her look bad like she’s taking jail as some kind of narcissistic joke. When in reality, the jail does these activities to keep people somewhat happy to be able to tolerate jail to keep inner-jail violence down. So, you are actually supposed to participate, the jail wants you to, they encourage it and then they use it to make you look bad.

        • I fully agree with this. While I meant to, I sure didn’t express that clearly. You did.

        • JA Kalskett says:

          Did you read the second half of the Diary of Days? (Until recently, I didn’t know there was more after the ‘everyone lies everyone dies life will never be easy)

          But IMO the instructions were clearly FOR her: smile, laugh, love unconditionally.

          It was her instructions on how to survive the H-MStory, as it unfolded and the ‘image’ it painted of her [and the A-family] I’d like to know which one of the Anthony’s ‘assumed power over the events’ and manipulated the facts to unfold like a ‘murder novel’ the one time Caylee was out of everyone’s sight.

          • JA Kalskett says:

            Does anyone know if there was a third part of the Diary of Days? What I have seen is two paragraphs that seem to be addressing 2 of the 3 people involved with the events when Caylee’s death occurred.

            The first stanza is about Geo’s involvement…the second part is a survival guide for Casey. But where is the part that would have been for Caylee? Her death was FIRST; Casey became the victim, SECOND; and Geo assumed power as ‘captain of the H-MStory’, THIRD.

          • I do know about the Diary of Days aka Everyone Lies, Everyone Dies. It was a poem that Casey Anthony had written when she was younger. It was supposedly posted during the 31 days around early July. It wasn’t made clear the importance of it to the case at trial. The prosecution was not allowed to present that Casey Anthony posted this, only that Cindy Anthony posted what she posted about My Caylee is Missing. I remember that people argued over Casey Anthony’s journal, where the poem is also written, saying it was written in 08 and that the date was just hard to read and that it had something to do with getting rid of Caylee to be free and party. I looked at the evidence photo, to me it clearly says 03, which means it has no reference to Caylee. However, I have not yet put together, if it was posted in response to Cindy, why it in fact was posted and whether Casey Anthony posted it. I do know that Casey Anthony, according to Dr. Weitz’ deposition, did mention to him that she had written that poem when she was younger and it had nothing to do with what was happening.

          • JA Kalskett says:

            But…b/c she was familiar with it, the person risking ‘great consequence’ placed it in the H-MStory for Cas to reference.
            [remember whenCin referenced Casey’s Journals on the news?…cryptic to Cas, ‘where this story was going” so she could ‘get on board’…The H-MStory would eventually ‘save her life’.

            This wasn’t the A-Fam’s ‘first cruise’ I bet….LOL see what I mean that the 180 degree perseption/perspective of the true event, 180 day H-MScma maiden-voyage story was a cruise between Father’s Day and Dec 11. The H-MS was A benefit for the whole family, caused by the ‘wake of Cay’s death’. OMG at times, the 500 piece ‘heinous-murderer puzzle” is so obvious, it makes me feel guilty for recognizing the author’s sick(detached)humor.]
            Akin to laffing at GarbagePailKid Cards in the 80’s, or MaddMag

  7. Marilyn C. says:

    Hi SJ….I think we all know that HLN could do a show about something as simple as Goldfish & make it somehow all about Casey!! When are they going to stop insulting us like they keep doing? You are right about making their day.I will contact these IDIOTS that think they know EVERYTHING about these girls,that they have never even met.I do believe Mason spoke on these types of people when Him,Baez & Team WON the case.Hln will make any & every show about Casey to TRY to get some kind of ratings back.Unless they get rid of the IDIOTS,they might as well take it off the air!

    • I think HLN is banking on George Zimmerman to be their next cash cow. He has just sued NBC because they altered his non emergency phone call to make him look racist. I hope he wins and sets a precedent for Casey to sue every last one of them!!!

      • I hope he wins too. What the media has done in that case is even worse than with Casey, because they’ve intentionally fanned the flames of racial hatred for ratings. The lynch mob Zimmerman faces is scarier and more truly dangerous than the middle-aged housewives who obsess over Casey. But I think there’s a good chance Zimmerman will get the case dismissed before trial and HLN will lose its chance for a new freak show to profit from. And maybe some day Casey will do what Zimmerman is doing and take on the media. One can hope.

        • I agree you guys, intentionally inciting racial violence for ratings is beyond words terrible. George Zimmerman should win, they edited it on purpose for sensationalism we all know it. Casey Anthony definitely should sue these people who keep saying she killed her daughter, it is beyond defamation at this point. I don’t know if I’d say it is worse than what happened to Casey Anthony. I’d say it is different. To me it’s like comparing apples and oranges. George Zimmerman was made to look like a racist, gun toting, police wannabe falsely, which defamed him and is certainly making it difficult to get a fair jury and it also endangered his life due to psychos who buy what the media sells them. In Casey Anthony’s case, she was accused of cold-bloodedly murdering her own daughter and made to look like a narcissistic, femme fatale, heartless, selfish harlot who never cared for her child and threw her away like trash to party, which made it difficult to get a fair jury (though not impossible) and endangered her life due to psychos who bought Nancy Grace’s poison. From what I’ve seen both images are so far away from the truth, it’s unbelievable. Nothing can be compared to a mother losing their child and then being accused of causing it. On the other hand, nothing can be compared to being (falsely) nationally ridiculed from something as deeply engrained and sensitive as racism. It is unimaginable the pain that people who are falsely accused and convicted go through, what they lose in the process, especially in a high-profile case.

    • JA Kalskett says:

      I’ve wondered, if there comes a time when Casey is exonerated, CAN she sue people like her mother and father, ZF-G and Holloway, even Kronk; each added to the snowball, too. And the fines…and time in jail (or was that all related to the probations, etc…and what about the lying charges, then?

      • JA, prosecutors are sadly given full immunity, so you cannot get any money from the government when you are falsely accused of a crime and then acquitted. You have to prove that the prosecution did not have a reasonable suspicion that you could have done it, which is impossible, because you can have a reasonable suspicion for pretty much anyone in cases (how do you think we get innocent people in jail?). Prosecutors rarely have to answer for misusing their power, which is outrageous because 1) they can continue to do so and 2) they are unchecked politicians and/or government authorities. The only thing that can happen to them is to be reprimanded by their office. It’s just like the police, when they misuse their authority, they rarely get anything, but a slap on the wrist from their department. I don’t know what possessed us to set up a system in which people who break the rules can continue to do so. If you didn’t know, for example, Jeff Ashton had a Brady violation (did not turn over possible exculpatory evidence to a defendant) and he paid a witness in another case before trying the Casey Anthony case. Now he is going to be a State Attorney, a man who thinks it is okay not to turn over evidence that may exonerate a defendant and who thinks it is okay to pay witnesses is now going to make the rules in two counties in Florida, unbelievable and scary. Some states have compensation packages for exonerees, but not all states and no states have compensation packages for acquitted members of society. Though I’d take an acquittal and keep my 25 years of life over money after 25 years in jail any day!

        • JA Kalskett says:

          Thx, ycbw, me too!

          But, is Florida one of those? That kind of package could be the reward (or pot-o-gold) intended for Casey at the end of the voyage on the H-MS… in spite of ‘what Casey could’ve told (or prove) to LE’, 31 days after Caylee disappeared; b/c no sign of the child’s death or whereabouts was ever found.

          [But Casey had no choice, she could never have produced Caylee’s body, cuz that disappeared on the 14th]

          • For people who are exonerated, Florida provides for $50,000 annually with a maximum of $2 million. So, if you are given the entire $2 million then you would get an income for 40 years (the largest amount so far was $1.3 million, that’s an income for 26 years). However, many are refused their money and it is very hard for the wrongfully convicted to get their just compensation in many states. What complicates things in FL is the “clean hands provision”, it provides that people who committed crimes while wrongfully confined or who committed crimes before imprisonment cannot get compensation. This means that if you were convicted previously for something and then arrested for something you didn’t do and wrongfully convicted that you do not get compensation. For lack of a better analogy, your previous “dirty hands” then cleans the State’s current “dirty hands” of their responsibility. The other part of the provision is just ridiculous. Prison is a hard place to be and if the person hadn’t been there they would not have committed a prison crime. Plain and simple, it is the State’s fault they were put in that position. The provisions are also bad because people who have committed crimes before tend to be wrongfully convicted more than people who have no criminal record, etc. A wrongful conviction is a wrongful conviction, you shouldn’t qualify it. It doesn’t matter what happened before or during, if they shouldn’t of been in there then, they shouldn’t have been in there, period. Only 3 people have been able to be compensated out of an estimated 9, over the past 4 years (add an addition 22+ people not compensated since 1972) in Florida due to these provisions. The 3 compensated were all compensated before the provisions were passed, 1 died in prison so his family was compensated, 1 was compensated by local authorities, and 1 was compensated through legislative bill (the old way of compensating in Florida). Since Casey Anthony was acquitted, she is not eligible for legal exoneration because she is legally already not guilty. Besides, if she had been falsely convicted and confined to prison and later exonerated, she would not have been eligible for compensation for the years that she lost because according to the “clean hands provision” her check charges would exclude her. Like I said before, she wouldn’t be able to pursue a civil case against the State, either, because of their full immunity and because the law provides you have to prove “bad will” and that is almost impossible even when it is true.
            Just in case you’re curious, these were the three compensated in Florida in the past 4 years: Luis Diaz-Martinez was falsely convicted of being a serial rapist (26 years falsely confined to prison), Leroy McGee falsely convicted for robbery (almost 4 years falsely confined to prison), and James Bain was falsely convicted of kidnapping and raping a 9-year-old boy (35 years falsely confined to prison).

        • JA Kalskett says:

          When you say about Ashton : …for example, Jeff Ashton had a Brady violation (did not turn over possible exculpatory evidence to a defendant) and he paid a witness in another case before trying the Casey Anthony case. Now he is going to be a State Attorney…

          I say : that is the common mind-set Geo and Ashton share…it gives a different perspective of their past relationship (and from my POV a possible motive for extorted / blackmailed ‘donations’ to the CMAFoundations)

          “for lack of anything to the contrary, LE had to follow the H-MStory…” and the state’s prosecution team had nothing other than the H-MStory to work with…Ashton at some point, has realized that he was being ‘given’ reasonably-believable disinformation from Geo (and the purpose for it) Making Ashton a ‘party’ to it, willing or not.

          • JA, “…that is the common mind-set Geo and Ashton share…”
            Maybe that’s why they get along so well?! George Anthony did say that we don’t know how well Jeff Ashton and him know each other at Jeff Ashton’s victory party.

        • JA Kalskett says:

          Well, that’s not exactly what was meant, I said:

          b/c no sign of the child’s death or whereabouts was ever found

          * until Dec 11, when Casey learned on the news, the final pieces to her story; when, where, how, and why the H-MS was necessary, when the remains were recovered from the woods location.

  8. I never watch nancy grace. I see her as the most evil woman alive! Becouse of media George Zimmerman will always be in danger no matter how court comes out. Casey will also always be in danger for the rest of her life. I sometimes feel if she wins this next case she may even be in more danger. I see nancy grace &hln making her LOOK guilty even more. If Casey wins the ppl will be more mad.I will be writing these ppl that think they know Casey also.I believe ppl in FL. will wish they never heard of jeff aston. I can’t say I know much about the Caylee law. Is this really a good law? This is getting to be a very scary world. I will help Casey anyway I can.

    • JA Kalskett says:

      Nancy G is a modern version of the ‘propaganda spewers’ who subtly spin public opinion to gain support for people of power / authority, and the media fuels the fire.

    • Caylee’s Law isn’t like the other bills named after victims, in my opinion, it is a political stunt. The bill was not proposed, as is usual, by any family members. Obviously, politicians believe that a majority of people wanted Casey Anthony convicted, so what do they do? They make up bills that only make it harder for law enforcement officers and really mess things up in missing persons cases for some fanfare. Caylee’s Law was passed in 7 states and is pending in 4 states. Each state has varying degrees of punishments. The laws revolve around making it illegal for a parent/guardian to fail to report a missing or deceased child, in cases where they knew or should have known that the child was possibly in danger. They have to report this within 24 – 48 hours (some states depend upon age, i.e. over 16 is extended to 72 hours). The bill was supported by, of course, those who disagreed with the verdict. They had wanted the penalty to be much higher, somewhere around 30 years across all states. They of course, after the bill passed, wanted to retroactively charge Casey Anthony, problem is that is illegal, which like I’ve said before proves they don’t understand the law. Which to me also shows why they would believe people like Nancy Grace and InSession who openly lie about the law. The whole thing was a knee-jerk reaction. The states/penalties are: Alabama (2 – 20 years), Connecticut (up to 1 year), Florida (5 years in prison), Illinois (2 – 5 years), Kansas (probation – 8 months in jail), Louisiana (2 – 5 yrs.), New Jersey (up to 18 months in prison), Oklahoma (proposed), South Dakota (5 years), Virginia (proposed, 1 – 5 yrs), and Wisconsin (up to 25 years in prison with no previous convictions). Let’s be serious, if someone who has nothing to do with a child’s death fails to report a child missing or dead for whatever reason, should they really face as much time as someone who is a murderer? In Alabama and Wisconsin you would. I personally think that this law is unconstitutional and the penalties in Alabama and Wisconsin are out of this world high. The crime should be negligence of a child, something already on the books. Politics have no place in our justice system, it is full of back scratching and lies. We shouldn’t decide people’s lives on Nancy Grace’s opinion and we shouldn’t decide it on some political whim because people get falsely frenzied and aren’t smart enough to admit when they are wrong. I believe that the Casey Anthony case had some political motivations, it is outrageous to play with people’s emotions and lives to further your career. We already know the media does that, we shouldn’t let the government do it too. One important thing to note is that many have opposed the laws saying that they are unconstitutional and directly against the 5th Amendment. Other critics point out that the laws have no provision for the cause or place of death, so that parents who lose children due to sudden illnesses in the hospital are still liable to report the death or face felony charges. The law could lead to overcompliance and false reports by parents wary of becoming suspects (this was the criticism that overwhelming came from law enforcement agencies, who did not support the bills), wasting police resources and due to the increase of reports legitimate abductions may go uninvestigated. The most shocking, people could get charged for searching for a child instead of immediately calling police.

      • JA Kalskett says:

        Thanks ycbw,
        It is our good fortune to have you explain things like this…
        I say, ‘you know your stuff with certainty’, and want you to know, it is appreciated that you can (and do) translate the legal language into terms that even I can understand. So glad to meet you.
        sincerely…JA here or Jynnxter : Twitter and hotmail

        • Thanks JA, it’s my pleasure. And it’s nice to meet you guys too. I like a civil learning environment where I can express my opinions and see others’ as well. So glad I found this website!

          • JA Kalskett says:

            You said it, that goes for me, too! (unfortunately after beating my head against the wall at an anti-Casey site for weeks) It made me appreciate the tolerance of others here, of my particularly uncommon perspective, Thanks

          • That’s the great thing about this site. We all respect each other, can disagree but not take it personally. We are all civil and don’t argue. We are all here to support Casey. It’s just a great place to be. We can come here and not be attacked for our beliefs.

  9. Wondering when hln will be asking Zimmerman to be in playgirl?? Isn’t that the Lowlife crap they did with Casey and others??

    • Yes, Kelly, they were all over that angle. I was disgusted at the derogatory coverage of the Casey Anthony case. Vinnie Politan and his mic-blooper about Casey Anthony’s breasts, Jane Velez Mitchell and her porn talk, Nancy Grace and her “skeezy”/slut crap, and of course the false reports by ABC about Casey Anthony “sleeping with two men” at the same time. I’d like to pause here for a moment and say that I think the porn industry prays on women and men. Did you know that a lot of pornography actresses were abused as children? I wouldn’t, but hey, it is your choice to consume or to be in. Besides, people shouldn’t really knock it too bad, it’s hypocritical. It is a multi-billion dollar biz. If people didn’t consume it, they wouldn’t produce it. Number two, if she was sleeping with two men, not your business. I’ve got news for you, do the people who watch these shows forget their own lives? The average number of people someone sleeps with, for better or worse, is 7. Lots of those viewers also probably had affairs, that’s two people at once. So get off it you harpy hypocrites. If it were true, you don’t even know her reasons, maybe it was because she was abused? The ABC report is not factual though, as I explain below, it was created for more sensation. And let’s not forget the crescendo of sleazy, the police asking her boyfriends for details about their intimacy with her. First of all, why is any of that anyone’s business? It has nothing to do with anything. The police and prosecution wanted to smear her character because they had no case. Other than that low-grade reason, there was no reason. It disgusted me, the sordid coverage was off the charts out of control in this case. It is sad how they treated Casey Anthony. It is an old recycled and sadly, profitable angle on women in the news. The ABC article, do you know what that is really about? It was about how she was dating Tony and at one point when he was in NY, she stayed with her friend Amy who was living with her ex-boyfriend Ricardo. They took her staying with her friend, who happened to be living with Anthony’s ex-boyfriend (if I remember correctly Amy was dating Ricardo at the time) and turned it into some love triangle crap that wasn’t true. Just because you live with someone doesn’t mean you’re sleeping with them ABC. And just because you dated them previously also doesn’t mean every time you see them you will sleep with them. It was so stupid and people bought it. I don’t know why people around this case acted like she was some kind of nymphomaniac! What is this high school? OMG, she had guy friends, how scandalous! They acted in this case like every man she was around she had to be sleeping with. It was all part of the media campaign of femme fatale, party girl. Apparently it worked. For goodness sake, you can find all over the Internet any man she ever knew being compared to Caylee to see if he is the father, even men she met after Caylee was born! That shows you how smart these people are. People were saying that Ricardo was the father, so much so, he dispelled the rumors himself. But, people didn’t listen. Just to set the facts straight, in Ricardo’s deposition, regardless of how the prosecution and media want to try to spin it, he said he didn’t even know Casey Anthony had stayed there until in the morning when he saw her. Kinda hard to fact check your story ABC when he didn’t even know she was there. Oh, wait I forgot the media doesn’t fact check anymore.

      • JA Kalskett says:

        “E-HAAAA! , we’re on a roll now…you took words outta my head…but these refilled the void, LOL

        All along there was an undercurrent; Casey’s image was a crucial part of ‘launching’ the H-MStory…all the implications were intentional; making the heinous-murder story more ‘imaginable’ while downplaying what Casey believed after Flag Day (and couldn’t prove).

        ..anything that she could’ve told LE was speculated over the 31 days that followed (when she still didn’t know Caylee’s whereabouts or condition)…so, of curse, WHAT she speculated was based on the disinformation she received from the person she ‘totally trusted’ (b/c THAT nanny loved Caylee like their own”. Adding on another day, “they want to keep Caylee” Casey just didn’t know where they ‘put’ Caylee, nor ever imagined Caylee was in danger (maybe until July5 when GandC impulsively concreted the back yard) Now, THAT made Casey worry about Caylee’s safety; tho she still thought baby was safe and close, and the nanny would clear-up all this when they bring her home for her birthday Aug 9. (she waited, trying to understand the lesson within the chaos until then)

  10. JA Kalskett says:

    …sheesh, they’ve been locking up women for ages for reasons only ‘authority’ understands…if they are out of sight…anything can be believed about them.

  11. No responsible psychiatrst or psychologist would diagnose someone they haven’t examined. Dr. Drew knows this, just as he knows that all he’s doing is providing entertainment for an audience of idiots. As for Jodi Arias, she’s probably guilty, but it will be up to a jury to determine that, not media demagogues or phony profilers and phony shrinks on cheesy TV shows. Last I heard, the rule of law still applies in America.

    • Why is everybody here saying Jodi Arias is probably guilty? Do we want to be like the haters who are judging this woman guilty before there is even a trial. They did it to Casey. I am going to assume Jodi is Innocent til proven guilty.

      • JA Kalskett says:

        wise choice.

      • I haven’t followed the case and to be honest I probably won’t. I assume she’s guilty but I don’t know, and will leave it up to the jury to decide. It does bother me that the media is pushing this trial, because that in and of itself has a corrosive effect on the legal system. Trials are supposed to be about the pursuit of justice, not reality shows to entertain idiots. By the way, I initially assumed Casey was guilty until by chance I started following the case and it became clear to me she was innocent.

    • Completely agree Harry. I like to wait until I hear the evidence to decide. Even if I make a “pre-judgement” when I watch the trial on TV, I always clear my mind and try to sort of act like a juror and follow the law and really listen to the real evidence. That is the true test of the case and the truth. After the trial, I make my final judgement based on the evidence and even if I disagree with the jury and can’t understand at all why they did what they did I don’t run around yelling and screaming and acting like a fool. I try to find out by researching and understanding. I think about what went wrong, if I missed something, or if something was hidden by the prosecution, or something was unfairly excluded from evidence, or there was inefficient counsel, or the judge made bad rulings, or the charges were wrong. The system isn’t perfect, so I expect bad verdicts, I just hope that it can be remedied for those unfairly convicted and the system can be modified appropriately. I like to hear what the jurors think too, that’s interesting. I know I can be wrong. That’s why I wait to hear the real evidence and not the garbled up opinions that are on TV and the Internet 24/7. Dr. Drew isn’t a psychiatrist, he is licensed as a primary physician and an addiction specialist. He shouldn’t be making any “diagnoses”, he doesn’t even know how to use the DSM-IV. Not only are his “diagnoses” for sensational purposes, his persona is too.

      • The point I was trying to make we shouldn’t pre judge anyone guilty. That is wrong. Everyone is Innocent til proven Guilty. Casey was pre judged guilty and she was innocent. When I watch the news and I hear of a crime someone has been accused of I don’t think they probably did it. I assume they are Innocent until they are proven guilty. I don’t make pre-judgements like that. If I disagree with a verdict I don’t go off about it unless I feel that they are Innocent when they were convicted. Didn’t we learn anything about prejudging people from Casey? Jodi is Innocent until proven Guilty.

        • I thought that’s what you meant Jon, I was just concurring in my own words. Everyone, I mean everyone is innocent until proven guilty because you never know who is telling the truth until you hear the whole story. And you are absolutely right, what happened to Casey Anthony should never have happened and certainly should not happen to anyone else. I never think “they probably did it” when I hear someone charged with a crime. If I did then everyone would be guilty and I would be an extremely judgmental person who doesn’t use their brain. That is such a low standard. How do you think innocent people end up in prison? Almost anyone involved in a case can have a circumstantial case built against them. It is quite scary some of the things that happen to people in the justice system. That’s why we must stand up for each others’ rights and be proud of the beyond a reasonable doubt standard and not participate in the anti-Constitutional crowd, which thinks that the police are perfect and so are prosecutors. They often think “eh, they look good to me” or “it had to be them, I don’t know why, when, or how, but it was them.” The sad part is that a lot of police investigations are propelled by those phrases. I’ve heard a lot of stuff about the Arias case and I think, if the evidence they say they have is what they have, my point was only that it is convincing to me so far. I have not heard what the defense has to say, nor has the trial occurred yet. So I have made no final judgements, and like I said if TruTV covers the trial I will try to watch it and see what is really going on. Besides, there is a difference between thinking someone committed a crime and thinking they should be found guilty. No one should go to prison on some kind of whim or feeling, because you could be wrong.

      • JA Kalskett says:

        What you said is the process that brought me to my POV.

        As simply as possible, IMHO The picture painted by the whole H-MStory (beginning June 15th) AFTER the child was decomposing …IS THE LIE that protects the secret (Flag Day) and alone affected the trial verdict; protecting the whole Anthony family, and leaves ppl confused in the chaos of ‘pieces that will never FIT’ b/c the day of the EVENT has even ‘disappeared’

  12. I watched the Dr. Drew clip with disgust. And to think at one time I liked this guy…but now I see him for what he is; a ratings whore. This whole clip is a farce…the comparison of the two women, Casey and Jodi is beyond ridiculous! Just because they are pretty, they are compared? Wow…that’s some deep thinking there Dr. Drew! Real journalism…NOT! HLN is just hoping Jodi is the “next Casey” because they have ridden the Casey cash cow nearly to death…of course they will continue to try to resurrect it if they can. I just can’t understand how someone can go on the air and continue to call Casey a murderer AFTER she’s been acquitted, and be ok with that. She was found not guilty by a jury of her peers and yet this dumb Pat Brown thinks she knows more than the people who sat on the jury and heard every bit of evidence? Casey should sue the whole bunch of them…I would SO LOVE to see that happen! If that’s not defamation, I don’t know what is. I know of a blogger who is being sued because she posted some opinions about a boy who took pictures of a girl and did nothing to help her while she was being raped. This boy’s parents (idiot parents who raised an idiot son) are suing this blogger for defamation…this boy posted the pics on twitter…I think he defamed himself. So, if a blogger and anon posters can be sued, why can’t people like Pat Brown, Dr. Drew, Nancy Grace and the rest of the people who continually spout lies about Casey for ratings purposes? This stuff has got to stop! OK…climbing down from my soapbox now!

    • A boy took pictures of a girl being raped and did nothing to help this poor girl? That is disgusting and I hope this young man is punished to the full extent of the law if found guilty. He defamed himself. I don’t think the idiot parents will win anyway. They should be ashamed of their son. Yes, Casey should be able to sue.

      • Jon, it isn’t the first time someone has taken pictures or recorded something bad happening to someone and done nothing about it, the most recent example is the NYPost photographer and the man who got killed by the subway car. The front page was a disgusting display of their sensationalism at its worst. You hear about people all the time video recording with their phones, fights between people, making teens fight on camera, attacking people just to post it on YouTube, etc. Voyeurism on the Internet has gone to a new all-time low, it has even spread onto TV, and a lot of people sadly have the first reaction to document something instead of stepping in. Luckily though there are still those who will jump in and help; take a look at this story only a few months ago in Pennsylvania of 2 identified and 1 unidentified person who helped a woman narrowly escape death ( The weird thing is they make both items newsworthy. News channels often have Good Samaritan segments when someone saves someone else as if it should be something rare to awe at. It shouldn’t be. I understand people freezing in the moment, but I would hope that if you don’t freeze up in bad situations that you would help another person out. They also play the videos and show the pictures of the attacks, flash mobs, etc. as if we should be gawking at these things like the recorder was. We shouldn’t. What should be rare are people who reach for their camera instead of their phone. At least if you aren’t or can’t help call 911.

    • Jill, I don’t think I could have said it better myself. These media corporations shouldn’t be able to decimate people’s lives to make millions of dollars and just move on to their next victim. It is outlandish. The problem is, they have so much power because they are on 24/7 and they fill the airwaves with their spin and create a whole story, which is extremely hard to unravel and show that they were full of it because they of course aren’t going to give you the same amount of air time and exposure they had to show that they are just tabloids on TV now. It is sad how we let them use us and ignore our law and order so that they can become huge fat cats whilst surrounding us with a false reality. Yes, Casey Anthony should be able to sue, it is 100% defamation to get on TV and call someone a murderer who was found not guilty under law. The thing is though that I think that they believe that they have so much power of opinion that if she sued them, which they deserve, they would make things worse for her. Zimmerman I hope jars that thought process a bit. It would be so worth it to see them lose and get sued over and over. I hope George Zimmerman and Skakel both win their lawsuits. I hope Casey Anthony wins her civil suits. And I too dream of a day when HLN is brought to justice.

      • YCBR,

        I wonder why another network can’t embark on presenting cases from the defense’s POV and gain ratings as well in high profile cases. Is it not interesting to the public to know both sides of the story? I don’t understand why someone would want to watch a show they know is presenting information in such a one sided fashion and it would seem that if one side is being presented on TV that way, the masses would watch a show presenting the other side as well. Or is that not how the media works? LOL

        • You make an excellent point CJ. I would love to see a network do a show that is actually from the defense’s perspective. I am interested and certainly you guys are too, in actually knowing what’s really going on. You would think that the media would want to capitalize on this open market. However, they don’t seem quick to do so. Take for instance, why aren’t other news agencies jumping on Nancy Grace harder? A few shows, like GMA, which she guests on a lot, talked about Melinda Duckett’s suicide, but instead of exposing her, they allowed her to be nasty about what happened and blame it on Duckett. Did any news agencies report the settlement in that case, the lawsuit by Toni Medrano (Vodka Mom)’s family, the cancellation of her Swift Justice program or the lawsuit with that, or how TIME magazine named Nancy Grace the worst coverage of the year in 2011? Or how about how she slipped a nipple on national TV and then lied about it? I always thought that it was their usual way of doing things, for example: Fox News presents one side and MSNBC presents the other in politics. And they attempted to expose each others’ anchors and journalists for lies, etc. For some reason when it comes to criminal cases, they all bunch together on one side and sporadically you’ll hear the other side of things, but you have to dig through all the one-sided coverage just to get a hint of the other side. I would hope that people would actually want to know the truth and that they know they are only getting one side. But, it seems people are quite content in living in a world where to them the news is presenting the truth and since they are presenting one side that must be the truth. The reality is they are taking the government’s side in most high-profile cases because they can better sensationalize murder, sex, and lies, etc. like a soap opera. It’s just easier to take that side of things and run crazy with it. They don’t care about the law, the defendant, or anyone involved, what they care about is ratings. Until people really demand truthful news back, we will be stuck with these tabloid TV “news” programs that lie to us. People need to stop being sheep and start using their brains. You can also see this sort of one-sided interest in fictional shows as well, defense-oriented programs like Harry’s Law, Made in Jersey, and a while ago there was a show called The Defenders. They all were canceled, yet prosecution-oriented shows live on like the new show: Major Crimes or Blue Bloods.

          • JA Kalskett says:

            …unchecked ‘authority’ is the breeding ground for corruption. Media is a willing and able tool for deception…

        • Because the defense wants to keep what they are doing secret. A lot of times the defense decides to go another way because they feel something isnt going well or do something else. Why should they put everything out there so it can be disproved. The defense doesn’t want the prosecution or us knowing what they are going to do before they do it. If you were a defense lawyer would you.

          • That’s true Jon, it could be hard for a network to cover a defense’s perspective. That’s a lesser reason why the media doesn’t cover it. Places like Florida are where they like to concentrate their high-profile cases because they get basically 99.9% of what the State is doing in a case. The defense doesn’t and should never have to prove anything. That’s another thing I found appalling in the Casey Anthony case. The media acted all the time like the defense wasn’t proving anything, they don’t have too you dimwits!!! It was just more of their propaganda. Even the Judge acted at times, in my opinion, like the defense had to prove things. All the defense has to do is convince the jury that the prosecution isn’t proving anything. I think Casey Anthony’s defense did a very good job of that, which was reflected in the verdict. The show wouldn’t have to be what the defense is going to actually do, just a perspective on what they might do, or how the evidence really doesn’t stack up, etc. For instance, we can use the Casey Anthony case, if you actually read the evidence yourself in discovery you got the sense that it wasn’t really up-to-par, but if you watched in on TV, it was the most fantastic evidence in the history of man. They filter it and change it so much, society really could benefit from a fairer and more accurate viewpoint of criminal trials in the news. I don’t know what channel would do it though because they are all in this web of deceit together. Just a few examples, many guests who appear on InSession (TruTV), also appear on CNN and HLN (all 3 channels are owned by the same parent company), Greta Van Susteren on FOX is very pro-prosecution especially in the Casey Anthony case, GMA on ABC always has Nancy Grace as a legal guest, and all the parent company’s of these networks tend to own all the major newspapers as well (i.e. the same company that owns CNN, HLN, and TruTV owns TIME). Which of course are all going to have the same information, they aren’t going to contradict themselves. They also boast their own storyline if they all have the same information because people tend to view these news agencies as different entities that fact check each other, which isn’t the case. Instead, they serve sometimes as ways to falsely give credence to their information. For example, if on HLN you see the 84 times chloroform search and then you see it in TIME, you might think that it is true because 2 different entities said it, when in fact they aren’t different at all. Besides, we know the truth about the 84 times search and if the media had actually investigated they would have seen clearly in the discovery that something was off and that the two programs’ results didn’t match. The 84 times was always pretty suspicious to me. One thing to point out is that ABC did do a somewhat fair segment portraying Casey Anthony as a mother more accurately than anyone else and they got spun by the other networks negatively for it. Why? Because they got off the bandwagon for a second. PBS Frontline did a fair investigation into forensics and in it had a segment about the Casey Anthony case, in which Jose Baez says: “She had photographs of her and her child, and a network paid us $200,000 so we could mount a proper defense,” in response to the misguided outrage. So, George and Cindy Anthony can milk a charity dry, they can go on Larry King Live and get loads of money, but Casey Anthony isn’t allowed to properly defend herself? You need money to defend yourself in a death penalty case, it is expensive. It is your Constitutional right. What were George and Cindy Anthony going to use their money for? It is just more of their unfair angling to create the story they want you to see. It didn’t have anything to do with checkbook journalism, it had everything to do with making Casey Anthony look bad and ABC didn’t do that, so they got punished.

    • JA Kalskett says:

      Jill, you are SO right…and when you said : Pat Brown thinks she knows more than the people who sat on the jury and heard every bit of evidence?

      I’d like to add that these people (chosen for jury) HAD NOT heard the heinous-murder story as it unfolded in the 180 days of 2008, or in the two years before trial. It was important that they were given facts, evidence and expert opinion to base Casey’s guilt or innocence on the charge of murder, and lesser charges that could no longer be proven.

      [You can tell how convincing the Heinous-Murder propaganda was, by how fast the jury responded to the ‘disinformation’ once they returned home]

    • Edgar Longenecker says:

      Awesome…Jill… noting the hysterical tone of Pat Brown, and, the psychophantic, boot licking, dr. Drawn… Thank you for being conscious… More, anytime; and, you might think about, the news blackout, on the privileged charactors, who are privy to, only what they and the police know, what they have, on Jodi; obviously, in her defense, or, they’d havr disclosed , “all they have on her,” for, assurance, of a conviction; wouldn’t they ? This is an Alice in Wonderland, soap opera, wherein, Jodi, does the time, nearly five years, so far, or, soon enough… then the trial, with each blueblood, sitting on their piece of exculpatory, evidence; each, with important enough evidence to clear her; otherwise, why not, divulge it ? Then, after the bogus conviction, by the tapdancing prosecutor, making bland observations, that, exercising, anal rape, or, and, fantasies, is just, “Frisky Sex, while Travis had, Jodi, bent over, pinned down, and, unable to move, with, Travis, the school wrestler, and, 100 pounds more, proved that oral and anal sex, was less of a sin, than, vaginal sex… or, not; as to what he did, was going to do, or, she imagined, as he rough sexed her, bent over… until someone, grabbed him from behind, and nearly, decapitated him, then, spun him around for the extra-kill heart plunge. Read, “The God Makers,” Not a chance that Jodi, could have performed such a kill, without paramilitary, or, and, high priest, training, especially, from the front; nearly decapitating him… Edgar…

  13. I do hope both Zimmerman and Casey both Sue and WIN! The 2radio ppl was fired for making a joke that the nurse killed herself. Here nancy grace, hln crew can down right lie to destroy ppls lives and putting them in danger! These ppl needs sued and fired!! Also thanks for answering my questions! I thought the Caused law was bad!

  14. I do hope both Zimmerman and Casey both Sue and WIN! The 2radio ppl was fired for making a joke that the nurse killed herself. Here nancy grace, hln crew can down right lie to destroy ppls lives and putting them in danger! These ppl needs sued and fired!! Also thanks for answering my questions! I thought the Caylee law was bad!

    • Nancy Grace has faced civil suits before, but she does what every other famous person or corporation that gets in trouble does. She quietly settles it and of course, the media doesn’t cover her getting it because she is their leader. Under the conditions of the settlement, predictably, she never has to admit wrongdoing. Total bull. And then she just gets right back on TV and blasts people with lies again and again. She is the embodiment of the problem with the media.

  15. JA Kalskett says:

    yes..Leturno or something like that? They got married later, and now raising kids together…errr…as of the last I heard of her, anyway.

  16. Thank you so much YCBW, you answered all my questions! I agree also with you.

  17. JA Kalskett says:

    As the Holidays are soon approaching, and there is never ‘enough time’ in the last 12 days b4 Christmas, may I ask . . .

    Can ANYONE here relate to the ‘perception of the events’ that I’ve been trying to explain? [maybe my time would be better spent focusing on cookies, LOL]

    • I’m sure you and your family would appreciate your concentration on cookies! 🙂 I get what you’re saying JA, most of it at least, your viewpoint sometimes jogs something in my mind. I don’t agree with everything you say, but some of it I actually do agree with. I have my own theories and I’m still working on some things, since the new searches came out. I can’t believe it’s almost Christmas!!! Happy Holidays to everyone, JA, Jon, Kelly, CJ, Harry, Drew, Karen, everybody else on here, of course anyone reading this and anyone who actually reads my very long posts! LOL. Happy Holidays to all those who are having a rough time, I hope the new year is much better for you! And of course, Happy Holidays shout out to Casey Anthony and everyone on the defense team and everyone helping her out despite the ignorant and sometimes dangerous public. I wish peace and love to everyone!!! Even if you don’t get any presents this year know that you are loved by others and God.

  18. JA Kalskett says:

    …ah ditto, from me too… I’m still in need of sophistication, but I recognize it when I see it…Hope some rubs off on me…

Leave a Reply to youcouldbewrong Cancel reply