Thursday, November 8, 2012

Tiffany Hartley: Gender Bias on Nancy Grace Repost

Why did Tiffany Hartley lie about what happened on Falcon Lake?

Was her husband shot when they both went to meet with drug cartels in the hope of making a wholesale purchase meant for re-sale later in the United States?  This is a view held by some.  Pat Brown said she believed that Tiffany's "water story" makes sense if it is relocated on to land.  

Susan Murphy Milano, on the other hand, said that drugs was likely involved but wanted to know why Tiffany didn't grieve, and weeks after his death, took off her wedding ring and told the public that David would have wanted her to "move on", and "travel, see the world" because he loved her so much. 

Tiffany even said that David prepped her for possible kidnapping at the hands of Mexican drug cartel pirates.  She said that just before leaving for Falcon Lake, he gave her this very warning. 

She also said that the purpose of the trip was to photograph an underwater church.  

She said he was a "loving husband."

He was a "loving husband" who was willing to put his wife in harm's way, needing to warn her about the possibility of kidnapping, just to get a picture?

Nope.  Not buying it.  

Susan wondered if there was a love interest, or a life insurance policy somewhere in play in the backdrop of this untruthful story, so fanciful that, as we have seen:  even lies do not proceed from a vacuum. 

Don't believe me?

Try telling a lengthy lie:  100% false.  

It is almost impossible, as your mind seeks things to say, it inevitably will go to your past, or to movies you have seen, books you have read, and so on.  A lengthy 100% false story is very difficult to say.  This is why we give scripts of false stories in training, so that the 'teller' of the lie has no memory connection with the story other than what was just read. 

Tiffany Hartley is a big fan of the movie, "Titanic", which is where she lifted her death scene story from. 

Truthful people tell us what happened, what they saw, and what they heard.  When someone says "there were 3 men there but I didn't see them" we need to stop and ask, "...and you knew this how?"  Yet, given that Tiffany was young and pretty, she seemed to be above suspicion. 

Certainly David Hartley's family saw the changing story and it may be that they did not press her for a polygraph if the original intent was to travel to Mexico to meet with the drug cartel. 

Yet, how can it be that she and David could just go to Mexico and meet a drug cartel?  Drug Cartels are not in the yellow pages. 

There would have to be a connection between the Hartleys and a drug cartel. 

Nothing seemed to connect. 

Yet, it is human nature, however, to speak and when we speak, we reveal. 

In just a casual conversation about housing, Tiffany made this very slip.  

In talking about renting apartments and having lived formerly in Mexico, she slipped out that the house she and David had rented was previously owned or occupied by a drug cartel. 

She knew this how?

Tiffany Hartley emerged from Falcon Lake, Texas, with the claim that her husband had been shot dead by Mexican pirates and that she cradled his head in her arms, but heard a voice she attributes to God, telling her to leave him behind and go on.  

And "go on" she did; within a week she went on the talk show circuit and became an instant celebrity.  He was dead in September, but she was out photographed on Black Friday, 2 months later, shopping 'till she dropped, smiling and having a nice day with some media attention.  Even Gov. Perry from Texas said anyone who dared questioned Tiff must have something wrong with them.  


However, there were some questions that went unanswered.  

Statement Analysis concluded:  Deception. 
Tiffany Hartley refused to take a polygraph. 
Her story changed several times. 
The logistics of any of her accounts did not add up. 

Yet, she was given a pass by Sheriff Ziggy Gonzalez, who, himself, declined to give her a polygraph. 

Tiffany said she feared being arrested in Mexico. The following article was written after her appearance, in 2010, on The Nancy Grace Show.  

Did Nancy invent a new form of "look polygraphy", whereby looking at someone tells her when someone is honest and when someone is not?  For more insight into the case, see 
"The Death of David Hartley"  and analysis:

here and here
Here is the article from 2010:  

Statement Analysis is best done with little information; so that the analysis is not influenced.  The allegation is needed to discern the responses from the subject. 

When analysts work on statements from investigators the statements are to be received with only the allegation; no evidence, no suspicions, no history, no thoughts of investigators, etc.

However, when a case is ongoing, it is to be expected that commentary will become part of the analysis, especially as time passes and more information comes to light. Reference points are noted as well as the development of "memory" by the subject.

so many have wondered why media has gone so softly

First person singular, past tense, establishes commitment to a text. But when a subject has repeated a story often enough, the subject can now work from "memory" in a fabrication. This is often seen by the self-affirming phrase,

"like I said" or "as I said before".

It does not mean the subject is speaking from truthful, experiential memory.

Below is the transcripts from the Nancy Grace show in plain text; quotes in italics, and Statement Analysis and commentary in bold type.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Just released a frantic 911 call from that bizarre shooting.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Officials say gunmen approached on boats and opened fire on the couple. Tiffany managed to dodge the bullets. But David was hit in the back of the head.

UNIDENTIFIED 911 DISPATCHER: What`s your husband`s name?

UNIDENTIFIED 911 DISPATCHER: OK. Ma`am, were you shot at?

UNIDENTIFIED 911 DISPATCHER: Did you see anybody?
HARTLEY: There were three boats.

This is the initial indication that something is wrong. The question is: Did you (singular) see anybody? In Statement Analysis, when someone does not answer the question, it is flagged as a sensitive question. The expected response would include a singular pronoun, providing ownership, such as "I saw three boats".

Mark McClish has identified "3" as the "liar's number" in his research. There very well may have been 3 boats, but we simply make a notation about the number "3" and continue. This has been discussed previously in analysis; however, we must not miss that Tiffany did not answer the direct question, and when she did, she dropped the pronoun.
1. The question: Did you see anybody? is a sensitive question. "Anybody" refers to humans, not boats.
2. The missing pronoun means that Tiffany does not take ownership of her answer, which means that we cannot either.
3. That there were 3 boats is now in doubt. She did not say that she saw "anybody", nor did she say that she herself saw 3 boats. We, therefore, cannot say that there were 3 boats. We can only say what we are told. This is why it is vital to listen to what the subject says, and not interpret. She didn't say "I saw 3 boats". We do not say that she saw 3 boats. This is an indication of fabrication. This is only the initial 911 call. Tiffany has yet, to date, gone on various talk shows. We are working from this 911 call. Therefore:

We conclude that identity in this story is a highly sensitive topic to Tiffany Hartley.


HARTLEY: Three boats. And they came back looking at me.

Note that initially we have repetition (reflective language) which is not to be considered reliable. "three boats". Next she said that something began: "and they came back looking at me".

"they", grammatically, would refer to "three boats". Note that boats cannot "look".

Note also that they were "looking at me". "Me" is the speaker, Tiffany. 3 boats were looking at Tiffany. Since boats do not look, this is flagged for deception, along with the missing pronoun and the liar's number and the avoidance of the answer. This means that we have 4 indicators of deception already, even as the call had just begun.

Next is a clip from Anderson Cooper show that was played on the Nancy Grace show:

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN ANCHOR: The Good Samaritan who helped Tiffany Hartley out on the water.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: She was frantic, crying, sobbing. I mean, she looked very, very jittery.
UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: The Mexican authorities questioning whether or not it happened the way the victim says it happened here.

HARTLEY: They know the pirates are out there. We knew that. We knew that they -- you know, there`s a possibility of them being there.

Tiffany Hartley responds to the challenge that Mexican officials question whether or not it happened the way she says it happened. Note her answer does not include an affirmation that it happened the way she said it did, rather, she avoids the question (in the form of a challenge) and changes the topic to what Mexican officials know about the area (pirates there) and that she and David knew that pirates were there. Note the order of her knowledge:

They knew.
We knew.
We knew (repetition means further sensitivity)

This shows that Tiffany Hartley first affirmed the knowledge of drug activity, but then quickly sought to remove herself from such knowledge. The repetition and self-weakening show that drug activity is sensitive to Tiffany Hartley. (See Pat Brown's input)

I believe in my heart that they went back and took him. And they`re hiding our jet ski. They`re hiding him. And we just pray that we get him back. And when you`re looking at the end of a barrel of a gun, and wondering if they`re just going to shoot you, too, and wonder if your families are just going to never know where you are.

GRACE: That was Tiffany Hartley this morning, just a few hours ago on the NBC "Today" show.

To Will Ripley, reporter with CNN affiliate KRGV, this couple were real adventurers. And to my understanding they set out on jet skis at the reservoir there on the Texas shore to look at a partially submerged, centuries-old church.

And now I understand authorities are questioning her story. I don`t -- I don`t agree. I watched her on the "Today" show, and I believe her.

Nancy Grace believes Tiffany Hartley because she saw Tiffany on the Today Show. Please see analysis of Tiffany Hartley's appearance on The Today Show

GRACE: You know, and it`s quite a lure. I mean I traveled, I don`t know how far, to try to go dive to see an underwater statue of Christ. So this is a big, big attraction for water lovers and adventure seekers.
And the story she tells is so scary. But I was watching her I really believe she`s telling the truth. And I resent authorities questioning her story. I know his body has not been found. I know there`s no sign of the jet ski.

That does not disturb me. Looking at her, I believe this woman. We`re going to replay that sound of her speaking earlier today

Notice that Nancy Grace emphasizes the visual of Tiffany Hartley as the basis for her belief. This is vital to understanding the case.

This is what Susan Murphy Milano has been saying: Had Tiffany Hartley been a man, the story would have been questioned and a full scale investigation would have been done.

Susan will be on The Peter Hyatt Show soon. Stay in touch for the announcement.

To Alexis Weed, tell me her story in a nutshell, Alexis. Don`t embellish. I want to hear what she said.

ALEXIS WEED, NANCY GRACE PRODUCER: Nancy, she said that her -- she and her husband David were traveling on their jet skis. It was ambushed by several boats with gunmen. She said that the gunmen opened fire on both of them, that one of the gunshots from these men struck her husband in the head.

She then went over to her husband, jumped off her jet ski, went to check him, flipped him over. He was -- had this gunshot in the back of the head. She decided she better flee because she had a gun pointed at her head, she said. She fled and then went to the shore and went back to the U.S. side.

It would stand to reason to question the story about the cruelty of Mexican Pirates who:

fired without warning
killed for no reason
did not demand money
pointed a gun directly at her...
have a reputation for cruelty that included beheading and delivering the remains...

Since they are known to kill men, women, and children:

                                    Why then, was Tiffany Hartley spared

To a former prosecutor's mind: why wouldn't Nancy Grace even question this? Why would she have "resentment" towards anyone who did question the story? Nancy Grace, herself, uses the word "story". This suggests the ratings versus credibility argument that comes up from time to time on her show.

Casey Anthony was not afforded such a free pass. Certainly Nancy Grace has, at least in the past, asked some tough questions of some of her guests, including Crystal Sheffield.

Why does Tifffany Hartley get a pass from Grace?

GRACE: And this is what else I heard. I heard her say three boats of pirates, drug runners, approach her. That, first of all, she hears bullets. And they`re hitting in the water around her. She turns to see three boats approaching.
Her husband goes down. She goes back, risking her own life to save her husband. She pulls him up. She sees that he`s shot. She pointed right here. And tries to lift him. And the pirates come up to her.

They look down at her, pointed the gun right at her, and they`re talking, she doesn`t know what they`re saying, and they leave. She leaves in a hail of bullets. She said she felt God telling her, you`ve got to go now, you`ve got to go now, you`ve got to go now, and she did.

"a hail of bullets" but not a single hit on her or her jet ski. Yet, the former prosecutor does not raise a doubt.

Take a listen to Tiffany Hartley who survived an alleged pirate attack. Her husband shot in the head. Take a listen.


HARTLEY: When I looked back -- after I had seen some bullets hit the water next to me, I looked back to check on David, and I saw him fly over the jet ski. He had been hit.

Note: chronological order is always viewed in Statement Analysis. A person recalling from memory does so in order. If something is out of chronological order, it is flagged for deception.

1. I looked back First person singular, past tense. Reliable.

2. "after I had seen some bullets hit the water next to me"

3. He had been hit

4. He flew off the jet ski

she is out of chronological order.

I quickly turned around

The story now has editorializing rather than a simple account. She didn't just turn around, she did so "quickly"

and went to him and jumped off my jet ski.

"and went to him" is added by Tiffany. Where else might she have gone? This is unnecessary and makes her account sound more like a dramatized story.

And I had to turn him over because he was face down in the water. And turned him over and he was shot in the head.

We note that whenever an account has "so, since, therefore, because" it is to be noted as sensitive since the subject is no longer simply telling us what happened, but "why" something happened. This indicates sensitivity as the subject feels the need to explain actions.

Note that "turn him over" is repeated, which is sensitive. Why it is sensitive, at this point, we do not know, but when a subject repeats a word like this, a skillful interviewer will hear the repetition and focus questions upon it.

And that`s when a boat came up, one of the boats came up to me, and had a gun pointed at me, trying to decide what to do with me. And then they left. And that`s when I tried saving David and getting him onto my jet ski.

Note that "a boat" came up, one of "the" boats (previously identified). This is unnecessary. We would not expect that "a" boat was not one of the 3 she mentioned. It is unlikely that there were 3 boats; only one. But here we have a strong indicator of deception:
"trying to decide what to do with me"

When a subject tells us what another was thinking, it is deception.

NOTE: trying to decide what to do" is found within her sentence and it is likely truthful. This is an indication that the subject(s) on the boat and Tiffany Hartley did communicate. This is why she is expressing the other subject(s) thoughts.

But I just -- I couldn`t get him up. And I just kept hearing God tell me, you have to go, you have to go. So I had to leave him. So I could get to safety.

As police will often say, when God is brought into a statement, it is a sure signal that deception is present. Here, she stated that she "just kept hearing" (note tense) "God" "tell her" that she had to go. Note that she does not say why God did not warn them not to go jet ski in a place where she knew drug cartel pirates were, nor does she say why God didn't tell her a few minutes earlier so that David could be spared. She has now claimed Divine intervention for herself; but not for her husband.

He would never, ever put me in a position of danger. And we hadn`t heard anything of -- anything going on over there. We had heard about the pirates, but we didn`t know -- you know, we just hadn`t heard anything recently.

When a subject tells us what didn't happen, what wasn't said, what wasn't seen, or what wasn't thought, it is called a 'negation' and it is an offering of critical information that is highly sensitive to the subject. Here Tiffany, although not challenged, anticipates that she has said that they "knew" this was a drug area, and that people would naturally ask why David would expose her to such danger. Note now the sensitivity above and why she went from "they knew", "we knew" to the reduced "possibility" of being in harm's way.

1. He would never, ever put me in a position of danger

The word "never" is not to be accepted as a substitute for the word "no" and is, in fact, a weak denial. According to Tiffany, David Hartley did, in deed, put her in a position of danger, just to get a snap shot of a church. Tiffany knows that her story, as told, accuses David of this, therefore, she addresses it in the form of the highly sensitive negation.

This statement may suggest that drug involvement was part of September 30th.


Pat Brown's theory is that they went to buy drugs, likely a wholesale purchase, in order to sell them on the street at a tremendous mark up. She believes that they were shot at on land, not on a jet ski, and that David, hit, told her to run. She ran, got on her jet ski and took off, leaving him behind to die. That Tiffany Hartley offers to us that David would "never ever" put her in harm's way tells us that David either put her in harm's way, or had done something in the past to make her feel frightened; in some kind of "danger". This may be an indication of drug involvement, or it may be an indication of domestic violence. (Recall that she spoke of his size; meaning that his large size next to her small size is in her mind as she told her story. This may be in her mind if she felt intimidated by him. Research into his background, especially close friends or ex girlfriends, could confirm or deny this possibility.)

Tiffany told us, via negation, that David put her in danger. (we also know this from her story: she reported that they even spoke of the possibility of being kidnapped before they went.

How many husbands do you know would go into an area of such immense danger as to show the need for kidnap preparedness, with their wives?

And we hadn`t heard anything of -- anything going on over there. We had heard about the pirates, but we didn`t know -- you know, we just hadn`t heard anything recently

First: we hadn't heard anything;
Next: "anything" is repeated; sensitivity
Then: hadn't heard anything "recently" qualifying her answer.

This is what deception looks like.

GRACE: Hearing that woman, there is no doubt in my mind that this is what went down. You were just seeing her speaking a few hours ago on the NBC "Today" show.

This speaks for itself.

Out to the lines, Latoya, South Carolina, hello, Latoya.
LATOYA, CALLER FROM SOUTH CAROLINA: Hey, Nancy. I just want to let you know, I love your show, I watch it every night.

GRACE: Thank you, dear.

LATOYA: My -- my question is, just to clear this all up, because I believe her, too. But has she taken a polygraph test?
GRACE: I don`t know. Let`s go to Lieutenant (INAUDIBLE) Garza with the Zapata County Sheriff`s Office.

Lieutenant, thank you for being with us. I doubt she`s in any frame of mind right now to take a polygraph.

This is a statement of prejudice. It would be of interest to ask Nancy Grace how many males who had just "lost" their wives or girlfriends, were not "in any frame of mind" to take a polygraph.

In a murder investigation, what frame of mind should exist to take a polygraph?

Nancy Grace: Was Marc Klass in any frame of mind to take a polygraph when his daughter went missing?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No, ma`am. One hasn`t been provided to her, or offered at this time.

"provided" to her is soft language.

GRACE: Well, I`ve got to tell you something, Lt. Garza, I really believe her. And the fact that the body has not been discovered yet, and that the jet ski has not been discovered, that doesn`t concern me at all.

Can`t you look at this lady and tell she`s telling the truth

No need for science. Just have Nancy Grace look at someone and we can bypass the polygraph, statement analysis and interviewing skills, and get an answer from Nancy. No need for hundreds of hours of interview training. No need for linguistics. No need for polygraphy training.

Just have Nancy Grace look at someone and we can know if they are telling the truth or not.

This is what Susan Murphy Milano has been saying:

The media would not treat Tiffany Hartley this way had she been a man and the victim a woman.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, I was here actually when Miss Hartley came into the office. And we also had a witness out there corroborating Mrs. Hartley`s event of a boat chasing her into the U.S. side of the lake.
GRACE: Let me go to Dr. Leslie Austin, psychotherapist joining us out of New York.

Leslie -- Dr. Leslie, you can size somebody up in a heartbeat. What do you think?

A trained psychotherapist will know that what Nancy Grace claims is not only impossible, but irresponsible and the height of judgmentalism. Sociopaths, addicts, and so many others are able to fool professionals with impunity. Dr. Leslie is faced with a dilemma: does she speak truthfully and cause Nancy Grace to become angry, dismissive, and possibly insulting? (this could lead to no further invitations back to the show). Or, does she agree with Nancy, in the face of both science and common sense?
DR. LESLIE AUSTIN, PSYCHOTHERAPIST: I find her totally credible. I absolutely believe her. I just wonder why they started shooting first rather than trying to capture them and rob them. But I find her completely credible.

Note the weakness in the assertion by the additional words she calls upon:

"totally" credible"absolutely" believe her
This weakness in assertion is seen with two additional words and then the weakness leaks out with the following statement in which she "wonders" why they would shoot first and not rob. This belies her agreement with Nancy Grace as she shows the incredulous nature of the story.

GRACE: Well, they`re drug runners. Why ask why? Why do they act like animals? I don`t know. Why do they kill people? I don`t know. Do I need an excuse? Maybe they only wanted the jet ski.

AUSTIN: No. But there was a history of people being robbed there. I mean it`s just something that I wondered about.

GRACE: So what are you --

AUSTIN: But she is absolutely credible.
GRACE: -- trying to say, because she`s not robbed, she`s lying?

AUSTIN: No, no, no. I find her completely credible. I just don`t understand the scenario yet. But she is totally believable. There is no way this woman is lying.

Nancy Grace attempts to humiliate those who disagree with her. Note the sacrifice of dignity by many who repeatedly go on her show for the publicity.

GRACE: Unleash the lawyers, Ken Hodges, Raymond Giudice, Richard Herman.

Weigh in, Herman.

RICHARD HERMAN, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Nancy, her story sounds ridiculous to me. Why would they aim a gun at her and not shoot her and not take her jet ski? Pirates just don`t come up to people and shoot them for fun of shooting people. I don`t know what went on here. It`s tragic. This man apparently is dead. But the story sounds absolutely ridiculous.

Note that the first description by Richard Herman is that her story sounds "ridiculous". This is how far apart two views are:

Herman says her "story" sounds "ridiculous" but Grace says "she" is credible.

The difference?

Richard Herman is addressing the story;
Nancy Grace is addressing the woman.

Refer to Susan Murphy Milano. What is ridiculous to one is "absolutely" credible to another because the other "looked" at Tiffany Harltely.

Is this because Hartley is a woman?

GRACE: No, no. Because I have prosecuted cases where victims were murdered, were gunned down just for the hell of it.

What about it, Giudice?

HERMAN: Why didn`t they shoot her?

GRACE: I don`t know.


GRACE: I don`t know. I don`t know why they didn`t shoot her. I only thank God in Heaven. They didn`t.

What about it, Raymond?

GIUDICE: My two concerns are. Every picture I see in him --

GRACE: Your concerns?

GIUDICE: He`s wearing a floatation device, a life jacket. Secondly, those jet skis are designed to float. There is no reason that that body and that jet ski in a lake, not out in the ocean, have not been found yet.

Ray Giudice is not focused upon Hartley, the woman, but upon the forensics of her story. This, along with Richard Herman's view, are in stark contrast to Nancy Grace's view of looking at the person of the story, rather than the story and its details.

GRACE: Ken Hodges, what do you make of it?
KEN HODGES, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well, I think the most compelling thing to support what you say is that an independent witness observed it and corroborated what she said. It needs to have a full investigation and hopefully it will reveal what you`ve said that she was a victim of a horrible crime.

UNIDENTIFIED 911 DISPATCHER: OK. So you more or less know where he is?HARTLEY: Yes, but he`s -- he`s --


UNIDENTIFIED 911 DISPATCHER: OK. What`s your name?
HARTLEY: Tiffany Hartley.

UNIDENTIFIED 911 DISPATCHER: Are you sure that your husband got shot?HARTLEY: Yes, in his head.

Note that the 911 Dispatcher appears to have questioned the veracity of the caller.


GRACE: We are taking your calls, out to Cheryl in Georgia, hi, Cheryl.

CHERYL, CALLER FROM GEORGIA: Hey, Nancy. How are you?

GRACE: I`m good, dear. What`s your question?

CHERYL: I have a couple of questions. If I was going to go on a jet ski vacation I wouldn`t like go near borders of, you know, where they were, where it was dangerous. And also, if boats were coming towards them, why didn`t they shoot at her? Is there a life insurance policy on her husband?

GRACE: To Will Ripley, reporter with KRGV. Will, it`s my understanding from what she says it all happened so fast they just came up and started shooting, which that`s the way drug runners do. What about the rest of the questions?

Nancy Grace appears to know the MO of drug runners; how they shoot and operate.
RIPLEY: Well, one thing you need to remember about this couple is that they lived in Reynosa, Mexico for two and a half years before moving back to the Texas side of the border and they`ve only lived here in McAllen for the past five months.

So these are people who are familiar with Mexico and also Falcon Lake is not very clearly marked. I mean, because there is no, you know, physical basically boundary line you can cross into Mexico and if you happen to miss the buoy you may not even know you`re in Mexico.

And this lake is -- this reservoir is a drug runner`s paradise. We have smuggling going on so much because there`s really not enough law enforcement out there.

GRACE: Well, you know, Will Ripley, something you said is absolutely correct. The only way you can tell you`re going over the water border are there are some buoys and they are very far apart. You don`t know that you`re crossing the border.

Note that the question of the life insurance policy was not answered by the respondent, nor was it addressed by Nancy Grace.


MsCabinFever said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Lara Martinez said...

Maybe Nancy Grace has the same disparaging opinion of Mexicans as she does "drug runners." She immediately and without question accepts Tiffany's premise that "Mexican Pirates" are to blame for an elaborate Miami-Vice-esque hail of bullets on an innocent white couple who were just sight-seeing in an area where they needed to prepare for a kidnapping attempt.

They were there to buy drugs. They were probably robbed and her husband was shot--maybe Tiffany was hiding somewhere while the drug buy went down, so they didn't kill her. That would explain her demeanor when she was helped off her jet-ski--she was fleeing for her life.

I don't care one bit about Tiffany--I have a low opinion of drug dealers & distributors who blame others for their problems.

Anonymous said...


Dylan posts on Facebook.

"I said from the stage that we had to play better than good tonight," he wrote. "That the president was here today and he’s a hard act to follow. Also, that we’re not fooled by the media and we think it’s going to be a landslide." Dylan predicted a massive Obama victory during a pre-election concert in Madison, Wis. His post earned almost 30,000 likes, but not all of the commenters were thrilled

Anonymous said...

~ Posted by Patricia K.~
I think that the suicides of Melinda Duckett and Toni Medrano, two mothers who Nancy Grace was suspicious of has caused her to err on the side of assuming innocence rather than drawing attention to suspicious behavior or inconsistencies in stories.She was taken to task for her treatment of Melinda Duckett.
She now compensates by taking it further than necessary and it's irritating but I think that is what is behind it. She even did that with Ronald Cummings in Florida when little Hailey disappeared. Prior to all the criticism she got after the suicide of Melinda Duckett she would have been on board with questioning Ron and his girlfriend ... instead she sidled up right next to the grieving couple. She seems to be doing that with Tiffany Hartley now. It's rather transparent and she comes across as being fake and shallow. It's irritating, I can't even listen or read it because it's apparent that I'm "Humoring" her and playing along with dishonesty.
~Patricia K.

Vita said...

UNIDENTIFIED 911 DISPATCHER: Are you sure that your husband got shot?

HARTLEY: Yes, in his head.

In the moment of panic, 911 call in process, Are you sure that your husband got shot?

Yes, in his head.

Her, in his head, as in he was marked, tagged as it was an assassination? her to have pre- knowledge? or she shot him herself?

Had she said, Yes in the head, it would then be a an unknown, from her, to the 911 operator. 911 operator then would ask further questions, in the head? is your husband injured, grazed by the bullet or worse...

She is telling it as it is, yes IN HIS Head. He took a bullet. This in the moment of panic, her to outlive a scene from a James Bond movie. Matter of fact, IN HIS HEAD.

In his head, not in the head. Didn't we cover this with Tristen, she said my head, yet it was ' the hair, the throat, the neck, when she was being attacked by Chad Evans.

Miss Hartley on interview introduces there was a first single boat, friendly, prior to the " 3" boats ...

NG says the Pirates were talking and She/TH didn't know what they were saying, as in they were speaking Spanish? if the Hartly's lived in Mexico wouldn't she be able to decipher some of the saids?

Oh but here in this interview she says, they never spoke to her.
@ 1:22, She didn't know what they were trying to think. They left, they didn't shoot at me.

@ 1:10 after David hits the water, she says, No questions asked, not even thinking, I went to check on him, ( bizarre choice of words) she was not screaming, hysterical nope, she no questions asked, not even thinking, went to check -

Check what if he was Dead? mission accomplished?

John Mc Gowan said...

No need for science. Just have Nancy Grace look at someone and we can bypass the polygraph, statement analysis and interviewing skills, and get an answer from Nancy. No need for hundreds of hours of interview training. No need for linguistics. No need for polygraphy training.

Just have Nancy Grace look at someone and we can know if they are telling the truth or not.

Peter that made me chuckle

Anonymous said...

Presumably the magazine doesn't do refers to each source that it reproduces, just how does copyright law allow them to re-print editorial content that they don't own without paying royalties?
.. Also, can this law be used internationally?.

Feel free to surf to my blog :: transvaginalmeshlawsuit
Feel free to surf my web-site ; transvaginal mesh compensation

Anonymous said...

The first piece is geotagging each article on some kind of map.
.. The second piece is meshing those points
on a map with other people. Essentially we'd like several members of our team to offer updates regularly and post their locations to the same map..

my blog post; interrogarlo
Also visit my website - transvaginal mesh lawsuit

Anonymous said...

Would love to hear an "update" on the analysis now that a suspect has been arrested.

Anonymous said...

Do you mind if I quote a few of your articles as long as I provide
credit and sources back to your website? My blog site is in
the very same area of interest as yours and my users would truly benefit from a lot of the information you
present here. Please let me know if this ok with you.

Thank you!

Also visit my web-site: individual dental plans
Feel free to surf my website - individual dental plans

Anonymous said...

There really is it a little difficult to find computer parts
without having to buy whole computers and tearing them
apart myself.. I wish to start my business utilizing the computer parts,
but where can I obtain the computer parts (the small parts)?
I have tried my local recycle center and no success.
. I'm around the verge of contacting an established computer craftsperson and cosigning for their business... A person with ideas or advice?.

my page :: transvaginal mesh compensation
my web site :: vaginal mesh lawsuit

Anonymous said...

Is it true that blogs are just forum discussions with rss that could enable
the consumer to watch the actual wanted to watch
more convieniently? Is that all of the differences?

Also visit my blog post ...
My web site ; Paxil Lawyers

Anonymous said...

Hey there this is somewhat of off topic but I was
wondering if blogs use WYSIWYG editors or if you have to manually code with HTML.
I'm starting a blog soon but have no coding know-how so I wanted to get advice from someone with experience. Any help would be greatly appreciated!

my web-site:
Feel free to surf my weblog - what is a root canal

Anonymous said...

Excellent beat ! I wish to apprentice even as you amend your web
site, how can i subscribe for a blog site? The account aided me a acceptable deal.
I were a little bit familiar of this your broadcast provided shiny clear concept

my page
Take a look at my blog discount dental plans

Anonymous said...

Hello, just wanted to say, I liked this article.
It was funny. Keep on posting!

Here is my site :: cbdsa.Com
Also visit my web site ... what is a root canal

Anonymous said...

Wow that was odd. I just wrote an extremely
long comment but after I clicked submit my comment didn't show up. Grrrr... well I'm not writing all that over again.

Anyway, just wanted to say fantastic blog!

Look at my homepage ::
My web page > dental insurance plans

Anonymous said...

It's actually a nice and useful piece of information. I'm glad that you shared this
useful information with us. Please stay us informed like this.
Thank you for sharing.

My web page;
Have a look at my homepage ... dental plan

Anonymous said...

Good day! This is my 1st comment here so I just wanted to give a quick shout
out and say I really enjoy reading your blog posts. Can you recommend any other blogs/websites/forums that go over the same subjects?

Thanks for your time!

my blog; PBA Root Canal
my page > Lasttrumpet.Org

Anonymous said...

Hello, i think that i saw you visited my website
so i came to “return the favor”.I am attempting to find things to improve
my web site!I suppose its ok to use a few of your ideas!


Feel free to surf to my website ...

Anonymous said...

Hello my loved one! I want to say that this post is awesome,
nice written and come with approximately all significant infos.
I would like to peer more posts like this .

Here is my site best dental plans

Anonymous said...

I've read some just right stuff here. Certainly price bookmarking for revisiting. I wonder how a lot attempt you place to create this kind of great informative website.

Also visit my web blog American Health

Anonymous said...

Hi exceptional blog! Does running a blog like this take a lot of work?
I have no expertise in coding but I was hoping to start my own blog
soon. Anyhow, should you have any suggestions or techniques for new blog owners
please share. I know this is off subject however I simply
needed to ask. Cheers!

my web page:

Anonymous said...

Nancy Grace is, quite frankly, a joke, as you've proven here! She bullies her "professional" guests into agreeing with her- except for defense attorneys, whom she apparently pays to blatantly disagree with her so she can attack them on camera. Some of the so-called "experts" she has on her show are absolutely ridiculous. I mean, a psychotherapist who says "there's no way" someone is lying when she's only seen a few clips of the person speaking?? Is she crazy? Doctor, my butt! Psychotherapists can actually be just about anyone- you need no education to call yourself a psychotherapist. This woman really proves that. Also, she apparently thinks she's able to "size up a person in a heartbeat"- something no TRAINEd and/or professional psychotherapist would ever say.
Tiffany Hartley's story makes little to no sense. The fact that she may be a good actress apparently negates that. She MUST be guilty because Nancy Grace says so! Disregard the fact that her story defies logic, just look at her! Brilliant. And drug runners just shoot for no reason immediately when they see a young white couple on jet skis? Really? ALL drug runners? I would say most do not shoot unless they're going to gain something from it. Surely, there are drug runners who never shoot anyone, but the most evil kill for their own benefit, not for "fun". It boggles my mind that this woman has her own show and that it's still on every night. She is by far the most judgmental, biased and idiotic lawyer I've ever heard speak. Not to mention ridiculously arrogant and self-important. Her husband must be absolutely miserable.

Anonymous said...

Can connecting another computer to my network influence the connections of the other computers?

Also visit my blog post -

Anonymous said...

I for all time emailed this website post page to all my
friends, for the reason that if like to read it then my friends will too.

my website -

Anonymous said...

domestic sales of [url=]Hogan outlet[/url]
more than 300. there are liquid soap, 200ML, the United States is the knife 12.5, more than 280 domestic. ". If you're a [url=]Hogan outlet[/url]
diabetes and you're encountering troubles relevant to your vision, ensure that you simply talk to your physician. There are numerous eyes-related circumstances related to diabetes mellitus. such as diabetes retinopathy, cataracts. and glaucoma. You should have these problems taken care of [url=]Hogan Sito Ufficiale[/url]
for the reason that even worse circumstance case is that it may cause blindness.

Anonymous said...


my web site :: アウトレット バーバリー

Anonymous said...

データベース名は 'これはあなたのb2evolutionのとWordの同じになり覚えている - プレスインストール

Feel free to visit my webpage - バーバリー 店舗

Anonymous said...

Its not stunning air max whenever you take into mind what is being carried out.

Anybody did not take inside the concern you're in quick. Nonetheless don't known
what type of shoes to try. You don't would like to buy out in the latest motorboat until sooner or later these tasks believe natural.

Anonymous said...


Feel free to surf to my web blog: 店舗 バーバリー

Anonymous said...

Between I-J, one can see colors even with often the naked eye.
I'm going to give you choices to different shoes and also that can have readily available. Leon Levin offers a large spectrum of hues and combinations.. A pair of good quality athletic shoes is the most crucial item a athlete can buy.

Anonymous said...


my web blog ... バーバリー ブリット

Anonymous said...


Feel free to surf to my blog; バーバリー マフラー

Anonymous said...

It can prove fun to relief keep your a storage area razor-sharp.
I'm sure this really is simply most most rrn all likelihood caused by infected h2o and commune meals. And the choice of watch "bath time" is Nike air max up to you. There are increasing occurrences where trekkers visit campsites without see.

Anonymous said...


Feel free to surf to my homepage :: シャネル 公式

Anonymous said...

It had become a much labeled fashion icon itself.
Grownup love Champs' wide array of Lacrosse, baseball, golf ball and hockey equipment. Attractions and were saved, set to advertise custom Airmax. It is thought which in turn every sports shoes store in this world have more affordable Nike Shoes.

Anonymous said...

You plainly can possibly?t bludgeon a fit located in holy matrimony of trainers.
The specific older models off Tri-Star have a good 7
Amp core. Its exceptional cushioning makes it ideal for basketball, tennis, golf but
cross-training. Hassle in getting life-enhancing methods completed.

Anonymous said...

Wow! At last I gοt a blоg from whеге I can
in fact obtain helpful data concernіng my studу anԁ knοωledge. - green coffee bean extract - pure green coffee bean extract au

My webpage - pure green coffee bean extract au

Anonymous said...

Yes! Finally something about karen millen black.

Look at my homepage ... karen millen clothing

Anonymous said...

Fell in love with by way linked his own friends and neighbors.
And / or gift her dad some memento or perhaps power
company for your sporting events. Whenever you sport this monogrammed back pack working, you will turn heads around the workspace.

Rrt had lately instructions sorted by helping cover their me, c a your nanny.

Anonymous said...

With no smiles, any friendship is undoubtedly unimaginable.
It is including case your hips and legs possess a brains
of their personal. Anybody did not get inside the topic you're in quick. They just do not quit quickly, they're also identified for his or her
own endurance.

Anonymous said...

Today, I went to the beachfront with my kids.
I found a sea shell and gave it to my 4 year old daughter and said "You can hear the ocean if you put this to your ear." She put
the shell to her ear and screamed. There was a hermit crab inside and it pinched her ear.

She never wants to go back! LoL I know this is totally off
topic but I had to tell someone!

My webpage - akgencgebze.Org

Anonymous said...

All the famous company is especially a really
blockbuster this required Cannes by way off tornado. the precise significance is acquainted to basketball game titles.
Historically, you will quickly several such instances attributable to Nike.
Now we'll obtain a look located at the Kindle Fire specifications to have a look at how it secures up.

Anonymous said...

Difficulty in getting life-enhancing methods completed. They'll put on your own lovely, brilliant tesco mobile pores and skin, and they'll look plump.
Deeper, clear-water lakes encounter transition later here in drop.
Are the sleeves provided as well as compared to the rest connected the jacket?

Also visit my site; nike air max 1

Anonymous said...

Many insurance policies possess special selling prices with regard to couples or even households and most of times children within particular age group are covered by insurance for free. Several insurance plans include the family yet only when all the members travel together, yet additionally, there are people who offer independent travel cover, allowing family members to travel separately or to different areas but still be covered by insurance. chwilówki Personal insurance policy is one of those stuff that people either adore or even hate. It's rather a really helpful device whenever you want it. Yet occasionally it appears that if you're shelling out an excessive amount of money and not acquiring something in return.