Blog Drama in the Haleigh Case
Page 1 of 1 • Share •
Re: Blog Drama in the Haleigh Case
by Ann - Tx on Mon Aug 23, 2010 6:42 pm
awaiting justice wrote:Ann tx,
Welcome.... !
Just to share my views about the subject ... I personally think Blogger News has had a huge hand is facilitating LE in an awful investigation where LE were happy going with pointing their finger at the last known person....
I feel that this " method" of investigation is rampant and needs to stop.. It is a lame excuse for spending little money, and creating a circumstantial case against someone who may be totally innocent, where the pperp has been allowed to walk away scott free.. It seems like a no brainer how this type of investigation stets the stage for fiinger pointing between the players where each cud be telling the truth...
LE's ruining so much evidence becasue of " tunnel vision" makes me puke and so sad that so many communities jump on board....
Hi, Awaiting Justice,
Thank you! I agree with you. It has been over a year since Zachary Pittman went missing. Jan and Simon Barrett have written over 20 articles on Zach's case and Simon has been persistent in contacting LE in Pearl River, La. area. They have consistently covered this case, on Simon's Sunday Radio Show, with Christy Ragas, Zach's mom, as a guest.
The thing that sticks out in my mind is Zach had a fight with the son of the mayor of Pearl River 2 days before he disappeared and his girlfriend was the last to see Zach. Suspicious! Not accusing anyone but very suspicious! I hope to start a thread here on Zach's case. Maybe I can do that tonight. Too many projects for me; too little time! I wish I could have one free day to dedicate to Zach's case!
This case reminds me of the Eric Preimesberger case. I think Julie started a thread on Eric on Reality Chatter.
Ann - Tx- Posts: 10164
Join date: 2010-08-11
Location: Texas
Mood:
Re: Blog Drama in the Haleigh Case
by khintx on Wed Aug 25, 2010 6:25 am
Uh oh! Trouble in BNN land? kh
http://johnhgohdecommentator.wordpress.com/2010/08/24/kim-picazio-outs-bnns-lies-about-lisa-croslin/
Kim Picazio Outs BNN’s Lies About Lisa Croslin
Have the BNN boys stooped to a new all time low, just to get more hits to their Web site? In an exclusive telephone interview, Kim Picazio vents over the out right lies allegedly told by Simon Barrett about Lisa Croslin. As a person who was down on her luck and who has been trying very hard to get back on her feet, Simon wrongly portrayed Lisa as being “drunk, and higher than a kite on Xanax.”
Lisa Croslin was Roughed Up!
This Blogger last caught up with the BNN boys in Simon Barrett – Stupid is as Stupid Wrote. Simon seems to enjoy using every opportunity available to him to get back at a certain Emmy Award-winning journalist on BNN. Recently, he knocked out a couple of posts about Lisa Croslin that rubbed me the wrong way. And, he definitely has managed to get the attention of at least two other persons who contacted me by email.
In Haleigh Cummings Update – Lisa Croslin Crashes And Burns Simon Barrett wrote:
“Where did Lisa Croslin get the money from to buy the drugs? And where did the money for the booze come from?
Lisa herself mentioned two names last night. … One I feel was just trying to be another good (if misguided) Samaritan, the other conjures up more sinister journalistic ambitions.”
That sounds awfully like a thinly veiled swiped aimed at a certain journalist by Simon Barrett to me. Further Simon asks the specific question:
“Where did Lisa Croslin get the money from to buy the drugs?”
In Haleigh Cummings Case – Lisa Croslin Talks For The First Time Simon asked a series of questions that were allegedly answered by Lisa Croslin. So, I have a question of my own for Simon Barrett to answer.
Did Lisa Croslin answer those questions of yours in exchange for money?
Now that Simon himself has raised the question, it sounds like a definite possibility to me.
I further ask why in the world did this BNN fool feel the need to write about Lisa Croslin, at this point in time? Could it be all about getting more hits to BNN? Or, how about Simon taking yet another underhanded attack at a person that he threw under the bus a long time ago?
Lisa Croslin was NOT drunk or high on Xanax!
Today, I received a couple of emails from some prominent people who have been actively involved in the Haleigh Cummings case all along. One of them was from a well known Florida based attorney, Kim Picazio, who wrote:
“Please give me a call … I am fed slap up. Thank you.”
So, I spent 23 minutes talking with Kim as she heatedly vented about the underhanded tactics of the BNN boys who had taken yet another low-down swipe at one of Kim’s friends. As you may recall, Kim Picazio was the original attorney for Crystal Sheffiel, the biological mother of Haleigh Cummings. Ms. Picazio is more involved in the Haleigh case than most people realize.
According to what Kim told me on the phone, Simon’s snitch or source for his misinformation about Lisa Croslin being “drunk, and higher than a kite on Xanax” was allegedly Harriet Sweet.
What actually happened was that Chelsea Croslin previously had come down from Massachusetts to retrieve all of her mother’s belongings. She must have feared the worst as she took virtually everything back up North with her, including Lisa’s street clothes and ID.
Then quite unexpectedly, Lisa Croslin was released from jail.
Kim Picazio being aware of the situation and concerned about Lisa Croslin’s welfare stepped in with her contacts and money for a phone, clothes, and a few basic living essentials that were bought from a dollar store by Lisa.
Lisa’s probation officer was aware of and approved her prescription for Xanax. Lisa takes only three pills a day.
Kim’s good Samaritan contact managed to put up Lisa in a Christian Women’s homeless shelter. Later that night, a women at the same homeless shelter discovered that Lisa had Xanax on her, jumped her, stole her medication, and roughed her up. The staff at the shelter had to take Lisa Croslin to a medical center out of fear that she might have some broken bones. Lisa was thoroughly examined by a doctor at the emergency center. At no point was Lisa Croslin ever drunk or high on Xanax as erroneously reported by Simon Barrett.
Lisa Croslin was kicked out of the Women’s homeless shelter because they, also, do not allow any prescription medication on the premises. Presumably, at this point, Simon’s snitch called the Barretts and lied about Lisa Croslin being “drunk, and higher than a kite on Xanax”.
Kim Picazio has assured me that Lisa Croslin is presently safely residing at an undisclosed location in Satsuma, Florida. And, that she has subsequently been in contact with both her and Chelsea Croslin by telephone. Lisa wont be able to visit the Putnam County jail until she first obtains a picture ID.
Is it time for a retraction, Simon Barrett?
http://johnhgohdecommentator.wordpress.com/2010/08/24/kim-picazio-outs-bnns-lies-about-lisa-croslin/
Kim Picazio Outs BNN’s Lies About Lisa Croslin
Have the BNN boys stooped to a new all time low, just to get more hits to their Web site? In an exclusive telephone interview, Kim Picazio vents over the out right lies allegedly told by Simon Barrett about Lisa Croslin. As a person who was down on her luck and who has been trying very hard to get back on her feet, Simon wrongly portrayed Lisa as being “drunk, and higher than a kite on Xanax.”
Lisa Croslin was Roughed Up!
This Blogger last caught up with the BNN boys in Simon Barrett – Stupid is as Stupid Wrote. Simon seems to enjoy using every opportunity available to him to get back at a certain Emmy Award-winning journalist on BNN. Recently, he knocked out a couple of posts about Lisa Croslin that rubbed me the wrong way. And, he definitely has managed to get the attention of at least two other persons who contacted me by email.
In Haleigh Cummings Update – Lisa Croslin Crashes And Burns Simon Barrett wrote:
“Where did Lisa Croslin get the money from to buy the drugs? And where did the money for the booze come from?
Lisa herself mentioned two names last night. … One I feel was just trying to be another good (if misguided) Samaritan, the other conjures up more sinister journalistic ambitions.”
That sounds awfully like a thinly veiled swiped aimed at a certain journalist by Simon Barrett to me. Further Simon asks the specific question:
“Where did Lisa Croslin get the money from to buy the drugs?”
In Haleigh Cummings Case – Lisa Croslin Talks For The First Time Simon asked a series of questions that were allegedly answered by Lisa Croslin. So, I have a question of my own for Simon Barrett to answer.
Did Lisa Croslin answer those questions of yours in exchange for money?
Now that Simon himself has raised the question, it sounds like a definite possibility to me.
I further ask why in the world did this BNN fool feel the need to write about Lisa Croslin, at this point in time? Could it be all about getting more hits to BNN? Or, how about Simon taking yet another underhanded attack at a person that he threw under the bus a long time ago?
Lisa Croslin was NOT drunk or high on Xanax!
Today, I received a couple of emails from some prominent people who have been actively involved in the Haleigh Cummings case all along. One of them was from a well known Florida based attorney, Kim Picazio, who wrote:
“Please give me a call … I am fed slap up. Thank you.”
So, I spent 23 minutes talking with Kim as she heatedly vented about the underhanded tactics of the BNN boys who had taken yet another low-down swipe at one of Kim’s friends. As you may recall, Kim Picazio was the original attorney for Crystal Sheffiel, the biological mother of Haleigh Cummings. Ms. Picazio is more involved in the Haleigh case than most people realize.
According to what Kim told me on the phone, Simon’s snitch or source for his misinformation about Lisa Croslin being “drunk, and higher than a kite on Xanax” was allegedly Harriet Sweet.
What actually happened was that Chelsea Croslin previously had come down from Massachusetts to retrieve all of her mother’s belongings. She must have feared the worst as she took virtually everything back up North with her, including Lisa’s street clothes and ID.
Then quite unexpectedly, Lisa Croslin was released from jail.
Kim Picazio being aware of the situation and concerned about Lisa Croslin’s welfare stepped in with her contacts and money for a phone, clothes, and a few basic living essentials that were bought from a dollar store by Lisa.
Lisa’s probation officer was aware of and approved her prescription for Xanax. Lisa takes only three pills a day.
Kim’s good Samaritan contact managed to put up Lisa in a Christian Women’s homeless shelter. Later that night, a women at the same homeless shelter discovered that Lisa had Xanax on her, jumped her, stole her medication, and roughed her up. The staff at the shelter had to take Lisa Croslin to a medical center out of fear that she might have some broken bones. Lisa was thoroughly examined by a doctor at the emergency center. At no point was Lisa Croslin ever drunk or high on Xanax as erroneously reported by Simon Barrett.
Lisa Croslin was kicked out of the Women’s homeless shelter because they, also, do not allow any prescription medication on the premises. Presumably, at this point, Simon’s snitch called the Barretts and lied about Lisa Croslin being “drunk, and higher than a kite on Xanax”.
Kim Picazio has assured me that Lisa Croslin is presently safely residing at an undisclosed location in Satsuma, Florida. And, that she has subsequently been in contact with both her and Chelsea Croslin by telephone. Lisa wont be able to visit the Putnam County jail until she first obtains a picture ID.
Is it time for a retraction, Simon Barrett?
khintx- Posts: 3931
Join date: 2009-10-15
Mood:
Re: Blog Drama in the Haleigh Case
by khintx on Wed Aug 25, 2010 7:06 am
Flame war! Don't get me wrong, I have serious issues with the whole Kim/Cobra/Art Harris 'posse' from their previous questionable involvement in Haleigh's case................. just reporting here. kh
http://www.bloggernews.net/125143
ChattyCathy said,in August 24th, 2010 at 7:26 pm Statement From Kim Picazio….
I am abhorred that any person holding themselves out to be giving its readers factual, investigative information on this case, would use another human being’s misfortunes to score a few points against an enemy. To toss aside a struggling individual’s good faith attempt at becoming clean and sober for the sole purpose of airing a scandalous, detailed account of a relapse into drugs and alcohol, is the height of yellow-journalism. The loyal readers at BNN were misled. They were handed a bag of goods. This fabricated story was obviously written to incite outrage at Simon’s arch nemesis, Art Harris, who was coyly mentioned in the customary cliffhanger punch line at the tail end of the piece. Aren’t we all just exhausted with these snide innuendo that never lead to anything or anyone? Unfortunately, it keeps the loyal BNN reader hitting that website, and ups the amount advertisers pay them at the end of the month. It’s like preying on good people’s thirst for honest information – and keeping their pallet just wet enough to keep them coming back for more. More of what, is the question.
The readers have not yet realized how many times they have been duped by the likes of these fabricated story lines, and blubbering, chronic lies by Cobra (in order to get air time from anywhere, anyhow, by saying anything he can possibly make up out of the sheer blue sky). It is just sickening to me at this point. Ask Cobra any given fact of the case – when it all comes out in the wash, you’ll see he knew nothing at all. Nothing whatsoever. He makes it up as he goes along. I’ve seen him do it before my very eyes. What’s worse is that the BNN readers have actually been thanking Simon for “keeping them apprised of the truth”. Ha! That’s like thanking David Koresh for showing them the way toward holy salvation! Perhaps they should start demanding some hard answers from that website. First Question: does Simon earn any funds by way of salary or advertising from BNN? If not, what does he do for income to support himself? Are the loyal readers who click onto BNN all day lining the pockets of Simon in advertising fees? Have they wondered why he packs each story with baseless, ridiculous innuendo, unfulfilled cliff hangers (yawn), and triple hearsay by the likes of Cobra, who clearly knows very little about the facts in the Haleigh case? Maybe it is to earn more hits, or to enjoy this 15 minutes of popularity that he’s never otherwise earned in his life heretofore. Who knows.
In my opinion, a person who recently befriends Lisa Croslin at Church, persuades Lisa to confide in her, allows Lisa to believe she is there to help and guide her, then snitches all of Lisa’s personal information to Simon Barrett, is no “Good Samaritan” – that is deceitful, and immoral, in my opinion. This person who Simon calls a “Good Samaritan” was calling him and Jan in the middle of the night from the hallways of the hospital, telling them private information about her “friend”? And what is even worse, is Simon either intentionally reported this fabricated headliner of Lisa being drunk and high at the medical center, or he was irresponsible enough not to check the validity of the information. In either instance, he should be ashamed of himself. This story was written in glee by the likes of Simon Barrett, who saw it as a chance to pit his readers against Art, and me, and to take advantage of Lisa Croslin. Whether you like her, or hate her, to lie about her recovery, her personal life, and her medical status, then publicate the same on the internet, is just unconscionable. And Jan can just quit the “we wouldn’t stoop so low as to give an addict money” act – No, Jan, you’d just make sure your snitch called in and reported on Lisa’s every move. Even better – you’d demand “answers to questions from Lisa” (actually, the Good Samaritan – Lisa has never spoken to you or Simon Barrett), in exchange for a call to your readers for assistance for Lisa? The ole’ quid pro quo! Wow – BNN’s just in it “for Haleigh” alright!
BNN readers should beware of who they come to the game to cheer for. Plain and simple, if I was a BNN supporter thinking I’m getting accurate information from the website, I’d be demanding some hard answers right about now. I’d want to know why Simon got me all riled up over a relapse by Lisa, that never happened. What was the motivation to print that story packed of lies, snickering insults, and typical under-the-breath snipes. And especially, I’d want to know why he took this particular opportunity, within a story bulging at the seams with slanderous falsities, to take a swipe at Art Harris, when all the while, he himself had a wolf in sheep’s clothing in place in Putnam, feeding him personal information on a desperate Lisa Croslin. My take? This is irresponsible journalism at its best, and intentional manipulation of the facts for a free poke at Art (as well as hits on the site), at worst. BNN – you should be ashamed of yourself. The word “immoral bottom feeder” actually sums it up quite well.
**********************************
jan,if you need to remove this please do?
The world will see it anyway so thought I’d post it for you too?? LOL
http://www.bloggernews.net/125143
ChattyCathy said,in August 24th, 2010 at 7:26 pm Statement From Kim Picazio….
I am abhorred that any person holding themselves out to be giving its readers factual, investigative information on this case, would use another human being’s misfortunes to score a few points against an enemy. To toss aside a struggling individual’s good faith attempt at becoming clean and sober for the sole purpose of airing a scandalous, detailed account of a relapse into drugs and alcohol, is the height of yellow-journalism. The loyal readers at BNN were misled. They were handed a bag of goods. This fabricated story was obviously written to incite outrage at Simon’s arch nemesis, Art Harris, who was coyly mentioned in the customary cliffhanger punch line at the tail end of the piece. Aren’t we all just exhausted with these snide innuendo that never lead to anything or anyone? Unfortunately, it keeps the loyal BNN reader hitting that website, and ups the amount advertisers pay them at the end of the month. It’s like preying on good people’s thirst for honest information – and keeping their pallet just wet enough to keep them coming back for more. More of what, is the question.
The readers have not yet realized how many times they have been duped by the likes of these fabricated story lines, and blubbering, chronic lies by Cobra (in order to get air time from anywhere, anyhow, by saying anything he can possibly make up out of the sheer blue sky). It is just sickening to me at this point. Ask Cobra any given fact of the case – when it all comes out in the wash, you’ll see he knew nothing at all. Nothing whatsoever. He makes it up as he goes along. I’ve seen him do it before my very eyes. What’s worse is that the BNN readers have actually been thanking Simon for “keeping them apprised of the truth”. Ha! That’s like thanking David Koresh for showing them the way toward holy salvation! Perhaps they should start demanding some hard answers from that website. First Question: does Simon earn any funds by way of salary or advertising from BNN? If not, what does he do for income to support himself? Are the loyal readers who click onto BNN all day lining the pockets of Simon in advertising fees? Have they wondered why he packs each story with baseless, ridiculous innuendo, unfulfilled cliff hangers (yawn), and triple hearsay by the likes of Cobra, who clearly knows very little about the facts in the Haleigh case? Maybe it is to earn more hits, or to enjoy this 15 minutes of popularity that he’s never otherwise earned in his life heretofore. Who knows.
In my opinion, a person who recently befriends Lisa Croslin at Church, persuades Lisa to confide in her, allows Lisa to believe she is there to help and guide her, then snitches all of Lisa’s personal information to Simon Barrett, is no “Good Samaritan” – that is deceitful, and immoral, in my opinion. This person who Simon calls a “Good Samaritan” was calling him and Jan in the middle of the night from the hallways of the hospital, telling them private information about her “friend”? And what is even worse, is Simon either intentionally reported this fabricated headliner of Lisa being drunk and high at the medical center, or he was irresponsible enough not to check the validity of the information. In either instance, he should be ashamed of himself. This story was written in glee by the likes of Simon Barrett, who saw it as a chance to pit his readers against Art, and me, and to take advantage of Lisa Croslin. Whether you like her, or hate her, to lie about her recovery, her personal life, and her medical status, then publicate the same on the internet, is just unconscionable. And Jan can just quit the “we wouldn’t stoop so low as to give an addict money” act – No, Jan, you’d just make sure your snitch called in and reported on Lisa’s every move. Even better – you’d demand “answers to questions from Lisa” (actually, the Good Samaritan – Lisa has never spoken to you or Simon Barrett), in exchange for a call to your readers for assistance for Lisa? The ole’ quid pro quo! Wow – BNN’s just in it “for Haleigh” alright!
BNN readers should beware of who they come to the game to cheer for. Plain and simple, if I was a BNN supporter thinking I’m getting accurate information from the website, I’d be demanding some hard answers right about now. I’d want to know why Simon got me all riled up over a relapse by Lisa, that never happened. What was the motivation to print that story packed of lies, snickering insults, and typical under-the-breath snipes. And especially, I’d want to know why he took this particular opportunity, within a story bulging at the seams with slanderous falsities, to take a swipe at Art Harris, when all the while, he himself had a wolf in sheep’s clothing in place in Putnam, feeding him personal information on a desperate Lisa Croslin. My take? This is irresponsible journalism at its best, and intentional manipulation of the facts for a free poke at Art (as well as hits on the site), at worst. BNN – you should be ashamed of yourself. The word “immoral bottom feeder” actually sums it up quite well.
**********************************
jan,if you need to remove this please do?
The world will see it anyway so thought I’d post it for you too?? LOL
khintx- Posts: 3931
Join date: 2009-10-15
Mood:
Re: Blog Drama in the Haleigh Case
by khintx on Wed Aug 25, 2010 5:32 pm
http://www.bloggernews.net/125151
And the beat down goes on.......
Simon Barrett said, in August 25th, 2010 at 2:49 pm
I feel I need to make a statement about what apparently was a comment attributed to Kim Picazio.
Neither Jan nor I derive any compensation from BNN. People may say that we write articles to drive hits, and make money. I can assure you that that is not the case. Jan and I will happily tale a lie detector test, we do not earn a single cent from BNN.
Neither do we have a shadow corp such as Busy Streets.
Reporting on Haleigh, Caylee and the other cases we follow is something that we choose to do. In fact it has a negative impact on our cash flow. Every hour that we spend writing or on the phone about any of these cases is an hour that we are not making money.
What we report is what we can do our best to verify as the truth. Of course there are people that prefer to add spin. That is fine. We have no problem with that.
This latest piece of vitriolic crap from Picazio is stupid. But it is her prerogative. Once more she is inserting herself into a case that she has no place in.
As to her new best buddy (who she put through the wringer) in the Bar Complaint, Art Harris, I am at a loss for words. It was not BNN that announced bones had been found in the river. It was not BNN that wrote about Automatic Weapons.
It was BNN that got an interview with Lisa Croslin. We did NOT pay for it. In fact it was a series of written questions that an intermediary showed her. She replied via email. If you read the article this is all clearly stated.
I have been very restrained in what I say about Picazio and Harris. What I personally think about them is my business. I do not care for either of them. However I have not gone out of my way to cause them trouble. It is not my fault that Art Harris is being sued over his coverage of the death of Anna Nicole Smith.
This is all public record!
As for Picazio, I will just keep my mouth shut.
Sorry for this long rant, but it had to be said.
Simon
And the beat down goes on.......
Simon Barrett said, in August 25th, 2010 at 2:49 pm
I feel I need to make a statement about what apparently was a comment attributed to Kim Picazio.
Neither Jan nor I derive any compensation from BNN. People may say that we write articles to drive hits, and make money. I can assure you that that is not the case. Jan and I will happily tale a lie detector test, we do not earn a single cent from BNN.
Neither do we have a shadow corp such as Busy Streets.
Reporting on Haleigh, Caylee and the other cases we follow is something that we choose to do. In fact it has a negative impact on our cash flow. Every hour that we spend writing or on the phone about any of these cases is an hour that we are not making money.
What we report is what we can do our best to verify as the truth. Of course there are people that prefer to add spin. That is fine. We have no problem with that.
This latest piece of vitriolic crap from Picazio is stupid. But it is her prerogative. Once more she is inserting herself into a case that she has no place in.
As to her new best buddy (who she put through the wringer) in the Bar Complaint, Art Harris, I am at a loss for words. It was not BNN that announced bones had been found in the river. It was not BNN that wrote about Automatic Weapons.
It was BNN that got an interview with Lisa Croslin. We did NOT pay for it. In fact it was a series of written questions that an intermediary showed her. She replied via email. If you read the article this is all clearly stated.
I have been very restrained in what I say about Picazio and Harris. What I personally think about them is my business. I do not care for either of them. However I have not gone out of my way to cause them trouble. It is not my fault that Art Harris is being sued over his coverage of the death of Anna Nicole Smith.
This is all public record!
As for Picazio, I will just keep my mouth shut.
Sorry for this long rant, but it had to be said.
Simon
khintx- Posts: 3931
Join date: 2009-10-15
Mood:
Re: Blog Drama in the Haleigh Case
by Snaz on Thu Aug 26, 2010 4:26 pm
I'll tell you what makes ME sick, AJ.....
This case is all about everything and everyone EXCEPT HaLeigh. There are so many characters in this case, I can't even keep them all straight anymore.
It beaks my heart that there is so much bickering and back-stabbing amongst both the people in Satsuma related to this case and the people reporting it, when there is A LITTLE GIRL MISSING.
IMO, everyone needs to go back to day one and start over looking for this little girl. And cut out all the rest of the crap!
And while I'm at it..... the same goes for Kyron's case and Caylee's case... except in Caylee's case, we know where she is, yet still the circus goes on.....
I'm just plain sick and tired of all these people!
OK... I'm done now.
This case is all about everything and everyone EXCEPT HaLeigh. There are so many characters in this case, I can't even keep them all straight anymore.
It beaks my heart that there is so much bickering and back-stabbing amongst both the people in Satsuma related to this case and the people reporting it, when there is A LITTLE GIRL MISSING.
IMO, everyone needs to go back to day one and start over looking for this little girl. And cut out all the rest of the crap!
And while I'm at it..... the same goes for Kyron's case and Caylee's case... except in Caylee's case, we know where she is, yet still the circus goes on.....
I'm just plain sick and tired of all these people!
OK... I'm done now.
_________________
Updated 1/22/11
Snaz- Admin
- Posts: 4677
Join date: 2009-07-11
Mood:
Re: Blog Drama in the Haleigh Case
by khintx on Thu Aug 26, 2010 5:24 pm
Well.....I guess it aint over till the fat lady sings... or something like that kh
http://www.bloggernews.net/125155
HALEIGH CUMMINGS CASE - BNN RESPONDS TO RECENT ALLEGATIONS:
Posted on August 26th, 2010 by Simon Barrett
I have no idea how many times I have made this statement, but I will say it one more time. My wife and I derive no compensation from BNN. It does not matter how many hits the site gets, we still get exactly $Zero. Writing an article merely to drive traffic has no benefit to us what so ever!
It is no ones business as to how we pay our bills. However just to stop some of the lies that seem to be circulating. Our source of income is not from BNN. I work in the publishing, music DVD, and Movie world in a minor support role. It is not glamorous. Anyone that thinks spellchecking a 100,000 word document is fun is nuts!
The article that I published concerning Lisa Croslin was written based on the facts that we were provided by an eyewitness. That eyewitness asked that we not name them. And we did not, in fact I was asked ‘off the record’ who it was by people that I trust, I did not share the name. Other ‘news’ sources have outed the person. I think that was a very ill thought out strategy. The 10 minutes of fame found for the Exclusive, results in many days and often weeks of misery for the hapless victim that came forward with the information. There were only two people here at BNN that knew the persons name and we did NOT share it.
In fact we did the exact opposite, I tried of obfuscate any trace that might lead back.
I did make reference to two people alleged to have given Lisa money. Both were members of the press. Picazio however obviously thought that I was referencing her. Nothing could have been further from my mind. Yet in her tirade she admits that she facilitated Lisa getting money. That is an interesting twist.
Picazio started off as representing Crystal Sheffield, has she now changed sides? Has she now become part of the Croslin team?
Quite frankly I don’t care who it is, I know that Lisa Croslin needs help. If trashing Simon and Jan Barrett gets her that help, it is fine with us.
The entire Haleigh Cummings case has disintegrated into an exercise in stupidity. Little has to do with finding out what happened to the poor little girl any more. It is all about BS. If my story about Lisa Croslin was inaccurate, then I apologize. It was the best information that we had. The new version of events being touted by some, is that Lisa Croslin went to the hospital as the result of being assaulted by another person at the shelter. Of course there is no sign of any documentation to back this up. Is there a police report? Of course the biggest question of all, is why was Lisa not allowed back to the shelter? Most shelters involved with rehab and safety have a zero tolerance policy toward drugs, alcohol and violence. Drugs and alcohol rarely (if ever) are reported to the police, the person involved is simply asked to leave. Violence is a different situation, particularly if Paramedics are involved.
Both Jan and I want nothing more than a resolution to the Haleigh Cummings case. The guilty need to be brought to task. It would give Jan and I no greater pleasure than to be able to lay this story to rest.
Jan and I have met some great people while covering this story, we have also met a bunch of people that seem to revel in their own importance!
This morning I found my wife in tears. It was entirely due to a small cadre of commentators. I made the decision to close the comments on BNN. I know that I am punishing more than 97% of people to make a point to the 3%. As I stated earlier, we derive no income from BNN, so shutting down the comment section makes no difference to us. I do feel sorry for the vast majority of commentators that have been hit. Our forum section is still open, however, you will have to register with real information.
Simon and Jan Barrett
http://www.bloggernews.net/125155
HALEIGH CUMMINGS CASE - BNN RESPONDS TO RECENT ALLEGATIONS:
Posted on August 26th, 2010 by Simon Barrett
I have no idea how many times I have made this statement, but I will say it one more time. My wife and I derive no compensation from BNN. It does not matter how many hits the site gets, we still get exactly $Zero. Writing an article merely to drive traffic has no benefit to us what so ever!
It is no ones business as to how we pay our bills. However just to stop some of the lies that seem to be circulating. Our source of income is not from BNN. I work in the publishing, music DVD, and Movie world in a minor support role. It is not glamorous. Anyone that thinks spellchecking a 100,000 word document is fun is nuts!
The article that I published concerning Lisa Croslin was written based on the facts that we were provided by an eyewitness. That eyewitness asked that we not name them. And we did not, in fact I was asked ‘off the record’ who it was by people that I trust, I did not share the name. Other ‘news’ sources have outed the person. I think that was a very ill thought out strategy. The 10 minutes of fame found for the Exclusive, results in many days and often weeks of misery for the hapless victim that came forward with the information. There were only two people here at BNN that knew the persons name and we did NOT share it.
In fact we did the exact opposite, I tried of obfuscate any trace that might lead back.
I did make reference to two people alleged to have given Lisa money. Both were members of the press. Picazio however obviously thought that I was referencing her. Nothing could have been further from my mind. Yet in her tirade she admits that she facilitated Lisa getting money. That is an interesting twist.
Picazio started off as representing Crystal Sheffield, has she now changed sides? Has she now become part of the Croslin team?
Quite frankly I don’t care who it is, I know that Lisa Croslin needs help. If trashing Simon and Jan Barrett gets her that help, it is fine with us.
The entire Haleigh Cummings case has disintegrated into an exercise in stupidity. Little has to do with finding out what happened to the poor little girl any more. It is all about BS. If my story about Lisa Croslin was inaccurate, then I apologize. It was the best information that we had. The new version of events being touted by some, is that Lisa Croslin went to the hospital as the result of being assaulted by another person at the shelter. Of course there is no sign of any documentation to back this up. Is there a police report? Of course the biggest question of all, is why was Lisa not allowed back to the shelter? Most shelters involved with rehab and safety have a zero tolerance policy toward drugs, alcohol and violence. Drugs and alcohol rarely (if ever) are reported to the police, the person involved is simply asked to leave. Violence is a different situation, particularly if Paramedics are involved.
Both Jan and I want nothing more than a resolution to the Haleigh Cummings case. The guilty need to be brought to task. It would give Jan and I no greater pleasure than to be able to lay this story to rest.
Jan and I have met some great people while covering this story, we have also met a bunch of people that seem to revel in their own importance!
This morning I found my wife in tears. It was entirely due to a small cadre of commentators. I made the decision to close the comments on BNN. I know that I am punishing more than 97% of people to make a point to the 3%. As I stated earlier, we derive no income from BNN, so shutting down the comment section makes no difference to us. I do feel sorry for the vast majority of commentators that have been hit. Our forum section is still open, however, you will have to register with real information.
Simon and Jan Barrett
khintx- Posts: 3931
Join date: 2009-10-15
Mood:
Re: Blog Drama in the Haleigh Case
by Estee on Fri Aug 27, 2010 10:27 am
I guess if you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen applies to him... 
Estee- Posts: 5739
Join date: 2009-10-12
Age: 71
Location: Cozy little shack
Mood:
Re: Blog Drama in the Haleigh Case
by Ann - Tx on Sat Aug 28, 2010 3:32 am
Christy Ragas, Zachary Pittman's mother, asked me to post this comment by her on this thread. It is a comment she made on the most recent article by Simon Barrett on BNN: http://www.bloggernews.net/125155#comment-1740420
BNN Posted 8/26/10
cchristyra said,in August 26th, 2010 at 11:14 pm
Hi to everyone, I am Zachary Pittmans mother Christy, I just want to say I am very upset that people would accuse Jan and Simon of profiting off stories they have written. I know for sure that they never made a dime off any stories on Zachary.If it wasn't for them my sons name still would be unnoticed. I know for a fact that Simon reads books and does reviews on those and dvds for a living. I have seen a lot of the books he has read! And that was only a small amount that I did see. Jan and Simon are one of the nicest couples I have ever met, they would do anything to help someone in need, I know. God Bless them for bringing them into my life, I love you guys! Hang in there and keep your chin up, you have nothing to prove to those bozos.
BNN Posted 8/26/10
cchristyra said,in August 26th, 2010 at 11:14 pm
Hi to everyone, I am Zachary Pittmans mother Christy, I just want to say I am very upset that people would accuse Jan and Simon of profiting off stories they have written. I know for sure that they never made a dime off any stories on Zachary.If it wasn't for them my sons name still would be unnoticed. I know for a fact that Simon reads books and does reviews on those and dvds for a living. I have seen a lot of the books he has read! And that was only a small amount that I did see. Jan and Simon are one of the nicest couples I have ever met, they would do anything to help someone in need, I know. God Bless them for bringing them into my life, I love you guys! Hang in there and keep your chin up, you have nothing to prove to those bozos.
Last edited by Ann - Tx on Sat Aug 28, 2010 2:48 pm; edited 1 time in total
Ann - Tx- Posts: 10164
Join date: 2010-08-11
Location: Texas
Mood:
Re: Blog Drama in the Haleigh Case
by Justice4all on Sat Aug 28, 2010 12:02 pm
Too many people have lost focus on what is important in these cases. The number one priority should be finding a missing person as soon as possible. Once it becomes obvious that finding a missing person isn't going to be easy, people lose focus and that seems to be when all the mudslinging begins. Haleigh's case and Kyron's case are two of the biggest examples of this.
It seems funny to me that the person spending his time writing articles bashing BNN as being unreliable is the same person who kept posting unreliable information during the river search for Haleigh back in April. All you can do is interview people who cover the case and interview people connected to the case. They aren't always going to give you reliable information. It can happen to anybody, so it's not fair to single somebody else out when you yourself have posted information from "sources" that turned out to be unreliable.
It seems funny to me that the person spending his time writing articles bashing BNN as being unreliable is the same person who kept posting unreliable information during the river search for Haleigh back in April. All you can do is interview people who cover the case and interview people connected to the case. They aren't always going to give you reliable information. It can happen to anybody, so it's not fair to single somebody else out when you yourself have posted information from "sources" that turned out to be unreliable.
Justice4all- Admin
- Posts: 9028
Join date: 2009-07-02
Age: 37
Location: Michigan
Mood:
Re: Blog Drama in the Haleigh Case
by khintx on Tue Aug 31, 2010 4:21 pm
http://johnhgohdecommentator.wordpress.com/2010/08/30/lisa-croslin-police-report/
".........August 31, 201 @ 7:59 AM
John H. Gohde
I am working on an Exposé that is going to knock both Simon Barrett and BNN for a loop. It will totally blindside them. I want to do it just right, so it will take a bit of research.
Revenge is a dish best served cold, Simon Barrett....."
~~~~~~~~~
Well, it doesn't look like this is dying down any. Don't know if this guy is on the up and up either so not sayin he is or isn't. Lots of people made a big ol mess of this case (Haleigh) who had no business bein involved in it in the first place or who had secondary gain issues or just wanted their moment of fame. Even more than in poor Caylee's case. kh
".........August 31, 201 @ 7:59 AM
John H. Gohde
I am working on an Exposé that is going to knock both Simon Barrett and BNN for a loop. It will totally blindside them. I want to do it just right, so it will take a bit of research.
Revenge is a dish best served cold, Simon Barrett....."
~~~~~~~~~
Well, it doesn't look like this is dying down any. Don't know if this guy is on the up and up either so not sayin he is or isn't. Lots of people made a big ol mess of this case (Haleigh) who had no business bein involved in it in the first place or who had secondary gain issues or just wanted their moment of fame. Even more than in poor Caylee's case. kh
khintx- Posts: 3931
Join date: 2009-10-15
Mood:
Re: Blog Drama in the Haleigh Case
by khintx on Tue Aug 31, 2010 10:44 pm
Haleigh Cummings – I Have Had Enough
August 31st, 2010
Simon Barrett
I have given this some considerable thought. When push comes to shove, I really don’t give a damn what is thrown at me, I do however get very concerned when people start picking on my wife. As a result I have decided to stop reporting on the Haleigh Cummings case. It has become such a polarized case that it does not matter what is reported, some idiot will still attack us. If we earned the big bucks that people accuse us of, I might shrug it off. However this case represents no revenue and just a whole lot of aggravation.
I have not discussed this decision with Jan, if she wishes to continue with this case, that is her choice. I am so fed up with the whole nonsense that I cannot even be bothered to write an article about some documents supposedly purporting to a foreclosure involving a $million dollar property that a well known lawyer involved in the case apparently is intimately involved with. It just does not matter. I don’t care where she lives.
More….
http://www.bloggernews.net/125182
I did not see that coming. kh
August 31st, 2010
Simon Barrett
I have given this some considerable thought. When push comes to shove, I really don’t give a damn what is thrown at me, I do however get very concerned when people start picking on my wife. As a result I have decided to stop reporting on the Haleigh Cummings case. It has become such a polarized case that it does not matter what is reported, some idiot will still attack us. If we earned the big bucks that people accuse us of, I might shrug it off. However this case represents no revenue and just a whole lot of aggravation.
I have not discussed this decision with Jan, if she wishes to continue with this case, that is her choice. I am so fed up with the whole nonsense that I cannot even be bothered to write an article about some documents supposedly purporting to a foreclosure involving a $million dollar property that a well known lawyer involved in the case apparently is intimately involved with. It just does not matter. I don’t care where she lives.
More….
http://www.bloggernews.net/125182
I did not see that coming. kh
khintx- Posts: 3931
Join date: 2009-10-15
Mood:
Re: Blog Drama in the Haleigh Case
by khintx on Wed Sep 01, 2010 3:50 pm
The Barretts can sure dish it out (they have not been kind to any of the Croslins, or most of the Cummings- and Jan seems to have a 'save ron' mentality that I just don't get). In fact, they diss other family members, attorneys, blog writers, chatters, and anybody else when ever they want- but when it backsplashes on them they run for cover and assume the martyr personas that they are so in love with. Typical. Can't stand the heat? Get out of the dam kitchen. It's a free country and they can say what ever they want. I don't have to agree with them and seldom do. I don't have to read them and seldom do.
Let me put it this way~ If hypocrisy was bullshit, those two could cover about an acre. They need to put on their big boy/girl panties and write a blog or don't. Doesn't matter to me. But spare me the "somebody was mean to me" crapolla. kh
I know there are a lot of Simon fans here, and this is just my personal opinion (which we all have). kh
Let me put it this way~ If hypocrisy was bullshit, those two could cover about an acre. They need to put on their big boy/girl panties and write a blog or don't. Doesn't matter to me. But spare me the "somebody was mean to me" crapolla. kh
I know there are a lot of Simon fans here, and this is just my personal opinion (which we all have). kh
khintx- Posts: 3931
Join date: 2009-10-15
Mood:
Re: Blog Drama in the Haleigh Case
by Ann - Tx on Fri Sep 03, 2010 7:52 am
Hi, Awaiting Justice and Khintx!
I respect your right to your opinion. I hope we can agree to disagree.
I am a strong advocate for abused children, missing and murdered children, abused animals, and elderly abuse. I have actively advocated these issues for years. I am very compassionate about these issues and have strong opinions that I do not hesitate to convey to legislators.
I actively bring these issues to the attention of my state (Texas) legislators - where laws can be changed! I actively pursue issues at my county government level. If it is necessary to contact Texas Gov. Rick Perry, I will. I will do whatever it takes to get attention to issues that I feel need to be addressed by our legislative body.
The Texas Legislators will convene in 2011 and I'm working on various issues that I feel need to be addressed in the upcoming legislative session.
I am just one of many active advocates in the State of Texas. Just one small voice! I will say persistence pays and I am pleased with changes that have been made in some of our laws regarding Texas Child Protective Services (CPS), animal abuse and elderly abuse.
The CPS state wide changes are a result of CPS-Houston being investigated, as ordered by Gov. Rick Perry in August, 2009, with a report that was submitted to him in Oct, 2009.
After the brutal, horrific death of Emma Thompson, a 4-year-old Spring, Tx child, and CPS's failure to remove Emma from her home (improperly investigated), Gov. Perry ordered the aforementioned investigation. There were some immediate changes made and I anticipate more changes will be made in the upcoming legislative session.
It is unfortunate it took Emma Thompson's horrific death to call attention to CPS and state wide changes implemented, but perhaps it will save a child's life.
I am pro Law Enforcement. I am a graduate of our Citizens On Patrol Academy (COP). What an education! Also, hands on training with some of our county's finest law enforcement including a Saturday night "ride along".
In past years, I've been involved in major fund raisers for LE (injured or killed - line of duty) in Houston, Harris County, Tx. All proceeds go to the person for whom the fundraiser benefited. Everything on the "up and up" with off-duty law enforcement serving as Chairman or Co-Chairman. I have worked closely with LE in that effort. I even have a letter of commendation from a Sheriff of Harris County (Houston area) along with a picture of him and I taken at one of many fundraisers.
I will not affiliate myself with scams or a fundraising event that may be questionable. All volunteer work is at my expense. No reimbursement for expenses I incur. Just like all of the many other volunteers I've had the honor to work with.
With this being said to give you some info on my background, I would like to express my opinion of Simon and Jan Barrett since it is being discussed on a thread that was set up for helping those interested in joining Live Chat on Simon's Sunday Radio Show. Jan Barrett so kindly provided me with instructions on how to sign up for Live Chat which she gave her approval for me to post at Reality Chatter.
Re: Blogger News Network Radio
by Ann - Tx on Mon Aug 23, 2010 6:04 am
Ann - Tx wrote:
If you want to be on Live Chat, I'll PM you some baby step instructions Jan Barrett sent me 2 weeks ago. It's a piece of cake. You have to register to be able to log on.
~~~
Snaz wrote:
Ann, you can go ahead and post the instructions here, if you like. There might be several who would be interested in the future.
Thanks
~~~~
After seeing this comment from Snaz, I e-mailed Jan and asked her if she would provide me with instructions for registering for Live Chat (Sunday Radio Show) and could I have her permission to post her instructions on Reality Chatter.
The instructions Jan Barrett sent me two weeks prior to this request were specific to a problem I was having and I would have to make changes in her instructions so they would not address a specific problem. I felt that it would have been inappropriate and unacceptable for me to do that and I felt I needed Jan Barrett's permission to post her personal instructions to me on RC.
I think Jan Barrett is shocked to have been notified (I don't know who notified her) that a thread started, what appears to be by Ann - Tx, on RC as a result of inquiries by those interested in signing up for Live Chat has turned into a "Bash the Barrett's" thread. On occasion, I post at BNN. The assumption, from the person or persons who notified Jan, was that Ann - Tx on RC is the same Ann - Tx on BNN.
In the Topics section of RC, it indicates I started this thread. Actually, some other members and I made comments about Live Chat on another thread and Administration - RC started this new thread indicating my name. I was notified via PM and I thought it was a great idea. I immediately e-mailed Jan Barrett and asked if she could provide me some instructions to post here at RC. She took the time from her busy schedule to comply with my request.
Being that this thread has turned into "bash the Barrett's", I am requesting that Administration remove my name from this thread immediately.
Blogger News Network Radio
1, 2, 3 by Ann - Tx
~~~~~~
I think highly of Jan and Simon Barrett. Jan is one of the kindest, most compassionate ladies I have had the privilege of meeting. She has a heart of gold. Many of her articles are written from the heart and one can detect the compassion she feels for the children she has written about. She feels just as compassionate as I do. Jan is empathetic like I am.
People have accused Jan and Simon of profiting off of the Haleigh Cummings Case and other cases of missing children. That is a lie! I know for a fact that Simon and Jan Barrett do not make one penny off of the cases they cover. That is not what they do for a living. Actually, covering the various cases takes away from the time that could be utilized in doing the work they are compensated for. All of the hard work they do in covering various cases . . . . it is classified as volunteer work!
There have been many folks to profit off of the Haleigh Cummings case and the Caylee Anthony case. Simon and Jan Barrett are not among the folks profiting off of these cases.
Have you read the court documents regarding Crystal Sheffield's complaint, against Kim Picazzio, with the Florida Bar?
Have you read Picazzio's response to that complaint? Very interesting reading to say the very least!
Have you listened to some radio shows where the host or the guests say things are fact? When I check court documents or perhaps a police report, the ones flapping their jaws do not have the facts straight.
I do not like rumors or innuendo. I deal in facts. There are certain sites I won't bother to visit because of rumor, hate, evil, and bashing. My time is very valuable and I do not perceive wasting it on what I consider trash sites. I am not interested in reading comments or an article that is riddled with rumor but stated as fact. Just not for me!
I love Simon Barrett's articles. He tells it like it is and writes with a certain sense of humor on occasion. Simon is an independent and he does not have to play by the same set of rules like main stream media. It is his opinion. I have worked extensively with media over the years and I know the "rules" main stream media is obligated to follow!
The past several months I've had the privilege to work closely with Jan Barrett on the Zachary Pittman case. Christy Ragas, Zachary Pittman's mother, asked Jan Barrett to pass on her cell phone number and personal e-mail to me. Very few people know how Christy convinced the Barrett's to cover Zachary's case and why she needed their help in her desperate search for her son who she is confident has been murdered.
By working so closely with Jan Barrett, I can say this and it is a fact. Jan Barrett is a true professional in her field. It is an honor to work so closely with her on Pittman's case. There is a lot of things going on "behind the scenes". She is my contact but she and Simon Barrett are the decision makers. Simon and Jan have done a tremendous amount of work on Pittman's case and it has resulted in LE actively doing some things in this case which I am not at liberty to disclose. Pittman's case is over a year old and finally Christy Ragas is seeing some forward movement in this case.
Christy, Jan and Simon Barrett and I are working together as a team. I "appointed" Jan and Simon Barrett as Team Captains. We keep each other informed to ensure we are all on the same page in our efforts regarding Zachary Pittman.
As a result of having the privilege of working so closely with the aforementioned, I have tremendous respect for Christy and especially Simon and Jan Barrett.
Christy Ragas and I communicate, via phone and e-mail, on a regular basis. We have become close friends. She is a remarkable, strong lady and I hope her son, Zach, is found soon. I will do my very best to help Christy in any way I can.
There are some folks "out there" that have been trying for quite some time to close BNN down. It kind of came to a head last week. I consider the folks and it makes me laugh out loud!
I admire and respect Simon Barrett for feeling the way he does about his wife, Jan. If my husband would catch me in tears and he determined why, look out guilty party! At that point, someone would be answering to him. My brother-in-law feels the same way about my sister. My brother feels the same about his wife. I think it is wonderful to have someone love and care so much about their spouse!
I just wanted to address this because I am very hurt that I reached out to Jan Barrett so I could post some instructions about the Live Chat - Simon Barrett's Sunday Radio Show on Reality Chatter. A new thread was started. It is now off-topic and Jan and Simon are being bashed.
I don't think Jan would have provided me with instructions for Live Chat to post here if she knew this thread was going to turn into a "bash the Barrett's" thread.
I am getting ready to respond to Jan's e-mail that I received late yesterday afternoon. Jan's friendship is special to me because of my respect and admiration I have for her and I will not jeopardize our friendship. I am hoping she will understand I had nothing to do with this thread getting off topic.
I am fairly new to this site. It is an awesome site and Administration has been very helpful to me, especially Snaz, in teaching me how to set up a new thread. Julie invited me to join Reality Chatter and she has been very helpful to me in learning how to navigate this awesome site.
To Administration, I would like to make a suggestion. If you condone "bash the Barrett's", then please start a "Bash the Barrett's" thread. This is a thread about the Live Chat. Please read the first page and you will see the excitement that some had about joining Live Chat.
I think it would be nice for this Live Chat thread to be available for folks to be able to come to and see how they can register and log in to Live Chat if they are interested. I know if I was interested, I would not want to read any comments other than about Live Chat or the Radio Show, i.e., what time is it on, what day, length of show, the announcement article for upcoming shows, guest panel, etc.
I don't beat a dead horse to death. This is my only comment I will make regarding this matter. I will not respond to any comments directed towards me. As far as I am concerned, I respect a person's right to his or her opinion. I have stated my opinion. Many of you may not agree with me but please respect my right to express my opinion.
I consider this a closed subject because I don't have time for a back and forth and I need to focus on pending projects. The valuable time it took me to type this could have been spent on developing a presentation to a media outlet for Zachary Pittman or a letter to my State Representative regarding issues for the 2011 Legislative Session.
Thank you for your valuable time and consideration!
Best regards,
Ann - Tx
I respect your right to your opinion. I hope we can agree to disagree.
I am a strong advocate for abused children, missing and murdered children, abused animals, and elderly abuse. I have actively advocated these issues for years. I am very compassionate about these issues and have strong opinions that I do not hesitate to convey to legislators.
I actively bring these issues to the attention of my state (Texas) legislators - where laws can be changed! I actively pursue issues at my county government level. If it is necessary to contact Texas Gov. Rick Perry, I will. I will do whatever it takes to get attention to issues that I feel need to be addressed by our legislative body.
The Texas Legislators will convene in 2011 and I'm working on various issues that I feel need to be addressed in the upcoming legislative session.
I am just one of many active advocates in the State of Texas. Just one small voice! I will say persistence pays and I am pleased with changes that have been made in some of our laws regarding Texas Child Protective Services (CPS), animal abuse and elderly abuse.
The CPS state wide changes are a result of CPS-Houston being investigated, as ordered by Gov. Rick Perry in August, 2009, with a report that was submitted to him in Oct, 2009.
After the brutal, horrific death of Emma Thompson, a 4-year-old Spring, Tx child, and CPS's failure to remove Emma from her home (improperly investigated), Gov. Perry ordered the aforementioned investigation. There were some immediate changes made and I anticipate more changes will be made in the upcoming legislative session.
It is unfortunate it took Emma Thompson's horrific death to call attention to CPS and state wide changes implemented, but perhaps it will save a child's life.
I am pro Law Enforcement. I am a graduate of our Citizens On Patrol Academy (COP). What an education! Also, hands on training with some of our county's finest law enforcement including a Saturday night "ride along".
In past years, I've been involved in major fund raisers for LE (injured or killed - line of duty) in Houston, Harris County, Tx. All proceeds go to the person for whom the fundraiser benefited. Everything on the "up and up" with off-duty law enforcement serving as Chairman or Co-Chairman. I have worked closely with LE in that effort. I even have a letter of commendation from a Sheriff of Harris County (Houston area) along with a picture of him and I taken at one of many fundraisers.
I will not affiliate myself with scams or a fundraising event that may be questionable. All volunteer work is at my expense. No reimbursement for expenses I incur. Just like all of the many other volunteers I've had the honor to work with.
With this being said to give you some info on my background, I would like to express my opinion of Simon and Jan Barrett since it is being discussed on a thread that was set up for helping those interested in joining Live Chat on Simon's Sunday Radio Show. Jan Barrett so kindly provided me with instructions on how to sign up for Live Chat which she gave her approval for me to post at Reality Chatter.
Re: Blogger News Network Radio
by Ann - Tx on Mon Aug 23, 2010 6:04 am
Ann - Tx wrote:
If you want to be on Live Chat, I'll PM you some baby step instructions Jan Barrett sent me 2 weeks ago. It's a piece of cake. You have to register to be able to log on.
~~~
Snaz wrote:
Ann, you can go ahead and post the instructions here, if you like. There might be several who would be interested in the future.
Thanks
~~~~
After seeing this comment from Snaz, I e-mailed Jan and asked her if she would provide me with instructions for registering for Live Chat (Sunday Radio Show) and could I have her permission to post her instructions on Reality Chatter.
The instructions Jan Barrett sent me two weeks prior to this request were specific to a problem I was having and I would have to make changes in her instructions so they would not address a specific problem. I felt that it would have been inappropriate and unacceptable for me to do that and I felt I needed Jan Barrett's permission to post her personal instructions to me on RC.
I think Jan Barrett is shocked to have been notified (I don't know who notified her) that a thread started, what appears to be by Ann - Tx, on RC as a result of inquiries by those interested in signing up for Live Chat has turned into a "Bash the Barrett's" thread. On occasion, I post at BNN. The assumption, from the person or persons who notified Jan, was that Ann - Tx on RC is the same Ann - Tx on BNN.
In the Topics section of RC, it indicates I started this thread. Actually, some other members and I made comments about Live Chat on another thread and Administration - RC started this new thread indicating my name. I was notified via PM and I thought it was a great idea. I immediately e-mailed Jan Barrett and asked if she could provide me some instructions to post here at RC. She took the time from her busy schedule to comply with my request.
Being that this thread has turned into "bash the Barrett's", I am requesting that Administration remove my name from this thread immediately.
Blogger News Network Radio
1, 2, 3 by Ann - Tx
~~~~~~
I think highly of Jan and Simon Barrett. Jan is one of the kindest, most compassionate ladies I have had the privilege of meeting. She has a heart of gold. Many of her articles are written from the heart and one can detect the compassion she feels for the children she has written about. She feels just as compassionate as I do. Jan is empathetic like I am.
People have accused Jan and Simon of profiting off of the Haleigh Cummings Case and other cases of missing children. That is a lie! I know for a fact that Simon and Jan Barrett do not make one penny off of the cases they cover. That is not what they do for a living. Actually, covering the various cases takes away from the time that could be utilized in doing the work they are compensated for. All of the hard work they do in covering various cases . . . . it is classified as volunteer work!
There have been many folks to profit off of the Haleigh Cummings case and the Caylee Anthony case. Simon and Jan Barrett are not among the folks profiting off of these cases.
Have you read the court documents regarding Crystal Sheffield's complaint, against Kim Picazzio, with the Florida Bar?
Have you read Picazzio's response to that complaint? Very interesting reading to say the very least!
Have you listened to some radio shows where the host or the guests say things are fact? When I check court documents or perhaps a police report, the ones flapping their jaws do not have the facts straight.
I do not like rumors or innuendo. I deal in facts. There are certain sites I won't bother to visit because of rumor, hate, evil, and bashing. My time is very valuable and I do not perceive wasting it on what I consider trash sites. I am not interested in reading comments or an article that is riddled with rumor but stated as fact. Just not for me!
I love Simon Barrett's articles. He tells it like it is and writes with a certain sense of humor on occasion. Simon is an independent and he does not have to play by the same set of rules like main stream media. It is his opinion. I have worked extensively with media over the years and I know the "rules" main stream media is obligated to follow!
The past several months I've had the privilege to work closely with Jan Barrett on the Zachary Pittman case. Christy Ragas, Zachary Pittman's mother, asked Jan Barrett to pass on her cell phone number and personal e-mail to me. Very few people know how Christy convinced the Barrett's to cover Zachary's case and why she needed their help in her desperate search for her son who she is confident has been murdered.
By working so closely with Jan Barrett, I can say this and it is a fact. Jan Barrett is a true professional in her field. It is an honor to work so closely with her on Pittman's case. There is a lot of things going on "behind the scenes". She is my contact but she and Simon Barrett are the decision makers. Simon and Jan have done a tremendous amount of work on Pittman's case and it has resulted in LE actively doing some things in this case which I am not at liberty to disclose. Pittman's case is over a year old and finally Christy Ragas is seeing some forward movement in this case.
Christy, Jan and Simon Barrett and I are working together as a team. I "appointed" Jan and Simon Barrett as Team Captains. We keep each other informed to ensure we are all on the same page in our efforts regarding Zachary Pittman.
As a result of having the privilege of working so closely with the aforementioned, I have tremendous respect for Christy and especially Simon and Jan Barrett.
Christy Ragas and I communicate, via phone and e-mail, on a regular basis. We have become close friends. She is a remarkable, strong lady and I hope her son, Zach, is found soon. I will do my very best to help Christy in any way I can.
There are some folks "out there" that have been trying for quite some time to close BNN down. It kind of came to a head last week. I consider the folks and it makes me laugh out loud!
I admire and respect Simon Barrett for feeling the way he does about his wife, Jan. If my husband would catch me in tears and he determined why, look out guilty party! At that point, someone would be answering to him. My brother-in-law feels the same way about my sister. My brother feels the same about his wife. I think it is wonderful to have someone love and care so much about their spouse!
I just wanted to address this because I am very hurt that I reached out to Jan Barrett so I could post some instructions about the Live Chat - Simon Barrett's Sunday Radio Show on Reality Chatter. A new thread was started. It is now off-topic and Jan and Simon are being bashed.
I don't think Jan would have provided me with instructions for Live Chat to post here if she knew this thread was going to turn into a "bash the Barrett's" thread.
I am getting ready to respond to Jan's e-mail that I received late yesterday afternoon. Jan's friendship is special to me because of my respect and admiration I have for her and I will not jeopardize our friendship. I am hoping she will understand I had nothing to do with this thread getting off topic.
I am fairly new to this site. It is an awesome site and Administration has been very helpful to me, especially Snaz, in teaching me how to set up a new thread. Julie invited me to join Reality Chatter and she has been very helpful to me in learning how to navigate this awesome site.
To Administration, I would like to make a suggestion. If you condone "bash the Barrett's", then please start a "Bash the Barrett's" thread. This is a thread about the Live Chat. Please read the first page and you will see the excitement that some had about joining Live Chat.
I think it would be nice for this Live Chat thread to be available for folks to be able to come to and see how they can register and log in to Live Chat if they are interested. I know if I was interested, I would not want to read any comments other than about Live Chat or the Radio Show, i.e., what time is it on, what day, length of show, the announcement article for upcoming shows, guest panel, etc.
I don't beat a dead horse to death. This is my only comment I will make regarding this matter. I will not respond to any comments directed towards me. As far as I am concerned, I respect a person's right to his or her opinion. I have stated my opinion. Many of you may not agree with me but please respect my right to express my opinion.
I consider this a closed subject because I don't have time for a back and forth and I need to focus on pending projects. The valuable time it took me to type this could have been spent on developing a presentation to a media outlet for Zachary Pittman or a letter to my State Representative regarding issues for the 2011 Legislative Session.
Thank you for your valuable time and consideration!
Best regards,
Ann - Tx
Ann - Tx- Posts: 10164
Join date: 2010-08-11
Location: Texas
Mood:
Re: Blog Drama in the Haleigh Case
by khintx on Fri Sep 03, 2010 12:28 pm
Ann~ When I saw this BNN thread I did not know it was a 'listening' thread, I thought it was a discussion thread... and BNN was certainly a hot topic of discussion that week. I'm sorry you got in trouble with Jan. We all have our personal opinions and experiences about this and I am not interested in a bashing thread, just a discussion thread. Please accept my apologies. kh
khintx- Posts: 3931
Join date: 2009-10-15
Mood:
Re: Blog Drama in the Haleigh Case
by Justice4all on Fri Sep 03, 2010 8:24 pm
I split these comments from the BNN Chat thread. I don't condone bashing the Barretts, but when we started this site, we promised members that we wouldn't censor their opinions whether we agreed with them or not. Unfortunately allowing certain opinions has cost us members in the past and no matter how we handle certain things, somebody's going to end up unhappy. There isn't any way to keep every member happy and splitting this into a separate topic might even make some unhappy with me, but I thought this was the best move.
I care about justice for victims and finding the missing. If people want to waste time setting up blogs to bash Marinade Dave or writing exposés about Simon, to each their own. If I don't like what I'm reading at different sites or don't think it's reliable information, I simply move on.
Ann, I appreciate everything you do here and all the time and effort you put into advocating for victims of abuse, the missing, and the murdered. I'm sorry somebody reported you to Jan for comments you didn't make or agree with.
I care about justice for victims and finding the missing. If people want to waste time setting up blogs to bash Marinade Dave or writing exposés about Simon, to each their own. If I don't like what I'm reading at different sites or don't think it's reliable information, I simply move on.
Ann, I appreciate everything you do here and all the time and effort you put into advocating for victims of abuse, the missing, and the murdered. I'm sorry somebody reported you to Jan for comments you didn't make or agree with.
Justice4all- Admin
- Posts: 9028
Join date: 2009-07-02
Age: 37
Location: Michigan
Mood:
Re: Blog Drama in the Haleigh Case
by khintx on Sat Sep 04, 2010 2:17 pm
Who can we believe? I gave up on NG and JVM a long time ago, and have learned some very valuable lessons about taking to heart what other news/blog journalists report, as well as bloggers/chatters themselves. Is there anybody out there who can just report on the news and get the facts right? Maybe add a little insight? Did we create this monster with our insatiable need for newer, better faster information about the cases we so genuinely care about and feel compelled to follow?
kh
http://seamusoriley.blogspot.com/
Saturday 09/04/2010
Truth in Journalism: Misty and Casey
The Nancy Grace Show and Issues with Jane Velez Mitchell both practice deception regularly.
Both HLN evening shows have continued to spiral downward away from truthful reporting in journalism, to the cesspool of sensational tabloidism, better suited for comedy than for news. Statement Analysis seeks truth, and many here have a strong interest in justice for both Haleigh Cummings and for Caylee Anthony; therefore, they tune into these two shows in order to learn any news updates.
Instead, they are greeted with nightly, "Breaking News! Bombshell Developments" giving a sense of urgency and of exclusive interviews from opining experts in the know.
Remember the video tapes of Misty and her dad while Misty was in prison? When Nancy Grace says, "WE have the secret video!" with vocal emphasis, it is not a lie. It is, however, deceptive.
Producers know that by adding the word "secret" and emphasing the word "we", the audience may believe that the Nancy Grace show, somehow, has obtained a highly secretive tape; so the excitement will build. It is true that the tapes may be "secret" to someone, somewhere; certainly not "secretive" to Misty, her dad, or the attorneys, and most of the public as jail policy is openly stated. Someone, somewhere, may find it to be secretive. "We have it" is also not a lie. In fact, everyone has it: they are publicly available as news agencies get them and put them on youtube.
It is deceptive, but it is not a technical lie.
Nancy Grace regularly insults attorneys, calling them by their last name and ridiculing them. They come back, night after night, shamelessly pining for exposure. Other attorneys agree to appear for their client or for their opinions, but refuse to be mocked by Grace. She knows those whom she cannot ridicule or mock with "that is b.s.!" and "put him up on the screen!".
Of those who regularly "play the game", I wonder what dignity is found in these appearances, especially when their own children can tune in and watch mom or dad be bullied or ridiculed by a former prosecutor who uses juvenile eye rolling, head shaking and arm raising rather than logical speech; or will snear and cut off someone with whom she disagrees. Then, as the script rolls, a total stranger will call and say how much they love Nancy Grace's children; children they have never met, nor will ever meet. It is a pattern that goes on night after night.
From the height of watching Casey Anthony arrested live on the show, to the bottom, where the "fight for justice" meant counting the number of women Tiger Woods slept with, the ratings must follow suit.
Will HLN return to news reporting?
Nancy Grace reported that Donna Brock has been sentenced to 15 years and "now may be the time" for her to tell what she knows.
Art Harris agreed and said that "police believe" that Donna Brock is withholding information about Misty Croslin because Donna was "the only mother" Misty had ever known.
The other guests said nothing.
Those who have sought to learn Statement Analysis seek to learn the truth; and it is this case, as well as the Casey Anthony case, which has prompted many to learn its princples, and then to practice.
There is no need for Statement Analysis, however, in this case.
The sensationalism that the two shows, Nancy Grace and Issues, have embraced appears to have increased a great deal, especially in the coverage of the two Florida cases. Nancy Grace show is billed as a victims' advocacy show, "fighting for justice" but does little of the much publicized press of the issues for the sake of justice.
Friday night's two shows both delivered examples of the sensationalism's victory over journalism.
By having Art Harris state that the police believe Donna Brock is withholding information shows a lack of credibility.
I believe Art Harris fabricated this (see commentary and analysis on the Haleigh "bone" found) based, not upon analysis, but upon common sense. I don't believe the police think Donna Brock is anything but foolish.
But is Art Harris lying?
Those here know that there are many statements in which the subject deceives but, sentence by sentence, does not tell a single lie. (these are among my favorite studies).
I believe police likely did tell Art Harris, long ago, that they thought Donna Brock may have withheld information, but it is old news. They have talked to Donna Brock often since her arrest, and have gotten every detail out of the scared women that is possible. Technically, it may not be a lie. It is, however, deceptive.
But inspite of what Nancy Grace and Art Harris wanted the audience to think:
Donna Brock has no reason to withhold information from police.
Donna Brock has already been sentenced.
Had she had information, she would have made a deal long ago.
Does anyone really believe that a 40 something woman without a criminal history would protect Misty Croslin? Motive? It is without credibility.
Nancy Grace, former prosecutor, knows this. So does Harris. But, the show attempts to have a "breaking news; bombshell!" atmosphere, night after night. The theme has jumped the shark and has given way to "emergency exhaustion"; where the same words used often enough have now had a numbing effect upon the audience.
On the show, "Issues", Jim Worter continued to press Tommy Croslin's innocence after attorney Kim Picazio said that she believed that Cousin Joe Overstreet will be arrested in the disappearance of Haleigh Cummings and that Misty and Tommy will be arrested as accessories after the fact.
Levi Page, a blogger and radio host, regularly imitates Nancy Grace. I listened to his show and he employs Nancy Grace wording such as "BS! Breaking News! Bombshell!" as well as her habit of calling people by their last name.
When JVM went to him, he told Jim Worter that no one was buying the "BS!" and called him by his last name.
Jim Worter took the young man to task with a lesson on how to address his elders:
"It is Mr. Worter, or Jim".
My parents would have approved.
The disrespectful tone only belies lack of sound argument. Page could have asked an intelligent question of the attorney, in order to press forward his belief that Tommy Croslin is guilty, but instead, sounded like a junior high kid throwing a taunt across a safe distance.
This is accepted in the circle of sensationalism and the dumbing down of news reporting. Intelligence is being displaced by name calling and ridicule.
kh
http://seamusoriley.blogspot.com/
Saturday 09/04/2010
Truth in Journalism: Misty and Casey
The Nancy Grace Show and Issues with Jane Velez Mitchell both practice deception regularly.
Both HLN evening shows have continued to spiral downward away from truthful reporting in journalism, to the cesspool of sensational tabloidism, better suited for comedy than for news. Statement Analysis seeks truth, and many here have a strong interest in justice for both Haleigh Cummings and for Caylee Anthony; therefore, they tune into these two shows in order to learn any news updates.
Instead, they are greeted with nightly, "Breaking News! Bombshell Developments" giving a sense of urgency and of exclusive interviews from opining experts in the know.
Remember the video tapes of Misty and her dad while Misty was in prison? When Nancy Grace says, "WE have the secret video!" with vocal emphasis, it is not a lie. It is, however, deceptive.
Producers know that by adding the word "secret" and emphasing the word "we", the audience may believe that the Nancy Grace show, somehow, has obtained a highly secretive tape; so the excitement will build. It is true that the tapes may be "secret" to someone, somewhere; certainly not "secretive" to Misty, her dad, or the attorneys, and most of the public as jail policy is openly stated. Someone, somewhere, may find it to be secretive. "We have it" is also not a lie. In fact, everyone has it: they are publicly available as news agencies get them and put them on youtube.
It is deceptive, but it is not a technical lie.
Nancy Grace regularly insults attorneys, calling them by their last name and ridiculing them. They come back, night after night, shamelessly pining for exposure. Other attorneys agree to appear for their client or for their opinions, but refuse to be mocked by Grace. She knows those whom she cannot ridicule or mock with "that is b.s.!" and "put him up on the screen!".
Of those who regularly "play the game", I wonder what dignity is found in these appearances, especially when their own children can tune in and watch mom or dad be bullied or ridiculed by a former prosecutor who uses juvenile eye rolling, head shaking and arm raising rather than logical speech; or will snear and cut off someone with whom she disagrees. Then, as the script rolls, a total stranger will call and say how much they love Nancy Grace's children; children they have never met, nor will ever meet. It is a pattern that goes on night after night.
From the height of watching Casey Anthony arrested live on the show, to the bottom, where the "fight for justice" meant counting the number of women Tiger Woods slept with, the ratings must follow suit.
Will HLN return to news reporting?
Nancy Grace reported that Donna Brock has been sentenced to 15 years and "now may be the time" for her to tell what she knows.
Art Harris agreed and said that "police believe" that Donna Brock is withholding information about Misty Croslin because Donna was "the only mother" Misty had ever known.
The other guests said nothing.
Those who have sought to learn Statement Analysis seek to learn the truth; and it is this case, as well as the Casey Anthony case, which has prompted many to learn its princples, and then to practice.
There is no need for Statement Analysis, however, in this case.
The sensationalism that the two shows, Nancy Grace and Issues, have embraced appears to have increased a great deal, especially in the coverage of the two Florida cases. Nancy Grace show is billed as a victims' advocacy show, "fighting for justice" but does little of the much publicized press of the issues for the sake of justice.
Friday night's two shows both delivered examples of the sensationalism's victory over journalism.
By having Art Harris state that the police believe Donna Brock is withholding information shows a lack of credibility.
I believe Art Harris fabricated this (see commentary and analysis on the Haleigh "bone" found) based, not upon analysis, but upon common sense. I don't believe the police think Donna Brock is anything but foolish.
But is Art Harris lying?
Those here know that there are many statements in which the subject deceives but, sentence by sentence, does not tell a single lie. (these are among my favorite studies).
I believe police likely did tell Art Harris, long ago, that they thought Donna Brock may have withheld information, but it is old news. They have talked to Donna Brock often since her arrest, and have gotten every detail out of the scared women that is possible. Technically, it may not be a lie. It is, however, deceptive.
But inspite of what Nancy Grace and Art Harris wanted the audience to think:
Donna Brock has no reason to withhold information from police.
Donna Brock has already been sentenced.
Had she had information, she would have made a deal long ago.
Does anyone really believe that a 40 something woman without a criminal history would protect Misty Croslin? Motive? It is without credibility.
Nancy Grace, former prosecutor, knows this. So does Harris. But, the show attempts to have a "breaking news; bombshell!" atmosphere, night after night. The theme has jumped the shark and has given way to "emergency exhaustion"; where the same words used often enough have now had a numbing effect upon the audience.
On the show, "Issues", Jim Worter continued to press Tommy Croslin's innocence after attorney Kim Picazio said that she believed that Cousin Joe Overstreet will be arrested in the disappearance of Haleigh Cummings and that Misty and Tommy will be arrested as accessories after the fact.
Levi Page, a blogger and radio host, regularly imitates Nancy Grace. I listened to his show and he employs Nancy Grace wording such as "BS! Breaking News! Bombshell!" as well as her habit of calling people by their last name.
When JVM went to him, he told Jim Worter that no one was buying the "BS!" and called him by his last name.
Jim Worter took the young man to task with a lesson on how to address his elders:
"It is Mr. Worter, or Jim".
My parents would have approved.
The disrespectful tone only belies lack of sound argument. Page could have asked an intelligent question of the attorney, in order to press forward his belief that Tommy Croslin is guilty, but instead, sounded like a junior high kid throwing a taunt across a safe distance.
This is accepted in the circle of sensationalism and the dumbing down of news reporting. Intelligence is being displaced by name calling and ridicule.
khintx- Posts: 3931
Join date: 2009-10-15
Mood:
Re: Blog Drama in the Haleigh Case
by Ann - Tx on Sun Sep 05, 2010 10:59 pm
Justice4all wrote:I split these comments from the BNN Chat thread. I don't condone bashing the Barrett's, but when we started this site, we promised members that we wouldn't censor their opinions whether we agreed with them or not. Unfortunately allowing certain opinions has cost us members in the past and no matter how we handle certain things, some body's going to end up unhappy. There isn't any way to keep every member happy and splitting this into a separate topic might even make some unhappy with me, but I thought this was the best move.
I care about justice for victims and finding the missing. If people want to waste time setting up blogs to bash Marinade Dave or writing exposés about Simon, to each their own. If I don't like what I'm reading at different sites or don't think it's reliable information, I simply move on.
Ann, I appreciate everything you do here and all the time and effort you put into advocating for victims of abuse, the missing, and the murdered. I'm sorry somebody reported you to Jan for comments you didn't make or agree with.
Justice,
Thank you for taking the time to address this. I think it was appropriate for you to separate the "Bash the Barrett's" from a thread that was started as a result of those interested in joining the Live Chat on the Simon Barrett Radio Show. I had not been on the thread since I deleted my comment that I C/P from BNN.
I was quite shocked when I received an e-mail from Jan Barrett, whom I am working very closely with, along with Christy Ragas, Zachary Pittman's mother regarding Pittman's case. I clearly understand how Jan felt about it because she so kindly took the time from her busy schedule (and she is busy) to provide me Live Chat instructions, as I requested, to post on Reality Chatter. I am an empathic person and I know how I would have felt if the "shoe was on the other foot." I do not know who advised Jan that it appears that a thread I started about Live Chat registration, etc. is now "Bash the Barrett's." They said it appears the Ann-Tx on RC is the same Ann-Tx on BNN.
I e-mailed Jan and explained as best I could. For two days, I thought I lost a friend and someone I respect and regard highly. Things have been worked out and Jan understands I had no control over what went on a thread that was intended for Live Chat info and the Radio Show (as I explained to her when I requested the Live Chat instructions).
I am like you. If I don't like something, I move on. I respect a person's right to express his or her opinion. My time is valuable, like many others, and I have no desire to waste it on frivolous innuendo, rumor and outright lies. It is unfortunate that sometimes some folks will jump on a bandwagon and do not know the facts or take the time to dig deep to determine the facts. But . . . it is part of the blog (ghost ) world!
Justice, I can not imagine why someone would be unhappy with you for splitting the two topics. They are clearly not related. One topic is about how to register for Live Chat and info on Simon's Radio Show.
The topic you separated: From what I gather, there were links posted to a very questionable (in my opinion) site. The articles are not true for the most part. But what is so disgusting and offensive to me on that site are the comments: filthy, and I do mean filthy, language. There are evil, hateful, nasty comments. What kind of people make those kind of comments? Certainly not someone I would have as a guest in my home!
A long time ago, I clicked on to that site at a blog where someone left a link. I did not stay long and have not gone back to the site until I got the e-mail from Jan. She made no mention of that site; only about the thread that I told her was set up for Live Chat instructions and info on Simon's Radio Shows (upcoming).
After going to the Radio Blog site (Live Chat) here and reading comments left by others with links to the aforementioned site, I clearly understood what Jan meant and how she felt. Being empathetic, I would have felt the same way.
I clicked on the link provided by one of RC's posters and read all 200 plus comments. It made me sick to read the attacks and the filthy comments. But it was necessary for me to do that to understand why Jan was upset. Filthy language and graphic descriptions of certain things are just not my cup of tea. In my personal life, I do not associate with those type of people and I certainly do not have a desire to waste my time on that type of trashy commentary on what I view as a questionable site. By the way, I'm not into trashy porn sites either!
Justice, I am honored to be part of this awesome site. I am a very strong active advocate. I am very compassionate about what I believe in regarding the abused and/or murdered children, missing children, elderly abuse and one I spend an exorbitant amount of time on: animal abuse. I don't just talk, I walk the walk!
I think you, Fysty and Snaz should be very proud of this awesome site. It is a Cadillac for sure! All of your threads are consistent and done with class.
I am very excited about covering Lucas Coe's upcoming trial. I will be working closely with three local media outlets, as I did during Abigail Young's trial and as Emma Thompson's case unfolded in 2009. I plan to attend several days of Coe's trial in Houston, Tx and hopefully, I can offer some first hand observations. I look forward to posting Links on Emma's thread at RC as Coe's trial progresses.
I want to thank you, Fysty and Snaz for this awesome site! Thanks for all of the help from all of you and a very special thank you to Snaz who has patiently been working with me and teaching me how to set up a thread and be consistent regarding links, etc. I still have a lot to learn!
Best regards,
Ann-Tx
Justice, thank you for your valuable time in addressing this issue. I appreciate it.
Ann - Tx- Posts: 10164
Join date: 2010-08-11
Location: Texas
Mood:
Re: Blog Drama in the Haleigh Case
by Ann - Tx on Sun Sep 05, 2010 11:48 pm
khintx wrote:Ann~ When I saw this BNN thread I did not know it was a 'listening' thread, I thought it was a discussion thread... and BNN was certainly a hot topic of discussion that week. I'm sorry you got in trouble with Jan. We all have our personal opinions and experiences about this and I am not interested in a bashing thread, just a discussion thread. Please accept my apologies. kh
Hi, Khintx!
First of all, I respect your right to express your opinion.
Yes, I did get in trouble with Jan. I can clearly understand her being upset with me. If the shoe was on the other foot, I would've been upset with her. For two days, I was upset for I thought I lost a friend whom I have the privilege of working closely with regarding the Zachary Pittman case (Pearl River, La) along with Christy Ragas, Zachary's mother. Christy has been in the Barrett's home as well as their home office. She knows many things about the Barrett's for a fact. One of many facts is the fact the Barrett's do not receive any revenue or income from any of the cases they cover. Christy is very grateful and appreciative for the tremendous amount of work the Barrett's have done regarding Zach's case. Because of their efforts as well as hers, there is a forward movement in the case which can not be disclosed to even me at this time.
I have tremendous respect and admiration for Jan and Simon! In my lifetime, I have dealt with people from all walks of life and continue to do so today. I consider myself a rather good judge of character and integrity.
You know, it is no one's business where my income comes from. I feel that way about the Barrett's. It is none of my business since no income or revenue is derived from all of their volunteer work. Volunteer work is very rewarding for me but it can get expensive. On an effort three (3) years ago, my gas expense was $373 and that does not include wear and tear on my SUV, insurance, etc. That is the actual cost of the gas!
If my efforts require an out of town overnight trip, I have hotel and meals expense. So it really can get expensive!
Kh, I accept your apology. Once again, I do respect your right to your opinion, thoughts, etc.
By the way, Kh, did we blog on another site in 2009 about the Emma Thompson case? I think we did. I could be wrong.
If so, Lucas Coe's trial is 9-13-10. If you are not aware and if you are interested, I started an Emma Thompson thread, with the help of Snaz, on Reality Chatter. Snaz did the pictures on the thread and she really made the thread come alive! I know Justice also did some of the pictures.
So many failed Emma in life and after death. I feel like Reality Chatter is offering a forum for those who are seeking justice for little, precious Emma! Emma Thompson now has a beautiful thread on RC (thanks to Snaz and Justice) and to Fysty, the site owner.
If you want to check it out, Kh, here is the Link:
http://www.realitychatter.com/missing-murdered-f30/emma-thompson-deceased-6-27-09-t2705.htm
Reality Chatter Emma Thompson - - Deceased 6-27-09 Thread started: 8-31-10
If you are interested in justice for abused and in this case, murdered children, I think you will find the articles and especially the live videos informative. The Victim's Impact Statement for Emma Thompson (raw video) is even posted on her site! Very informative video and sad when Laurie Thompson, Emma's paternal grandmother, describes briefly what she saw when she looked at Emma in the casket.
Hope you check out Emma's beautiful thread! Her maternal family failed her, even after her horrific, brutal death but . . . . Reality Chatter has not failed Emma! ~~~ Justice for precious Emma! ~~~
Ann - Tx- Posts: 10164
Join date: 2010-08-11
Location: Texas
Mood:
Re: Blog Drama in the Haleigh Case
by Justice4all on Tue Sep 07, 2010 4:37 am
Sorry about making you the author AJ lol. The author of the first post of the thread is automatically listed as the author of the thread. The three ways I can think of that you can author a thread without starting it is when we split a thread, merge two threads, or delete the first post in a thread.
Justice4all- Admin
- Posts: 9028
Join date: 2009-07-02
Age: 37
Location: Michigan
Mood:
Re: Blog Drama in the Haleigh Case
by khintx on Mon Sep 13, 2010 9:38 am
Hi AJ. I am glad she apologized too, but it came across to me as kind of a non-apology. It's one of those kinds of apologies where you say "I'm sorry you feel that way" but still imply it's someone else's fault for feeling that way and you are not really sorry for anything at all. A retraction of the story would have been nice.... or some kind of an explanation as to what the heck they were thinkin. Oh well.
I was directed towards Levi's radioshow recently- and, as you know, I have not been a big fan of his either. In fact, I didn't listen to it for several days, but as that was all anyone was talking about I decided to see what the buzz was all about. It was actually a very interesting and informative show. I'll post it over at the other thread. Mull it over and let me know what you think.
kh
I was directed towards Levi's radioshow recently- and, as you know, I have not been a big fan of his either. In fact, I didn't listen to it for several days, but as that was all anyone was talking about I decided to see what the buzz was all about. It was actually a very interesting and informative show. I'll post it over at the other thread. Mull it over and let me know what you think.
kh
khintx- Posts: 3931
Join date: 2009-10-15
Mood:
Similar topics» Bar Complaint Against Attorney in Haleigh Case Dismissed, Entire File Released
» PCSO Criticizes Release of Jail Letter in Haleigh Case, WSKY Responds
» Will the Haleigh Cummings' Homicide Case be Solved this Week?
» Lindsey and Chelsea Croslin Missing Links in Haleigh Cummings' Case?
» Update: Tim Miller and Leonard Padilla Don't Face Off Over The Casey Anthony Case on 'Watts Up With This' Blog Talk Radio Show - Sunday 4/11/2010 8:00 PM
» PCSO Criticizes Release of Jail Letter in Haleigh Case, WSKY Responds
» Will the Haleigh Cummings' Homicide Case be Solved this Week?
» Lindsey and Chelsea Croslin Missing Links in Haleigh Cummings' Case?
» Update: Tim Miller and Leonard Padilla Don't Face Off Over The Casey Anthony Case on 'Watts Up With This' Blog Talk Radio Show - Sunday 4/11/2010 8:00 PM
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum