2011.06.01 Dr. Drew

[akashana]

He took two callers that talked about sexual abuse victims and their behaviors. IIRC disassosiative behavoir...and another I can't remember right off hand.

By the end of the show he was pretty much summing up that KC would not have suffered sexual abuse that would have caused her to have severe psychological reactions...etc. You have to go back and listen to that part of the program.

He really seems stuck on it has to be an accident theory. That she accidently died while KC was being neglectful or really egregious parenting.

But he had a guest on today that kind of explained that legally if she did use chloroform to put Caylee to sleep so she could go out to party that would be death caused by aggravated child abuse and therefore could be seen as murder.

I don't care for his show but he's approaching it from a place of absolutely no fore-knowledge and puzzling out the details as they stand now. (State's Vs. Defense explanations of what happened).

I disagree with his argument that because we haven't seen proof that KC suffered from the classic triad we see with psychopaths that she can't be one. Not that I think she is, I just find his argument naive and am a bit surprised given his education. JMHO.

MY BOLD

I agree that is a naive perspective; the world is full of sociopaths. Only a small percentage of them actually wind up murdering anyone. But their swath of destruction is one and the same.

 

[Sabrina2011]

I would love to hear his thoughts if he was able to interview her and face to face really get time with her. That would be interesting

 

[Leila]

he goes back and forth.. but he has people from both sides on.. ..
He has basically said.. himself.. that what they are trying to show casey's mental condition (all the lies and bs) as someone who is very very very badly sexual abused..and that it does not fit with the story they are telling and that casey has told.

This is what I zeroed in on too. He said words to the effect that there's been no abuse proven that would fit with the type of abuse that would push someone to kill with no remorse. He indicated that the abuse would have to be pretty severe for this to happen.

 

[Just K]

Me too. I really liked Dr. Drew before watching a couple of his shows about this case. Come to think of it...I liked him alot more before he got his own show. A whole hour of him is a bit much to take. He's better when he's just commenting briefly on another show.

The first show he talked about this case he went on about some ridiculous theory about the duct tape. He was just "guessing" he said, he had no idea if what he was saying was true, but he put it out there. I also get the impression he thinks the people who follow this case are a little silly. Last night he was laughing about all the angry tweets and messages he got and told us all to calm down.

Since they are all covering the story and discussing it, isn't that like the pot calling the kettle black?

It amazes me that if they have a talk show or access to one then they automatically think that they are better than people who comment on forums. He/they have no idea how much trained experience any of the contributors/members have. It has always rubbed me the wrong way.

 

[BeagleMom]

First, let me say, I applaud DrD work with addicts. He appears to be very good working with people with addictions (yes, I would watch his celebrity addicts show, found it interesting).

But, it appears that he is trying to cash in on the CaseyCraze. Which, okay, he has a show, go for it. But, he needs to do his homework. He needs to research the players, the timeline, the interviews, depositions, all of it. He's trying to act like he is more informed and knowledgable regarding the case, than he really is.

The first night I watched his show, I thought, man he has no clue what is going on....i figured, being a professional, he realized how ill prepared he was and would do alot of background work. Tuned in tonight...same thing..scattered thoughts...he focuses on the abuse and forgets that a 2 year old was murdered.

Needless to say, I had to change the channel. I'm not watching him anylonger.

And Dr. D, you are not like me. My focus is justice for Caylee, not excuses for KC.

Respectfully,
BeagleMom

 

[concentric]

Some of the things he says are demeaning towards women, IMO. For example, he implies that women who are researching and following this case have irrational fears and are obsessed: He keeps bringing up his Medusa analogy to this case. Also he showed clips of people rushing into the courthouse in the a.m. to get one of the 50 seats in the courtroom and commented on how some women were pushing and shoving each other to get a place in line.

 

[Amster]

These shows are all about ratings. Nobody would watch or talk about them if they didn't do something controversial. I imagine that a majority feel that ICA killed Caylee. So....what better way to get attention than defend ICA or come up with some psycho babble reason that explains how she may get off. And, having LKB on as a guest is a big stick. She's been on several of these shows in the last few days. Chirping Jose's talking points.

It's nothing more than monkey dust.

 

[claudicici]

I respect Dr Drew and agree with his assessment of ICA.
I did not watch tonight only last night when he had LP on.
I would have liked to hear him talk about people obsessed with the case because I always question myself about that.Irrational fears are correct in my case.My daughter reminds me about that all the time.

 

[dodie20]

IDK, but I think maybe he's doing the right thing by exploring ICA's accusations. Honestly, I don't think I believe a word she says, but to be balanced and unbiassed, I think it's important to at least consider why she is the way she is. (I'm one of those people who thinks something is seriously wrong with her). I think DD is trying to figure out what makes this girl tick. In his world, there's an explanation for everything.. but he may have have finally run across something that just can't be explained. MOO.

 

[LCoastMom]

I actually find Dr Drew refreshing. He doesn't froth at the mouth when he mentions Casey's name and he is just trying to take an objective view on all this.

As far as Linda Kenney Baden- she says, something to the effect of "Who knows what happened during the 5 hours that Casey, Caylee and George were together?" Now I'm trying to figure out what five hours- 9-2?

Another thing Dr Drew tries to figure out is if she was really sexually abused. This gave me an idea- maybe the kind of abuse the defense is talking about is consentual sex? You know- like Mackenzie Philips?

What if they come up with them two having consentual sex while they thought Caylee was napping? Does anyone remember Casey saying "I didn't say anything" when her parents visited her in jail?

JoAnn_W

BBM - CA opened that jail visit with: 'We know/heard what you said and we forgive you.' (paraphrased). ICA responded with "I didn't say anything". IIRC and true to form that was the end of that conversation. CA should have told ICA exactly what she was referring to or at least told her that she was still lying and yes she had said A LOT!

I think it is a shame Dr Drew is on this bandwagon without getting a clue about some basic facts of the case, first. With all the information available at his fingertips it is disrespectful to his viewers to come out and spread misinformation or to be rendering his opinion based on comments by a former member of the DT.

 

[Rail_Tracer]

I saw the Dr. D show last night and I was especially intrigued by something he said. He kept going back to the issue of whether ICA may be a sociopath. Often, one looks for a history of that person abusing animals or starting fires in childhood. Did ICA do that? He stated that there is no evidence that she did.

However.... statistically speaking, there are not a lot of female convicted murders who can reasonably be judged to be sociopaths whom we can base our knowledge of sociopaths on. Do female sociopaths act different than males sociopaths? So maybe we shouldn't be looking for fire-starting and animal abuse. Maybe we should be looking other acts of abnormality, such as psychological abuse and torment of others by ICA (esp. going back into her childhood)?

An odd thing to me is that I haven't seen any long-term friendships of ICA. Only short-ones. Can any one explain that? (My thinking is that ICA used people. And when she was done, she threw them away. She didn't truly love them. They were more akin to objects. Thus, no need for any long-term friendships.)

 

[Chiquita71]

I find shows like this pathetic, it is all for ratings. And, "Dr" Drew's opinion is just that: an opinion. And, it is not a very informed opinion. :no:

:twocents:

 

[fla*mom]

It makes me cringe that Dr.'s like him have to ALWAYS label someone with some text book reason why a person acts the way they do. There are some people out there that are just BAD! Nothing happened to them they just choose to lie, steal, and hurt others and just walk away like nothing ever happened.

 

[fifteen89]

I cringe when tv show hosts jump in and try and cover a case like this when they know even less about the facts/evidence than NG. Like who? Dr. Drew, Joy Behar, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, Piers Morgan......

Did anyone happen to catch Marcia Clark on Joy Behar last nite? I didn't realize Casey was entered in any 'wet tshirt concerts'. ugh.