katydid23
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2011
- Messages
- 67,307
- Reaction score
- 232,472
I think some have been released on SM platforms.People have seen them. Great! Why haven't they been released to the public then?
I think some have been released on SM platforms.People have seen them. Great! Why haven't they been released to the public then?
MS already offered to talk about it all together like adults and CW and the others refused the invitation.I really wish the MS youtubers would just go on a live with the people they are accusing (who have offered to talk like adults about it) and get it all out in the open.
It depends upon what the conversations were about. If I said that seeing pictures of the victims all smiling and happy really bothered me and made me sick, and that seeing the grisly crime photos was not really as bad as I thought--I might be embarrassed.And I think we ALL would be embarrassed to have our private conversations made public the way youtubers Aine and Kevin did to CW so I really do not blame her for being mad.
I think Paul was doing the right thing.It was a crappy thing to do and not at all professional.
I don't think it was all about headlines. IMOThey got a headline out of it though, so mission accomplished. Future juors may see it and be influenced. Clap clap clap.
IMO MOO
MS already offered to talk about it all together like adults and CW and the others refused the invitation.
Who knows ??Why should we take HIS word for it? Why can't we see it for ourselves? In entirity?
BBM I hope so. She should not be the one asked to comfort crime victims or orphaned children, IMO.Why do so many people think social workers are some sort of super human saints? Some are, sure. Many however, are not. Again though, what are her actual credentials? Is she licensed? Just curious. I wonder if her work place will "cancel" her now for her given her remarks about the family?
Right, so that nullifies the false narrative here that MS was somehow faking the messages or lying about them.Or it is a 'he said/she said situation. IMOAnd he shouldn't. Private conversations should remain private, as he said. He owns what he says. Good on him.
IMO MOO
As to the bolded above, That is my biggest takeaway.You know what we didn't hear about?? Any concern that poor RA is innocent and being railroaded. No talking about how can we prove he didn't do this or what evidence do we have that shows he couldn't be BG. No just doxing jurors, recognizing that the Odin theory proposed was bogus and had no weight, and creating a mistrial?? Why would they want to do that?? Why would they not want a trial, where he could be found not guilty based on evidence (or a lack thereof if that is what the case may be) This is where I have a hard time because a fair trial yes, but winning at any and all cost just to "win".. I can't support that or any of these back handed ideas to manipulate the trial. Because what if RA really did it? Do any of them care about that or just holding to their publicly stated opinions about him and not wanting to back track?
PS: Sounds like that is exactly why the guy backed out of this and shared the account with MS. He tried to voice an opposing opinion and he was shot down. He didn't feel comfortable with what they were doing and posting and was worried that he would be linked to what they were willing to do and say. He didn't like the fact they wouldn't even entertain any other ideas or wouldn't question things about RA. He opted to shut it down so he was no longer tied to these views and these tactics and to protect himself in the event they posted or did something from his account that would be connected to him as well. Seems like he made a good choice.
Right, so that nullifies the false narrative here that MS was somehow faking the messages or lying about them.Or it is a 'he said/she said situation. IMO
Because her story makes no sense,IMO. She claimed someone 'hacked' into her account and locked her out and stole her messages. But the OWNER of the account already stepped forward, with ALL of the messages, after he locked down the whole Discord.Can we prove she lied? What makes her dishonest but the “leaker” is telling a truthful account while wearing a halo? (He could be. Idk who’s telling the truth. The content creators want us to take their word for it).
Context wouldn't help most of the worse content. If you haven't watched than it is hard for you to understand how negative and damaging many of these comments were---no context could have saved most of them.Both can be true. Some parts can be accurate and some inaccurate because of context completely left out.
Hacking is the first excuse people make when they are called out on certain posts that rub people the wrong way---I WAS HACKED!Like I said, the two girls made a post a few weeks ago complaining they didn't have access to any of the accounts because the owner, Paul, blocked them out. Common sense.
Ps- I don't even understand the hacking thing if all the three had access to the account. Until the owner decided to block the other 2 out.
Well, I forget which state she is in, but in Carolina where I believe she is from... according to Google a Licensed Clinical Social Worker can diagnose mental health conditions. Lisette Deese, LCSW - North CarolinaShe is an associate licensed clinical social worker. She does not have her full license, and is working towards getting it while practicing under the supervision of an experienced LCSW.
I’m not sure they’ll cancel her for her remarks about the families, but might for some of the comments she allegedly made that could be construed as practicing outside of her scope (such as various diagnoses she gave regarding the judge, “in [her] professional opinion”).
There are pretty rigid ethics codes, and I’m actually pretty shocked she was behaving like this with a license that’s so easily revoked.
![]()
LCSW Associate - North Carolina Social Work Certification and Licensure Board
Pursuant to the North Carolina Social Worker Certification and Licensure Act, NCGS § 90B, it is unlawful to engage in or offer to engage in the practice ofncswboard.gov
Everything except for the definition of LCSWA is my opinion
Well, I forget which state she is in, but in Carolina where I believe she is from... according to Google a Licensed Clinical Social Worker can diagnose mental health conditions. Lisette Deese, LCSW - North Carolina
Well I don't think she used the word hacked - at least not in the article I read and cited earlier upthread. She said someone stole the chat messages after accessing them using a password they knew a member was using to participate in the chat. Here is the quote:Hacking is the first excuse people make when they are called out on certain posts that rub people the wrong way---I WAS HACKED!![]()
“Recently, out of revenge a person who knew the password of one of my friends accessed her X account and copied all of her private conversations. He gave those conversations to Murder Sheet, who read some of them aloud on recent episodes. The conversations were blended together, and the messages were read out of order and out of context. Their purpose? To make it seem like we were “hired” by Allen’s defense team to sway public opinion. We were not.”
She can provide an opinion on anyone - just like anyone else can and it appears that is what these content creators (the lot of them) like to do really. The person I replied to said she gave her professional opinion. An opinion is not a medical diagnosis. Here is the post I replied to for clarity: Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #188She can diagnose someone she has never met??!!
She must be a genius!
I don't know if there is a legal license / standard for this type of thing there either, but if not, then it seems they can use whomever they choose to. It would appear they declined the offer of help (at least we have no proof to suggest they accepted it)... so its all a lot of smoke and mirrors about a lot of nothing that will affect the case outcome imo.I don't know if Indiana has a legal requirement or not. But it seems like common sense is required.
B and R have already had bad outcomes with leaks coming from their organisation. I'd think they'd want to lock down those kinds of situations in the future. Having 4 of their closest inner circle hanging out in a Discord group chat, discussing the case strategy and 'making' future plan ideas to take to the defense team seems risky and problematic.
Just the fact that there are defense team members, like CW, openly discussing the release of the jurors info, to anyone who volunteers, is a bad look. It is unprofessional, if not technically illegal. IMO
Great if true. I'll wait for an entire release. Then watch the parties argue amongst themselves and burn it all down. That seems what they're most intent on. Imo.I think some have been released on SM platforms.
Meh... not interested in chasing them down... nor listening to them... if they want to produce it that's up to them.Who knows ??
Perhaps you can ask them to display them in their entirety.
I'm sure we would all like to see them.
Murder SheetForgive me but I have like a zilllion podcasts in my brain. What is the MS podcast as it relates to this case? Thanks