Alec Baldwin’s Interview on ABC

/in , , , /by

Did you catch the interview of Alec Baldwin last night with George Stephanopoulos? He talked about the horrible day in October of this year, when a prop gun went off on the set of Rust, and killed cinematographer Halyna Hutchins and wounded director Joel Souza.

I found the interview very hard to watch. He turned my stomach inside out multiple times.

Baldwin showed an arrogance, a defiance and a callousness that bothered me.

Did you catch those? They are always red flags for you to pay attention, because exactly as seen, it can affect your safety. People who have those traits will always put themselves and their needs above you.

Baldwin actually showed more sadness for himself then he did for Halyna or the trauma he caused his crew. At times, it was simply, and disgustingly, all about him, even though he said that he did not want us to see him as a victim.

It’s very clear, however, Baldwin sees himself as a victim. He also sees himself as special and deserving of special treatment.

Do you see the signs of a toxic personality here??

I do.

According to Baldwin, nothing was his responsibility, and frankly, I don’t buy it. Not for a second.

His interview was done in desperation because he fears being held accountable and how that will cause him to suffer. It wasn’t about how his actions or in-actions caused grave harm and death. No, He doesn’t want to be held liable in anyway for what happened. The entire interview was him trying to find anything or anyone else to hang this horrible accident on.

I can’t imagine any lawyer telling him to do this interview. His arrogance actually hung him out to dry and will help those suing him. Not surprising for his personality type. They think they can convince you of their “truths”.

Do I believe Baldwin set out to intentionally harm people on the set? No.

Are there indications that someone else tried to cause havoc and harm on the set knowingly? I haven’t seen anything to support this yet, but that could always change. I’m not privy to the investigation.

Do I think there was a dangerous and reckless disregard for the safety of others? I absolutely do.

Do I think Baldwin was acting recklessly by not following safety protocols on the set? 1000%. And he should be held liable. He may not be the only person here who acted with recklessness and lack of concern for the safety of others, but he was at the helm of this production–the one ultimately responsible. And he doesn’t want to own that on any level.

Do I think Baldwin has skipped those safety steps before? I do. He clearly thinks he doesn’t have to do that stuff because he pays people, which is rubbish. Safety is safety and no one regardless of status is above that.

The fact that Baldwin said toward the end of the interview that he didn’t feel any guilt about what happened–I hope that cause a strong reaction in you, because it should. It shows his utter disregard for others and his completely lack of empathy. Any human being who has empathy would feel guilty as hell for what happened in that scenario and the fact he didn’t, speaks volumes.

________________________

Keep your eyes out in 2022!! I am going to be offering a very limited special 1:1 training/coaching for people who want to learn how to identify people who cause harm! I will only be accepting people who are very serious about learning this skill set and truly want to change their lives.

Lyle and Erik Menendez

/8 Comments/in , /by


ABC’s 20/20 aired the newest twist in the Lyle and Erik Menendez story this past weekend: Young millennials, specifically those on TikTok, are calling for the release of the murderous brothers. They claim that after enduring a lifetime abuse at the time of the murders, these two shouldn’t have to serve a life sentence.

In our modern day, it seems if you can generate enough interest in a case, perhaps you can renew interest and free people? I’m all for freeing the wrongly convicted and those who confessed to a crime they didn’t commit, but to free two cold-blooded murders like the Menendez brothers?

It boggles my mind.

To the younger generation, I say this:

Lyle and Erik weren’t children when they killed their parents. They were not dependent to their parents for food, shelter or freedom. These “boys” were actually grown MEN, ages 18 and 21 at the time they intentionally killed their parents. They were capable of taking care of themselves.

They had the FREEDOM to leave at any time, to file complaints against their parents and take responsible action for the abuse they suffered if they felt they were seriously wronged. They say they were afraid their parents would kill them if they did. And if so, they still could have moved out, started their own lives, secured their safety and cut contact. They had other options besides murder.

Furthermore, it wasn’t like they snapped that day at the abuse of their parents. They planned the murder. They could have planned their escape equally.

Erik wrote a screenplay detailing what he eventually did–before he did it. He wrote of the murders. The motive in his screenplay? Money. And then once they committed the atrocity, they lied about it and denied it, and hello, spent the money! It doesn’t take rocket science to see this.

They didn’t show any signs of pain and agony over the destruction of their family in such a brutal way–their parents harm to them or their harm to their parents. No, the men went out and lived lavishly on their parents money as if they won the lottery. They estimate when this happened they spent upwards of $700K before their arrest and that was 30 plus years ago!

The men acted callous, cold, arrogant, selfish and calculating.

Do I think the father was sexual abusive to the boys? That’s a good question.

I see pain, when the men testify at times, even agony, however, their story doesn’t 100% jive for me as honest. Erik says as to the reason they killed their parents was, “Me telling Lyle, that uh, my dad had been molesting me” (see video below). He suggests that was the final blow.

But what doesn’t ring sincere here is this: Erik says, “…it was Lyle who first penetrated him with a toothbrush as they played in the woods when he was 5.” It wasn’t his father, ironically, who molested him first. And Lyle admits to doing this to his brother multiple times.

So your brother molested you first and you find him a reasonable and trustworthy person to say hey dad did this too me too?

It could happen (it’s not impossible as many years past), but the odds are low.

And now that news breaks your brother, the brother who molested you?

Think of it another way, if you were Lyle: If you come from an incest family, and you too committed incest. How would you feel about it?

You would feel intense shame. You would want to hide it because you took part in it too. You would feel sick, dirty and gross and would want to bury that memory once you learned it was wrong. You would likely shun the topic and avoid it at all costs because you would think you were as sick as dad — even if you knew better. Emotions are hard to shake from an experience like this–even decades later as an adult who got therapy and understands you were a victim. That’s how a normal person would think in this experience: Bury it, deny it and do not talk about it. If your brother tried, you’d shoot him down. Quick. Right?

Does that make sense?

Personally, if this story is true that Lyle sexually abused Erik in real life, I honestly don’t think they would say a word in public either. What would be the benefit? It’s way too humiliating and not needed to be shared. I think most people who endured something like this would rather die than talk about it. Normal people who feel shame would have to hide this at all costs. Someone who doesn’t feel shame, remorse or guilt wouldn’t know this.

So something is off.

Was there abuse? Potentially.

Could it just be they are showing excruciating pain because they had to testify to something –“a story”–that is so humiliating as this a last ditch attempt to try to stay out of prison? They needed a defense and there were few they could claim.

Imagine saying you abused your brother when he didn’t to save yourself. How would that feel? That’s a possible explanation too. It would be utterly humiliating.

Terry Moran says seeing the vein pop in Lyle during the testimony of the sex abuse made him believe the abuse. For me, that blood popping vessel was anger. Why was Lyle angry at this point? Was it anger that he had to say this stuff “a story” to fight for their lives? At first, in that segment of the video I feel Lyle has empathy towards his brother, and then as his brother tells the story I see anger and disgust.

We just aren’t getting the true unfiltered story here, plain and simple.

You are getting a mix of truth and lies that would take me hours of testimony watching to ferret out. There likely was some abuse, but they embellished it for sympathy. That’s most probable by the behavior I see, and where I sit after watching the 20/20 clips.

Several of their abuse stories are pure fabrications–100% to garner sympathy for them–without doubt. Do I believe an abused son would get into bed with his mom and touch her “everywhere”? And she would tolerate it? I absolutely do not. They had to paint mom a villain too.

I believe the Menendez brothers lived a very affluent lifestyle, and were raised by a narcissist father who fostered and nurtured narcissist/psychopathic thinking in his children, which ultimately was his and his wife’s undoing. I do not believe these men should be set free.

What do you think?

Margaret Rudin

/7 Comments/in , , /by

ABC’s 20/20 featured the story of Ron and Margaret Rudin this past weekend. Did you catch it?

Margaret and Ron were both married five times, and this last marriage ended with Ron being murdered. Ron’s beheaded body was found in an antique chest burned in the desert. Margaret was the last one to see him.

The question, of course, was whodunit.

Margaret has always stood steadfast that she was innocent, but she ended up being convicted, and served 20 years of her life sentence before winning parole a year ago in January.

When you watch Margaret speak, what do you see? Do you see an innocent woman or someone who is denying her dirty deeds?

I always caution people not to assess someone’s truthfulness after they have paid the price for their crime. Why? Because there is no longer any pressure to have to succeed with their lie. Liars leak the most clues when they are under pressure to succeed with the lie, avoid punishment, etc.

Once the stakes are gone, its very easy to say you are innocent without any stress or indicators–there are zero risks and all benefit to do so now! That’s not to say one wouldn’t leak clues, but I have seen guilty people years later come across very honest and innocent when they claimed they were innocent when they were far from it! So be warned.

However, Margaret, in my opinion is only fooling herself here. She thinks she is still so brilliant she can tell you her story and you won’t pick up on the inconsistencies, but oh dear, no. She is wrong.

Did you catch any of her leaks?

Here is one of my favorites: “They stuck the name on me. That ‘black widow, black widow, black widow,’ like I had killed somebody before, or like that I was in the habit,” said Margaret Rudin.

Oh dear, Margaret. You aren’t good at self-censoring, are you? Your interview? It was a train wreck. I did not believe a word.

Angelika Graswald: A Free Woman

/in , , , , /by

ABC’s 20/20 did an updated story on Angelika Graswald this past weekend. She is out jail after serving 32 months. She pled guilty to reduced charges of criminally negligent homicide and was released just before Christmas 2017. She’s a free woman after only serving 32 months.

The case is fascinating because it polarized many people.

Many people found her credible, though the thought of that makes me cringe, like nails down a chalk board, cringe.

This case isn’t even in shades of gray. It is clear black and white.

Graswald shows every dangerous behavior known to mankind and anyone in her path should take deep care to protect themselves.

Remember how Jodi Arias played this sweet, innocent,  I-couldn’t-harm-a-flea demeanor?

These two are made of the same exact deadly cocktail of lethality.

I could write a 200-page book on Graswald’s behavior in this case.

My biggest piece of advice about this case?

When people tell you who they are, believe them.

Graswald told you she had a dark side that no one should ever see. That statement wasn’t coerced, or forced.

That was the stark, cold, hard, deadly truth!

[polldaddy poll=9943061]

Family of Thieves (20/20)

/3 Comments/in , , , , /by

Did you catch 20/20 this past weekend?  The show featured the story of the criminal Cabello family as they stole nearly $4 million in orchestrated bank-related heists.

Archie Cabello found a life of a crime was lucrative for him because he was able to out-smart the system time-and-time again, but finally after decades, the law caught up with him.

If you haven’t watched the story, I highly recommend it. It’s fascinating.

____________________________________

In thinking about the whole story, a few thoughts ran through my mind, one of which was:  Do you really think Archie’s family turned on him?

Or was it part of his intelligent genius to have his family “save themselves” from a life of prison by talking and pointing the finger at him?

Wouldn’t that be the ultimate con gaming the system one last time?

Archie was certainly smart enough to save his wife and son, don’t you think?

I think they put on a big game in their dislike for one another, and what flagged me to this was the fact that Vincent, who supposedly turned Archie in (after the cops discovered their 100 credit cards) wouldn’t speak to the media about how “wronged he was” by his father.  If you are willing to go to the police and turn your father in, you’d be willing to talk about it. But Vincent had no interest. Neither did his wife.

It makes you go “Hmmm….”

Furthermore, I was surprised that the banks never hired a private investigator to put surveillance on the Cabello family to recover their money.  I mean why not pay someone to follow them 24/7?  It would be pennies compared to their losses.  The Cabellos had to get money from somewhere and they should have been easily able to track where the loot was, right?  The Cabellos did put a large portion of their money in a safe at a company after all. Archie and the family rarely worked so they had to get money from somewhere.  It seems like a no-brainer, doesn’t it?

They still have $1.8M unaccounted for, and you know Vincent and Archie’s wife will have to access it at some point.