CBS 60 Minutes this past Sunday aired an interesting story on mass shootings. I think regardless of which side of the political line you stand, we are all likely to agree that mental illness is something we need to address and deal with.
When you hear that more than half of the mass shootings happened by people who were mental ill, it is staggering.
If you caught CBS 60 Minutes this weekend, they ran the story of Charles Cullen, a critical care nurse who managed to kill his patients for over 16 years before being held accountable.
What is so disturbing is that hospitals were suspicious of him for years and fired him–only to let him go forward to another institution–over and over again. That’s right–because they didn’t want to attract attention to their hospital and face lawsuits. And as a result dozens and dozens of people were killed. Some estimate as many as several hundred.
Pretty sad when that trumps human life.
It’s a difficult story to watch knowing that.
Charles Cullen is a fascinating study of human behavior. He gives amazing clues to the questions asked of him in the 60 Minutes interview.
From that interview, I truly believe that Charles Cullen enjoyed killing his victims. He got pleasure out of it–he just couldn’t admit it. He did, however, admit to killing at least 40 people over the 16 years.
This is one man that can never be released into society again. Chilling.
I thought this was an interesting segment of 60 Minutes. Did you see it? Did it surprise you?
I have to confess: I did not watch the entire CBS 60 Minutes interview with Michael Vick, because I don’t care to hear about the cruelty to animals. However, I did watch a few segments online, and what I saw was contradictory. Vick seems to be saying whatever comes to mind at the moment.
Read moreOne minute, Vick tells 60 Minutes, “The first day I walked into prison, and they slammed that door, I knew, you know, the magnitude of the decisions that I make, and the poor judgment and what I allowed to happen to the animals….”
Another time, James Brown asks (above), “Why couldn’t you understand what you were doing and what you were allowing then versus now?” Listen how contradictory Vick’s answer is. In the middle of his answer, Vick says, “You know, your mom teach you right from wrong from day one so you know, and I didn’t have the strength to move on or say, ‘This is not me. This is not what I want to do.’ You know, I continued to let it happen and you know, for certain reasons, I don’t know, or for what reasons, I don’t know.”
Does that answer make any sense? He flat out admits he knew right from wrong from day one!
Much of what Vick says, if you want my opinion, is just ramble, not his true feelings, and hence why I see the contradictions. If Vick knew right from wrong from day one, the only “magnitude” that would hit him when the prison door slammed wasn’t what he “allowed to happen to the animals”, it was that he was caught and being held accountable! It doesn’t take any talent to see this.
I also don’t think Vick feels sorry for the “animals” either, as they come as an afterthought it his sentences. And he uses the word “animal”, too, which is removed from the “dogs” he is responsible for killing.
I am sure many of you also noticed that Vick has this smile throughout. It’s downright arrogant, if you want my opinion. It feels as if Vick thinks he is getting away with it again–perhaps because the NFL is handing him another contract after he was indefinitely suspended from the NFL?
I also find it ridiculous that Vick says he doesn’t know why he continued to let it (the dog fighting) happen. Give me a break! He bankrolled the whole operation. There was obviously a handsome payback for Vick or he wouldn’t have risked the millions he made, but he obviously doesn’t want to admit THAT.
Vick just wants to skirt the issue and ramble on about rubbish. If Vick was sincere, he would admit he knew it was wrong all along, but didn’t want to stop it. He thought he could get away with it. It was profitable on some level for him. Period. But that wouldn’t go over so well, would it?
CBS 60 Minutes on Sunday night ran a story about the Duke University lacrosse team members who have been accused of raping an exotic dancer who was hired for a lacrosse team party.
I have not followed this story nor read about it since the news first broke — so when Ed Bradley of 60 Minutes told the story, I was intrigued — especially since the three accused guys were going to speak out. Furthermore, one of the two exotic dancers, Kim Roberts, was going to speak as well. The victim did not speak. Yes, only one dancer claims to have been raped.
For those who watched the interview, CBS 60 Minutes pretty much dispelled the belief for the average person (who doesn’t see lies) that the three guys who were accused on the lacrosse team actually raped the dancer. They gave the facts that the entire team (outside of one) submitted to DNA tests — and no one was found to be a match — including the three suspects. More than that, one guy had an alibi for the time in question which is verified on video surveillance — and another accused guy says he will give one in court.
When I watched the three accused lacrosse members speak: David Evans, Reade Seligmann, and Collin Finnerty; both David Evans and Reade Seligmann come across as genuine and honest — and everything they said was logical. There are no contradictions. I completely believed what they said. And with Collin Finnerty, while I don’t believe he lied, he was the most stressed and the most worried of all three guys — and says the least on camera. It makes me wonder what perhaps he might know. Maybe he knows something. Then again, he may just be the most nervous facing the news crews. I can only guess.
Furthermore, 60 Minutes reports that the District Attorney said once he got the DNA samples from the team, it would prove who was innocent, and he would drop the case for those cleared. But in fact, the DA hasn’t dropped the case. Instead he is moving forward — without any DNA matches and making a spectacle of himself. Rumor has it he used this case to help win re-election — as he needed the black vote (the dancers I presume are both black). He has even made an outrageous allegation that perhaps the rapists wore condoms — when the victim herself has made a statement that the rapist did not!
But it gets more interesting.
60 Minutes goes on to say that statements the two dancers gave to police, separately, have both been inconsistent and have changed on more than one occasion. What that would lead anyone to believe is the that the two dancers are lying — that the rape didn’t in fact occur, right? However, the two dancers DON’T AGREE about what happened. So who do you believe?
This is where the irony comes in. The dancer who is not the accuser in this case doesn’t agree or “recall” that the other dancer was or could have been raped. She didn’t say this early on — but that is what she says to 60 Minutes on this day. And the odd part — I don’t believe her statements made on CBS 60 Minutes to be 100% accurate, yet I believe the two of the three guys accused are innocent for sure — and the third one likely is too.
Ms. Roberts, one of the two exotic dancers, hits me as someone who is twisting the truth, saying half-truths and in general is being very evasive — and I would like to know why. While I don’t believe her, I am not sure her inconsistencies point to the fact the victim did get raped. Could this point to the fact she is covering something else up? What could she possibly know or want to hide??? I can only guess at this. I just sense something is up with her odd statements.
When Ms. Roberts spoke, I found it strange that I didn’t believe her, immediately, from the first few words out of her mouth — though at times, snippets of what she said I believed were true. It was almost instant and I can’t give a reason. Then as the interview went on, I believe it was a combination of her pouty lip that she curled downward as she spoke, the way she tensed her lips as well as the way her behavior changed during the interview.
At times, Ms. Roberts would speak directly at the camera — confident and sure. Other times, she would look down as she spoke — and her confidence vanished. Her voice changed from solid and steady to weak and meek! Her demeanor completely changed. When you are honest, this doesn’t happen out of the blue like this. It’s a big red flag.
DO KNOW these are not guaranteed signs of a liar — but in this situation combined with the other elements — the behavior was dramatically different within the same context — which made it unusual — and that is why I don’t believe everything she says. You have to ask yourself: Why was Ms. Roberts acting differently all of the sudden, for short bursts of time? Other times, Ms. Roberts smirked — and I found that odd and out of place as well. She smiled and grinned at odd times. These are all red flags that make me not trust her.
Furthermore, Ms. Roberts choice of words was telling. She said, “I just don’t remember that conversation happening ever”. I find the use of the words ‘that conversation’ interesting. So what was the conversation that she remembers?
Ms. Roberts goes on to say, “No, I did not say those words.” I find the use of ‘those words’ interesting. So, what words did Ms. Roberts use? She doesn’t volunteer.
Why the odd choice of words? Normally one would say, “I don’t remember that”, “I didn’t hear that”, “I didn’t say that”. It reminds me of President Bill Clinton, “I did not have sexual relations with that woman.”
When we are honest, we don’t speak that way. I suspect more went on at this party that all of the party-goers are keeping quiet — because if it comes out — none of them will look good. None of them — innocence and all. I think they all agreed to do some things (players and dancers a like that was perhaps illegal for both parties involved– and then things went funny, they didn’t agree about it, etc.). That’s just my two cents. It would explain all their behaviors. We may never know what happened behind closed doors… but I don’t believe these men are guilty of rape.
