Woman commits suicide after Nancy Grace appearance

[Forty-Two]

This is so sad: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14823398/

I have no idea whether the woman was guilty or not, but now we may never know. Thanks a lot, Ms. Grace.

[Charlie Monoxide]

It's been like the only news story since last week. From what I've heard and read, it doesn't look good for her. Refused a polygraph (yes, they are BS, but more of a ritual), has been evasive about her whereabouts around the time in question as well.

The news at 6 (WESH) was saying that the law enforcement investigating, doubts that the childs room was broken into.

It's a sad story for sure. The kid and the mom made a cute couple ....

Charlie (another weird Florida story) Monoxide

[fuelair]

Would love to know what the police found examining the cut screen - that could answer the question pretty thoroughly.

[Charlie Monoxide]

Originally Posted by fuelair

Would love to know what the police found examining the cut screen - that could answer the question pretty thoroughly.

Although I didn't go into details in my above message, they are quoted as saying they believe the mother cut the screen, after the fact ....

Charlie (gossip from Orlando) Monoxide

[fuelair]

Originally Posted by Charlie Monoxide

Although I didn't go into details in my above message, they are quoted as saying they believe the mother cut the screen, after the fact ....

Charlie (gossip from Orlando) Monoxide

Assume cut from inside - easy to spot.

[Dave1001]

I find Nancy Grace odious, but I'm not sure that she was in the wrong in this case. This woman volunteered to go on Nancy Grace's show, and it's not a secret what to expect on it. It's different from ambush journalism. Unless Ms. Grace's producers mislead the woman on what to expect during the interview.

[Forty-Two]

Well, now that I think about it, I may be overly harsh toward Nancy Grace (though I still have little-to-no respect for who she is and what she does).

If the mother is innocent, then Grace had no justification for tearing into her like that. The woman has lost a child, so she's already in emotional distress with feelings of mourning, guilt, and depression, so a harsh interview could have pushed her over the edge.

If the mother is guilty, then she probably already had some psychological problems, and if Grace hadn't pushed her to suicide, perhaps something else would have. But it still wasn't Grace's place to presume guilt.

[a_unique_person]

Originally Posted by Forty-Two

Well, now that I think about it, I may be overly harsh toward Nancy Grace (though I still have little-to-no respect for who she is and what she does).

Don't back off. Grace makes money humiliating and hounding people, with no actual legal process to determine if they are actually guilty or not. Don't forget the Jonbenet case. The family looked as guilty as hell, but that doesn't mean they were.

I was talking to a detective here about a famous murder case, of a woman killed for apparently no motive. It was found she had been having an affair with a policeman, he didn't have a good alibi, she had been wanting to break it off, or had broken it off. The cop looks as guilty as hell. He didn't do it, or hire the people to do it. It turned out some drug dealer wanted somone killed, and hired two idiots who went to the wrong address. Just because you look guilty, doesn't mean you are, and jumping in to torture and humilitate people because it's how you make a good living doesn't justify what she does at all.

The lawyer was right to tell her to refuse the lie detector test, they are b*****.

[Raphael]

Originally Posted by Forty-Two

Well, now that I think about it, I may be overly harsh toward Nancy Grace. But it still wasn't Grace's place to presume guilt.

It's impossible to be too harsh. AUP is right, she flat out attacks everyone without allowing for the possibility that they might be innocent.

It's inevitable that she will occasionally be right.

[hgc]

Boy, what a terrible thing to have to happen to Nancy Grace. All these obnoxious guests like that Smart young lady and now this one going and doing silly things just to humiliate her.

[davefoc]

OK, maybe I'm missing something here and I haven't followed this story very well, but Grace appears to have done absolutely nothing wrong to me.

AUP's comments, with respect, seem to be irrelevant. It goes without saying that the woman might have been innocent. I don't think Grace has announced some supernatural ability to distinguish the guilty from the innocent. She badgers people. If you don't like it don't go on her show. If we are going to start finding ethical problems with every journalist that badgers somebody before the journalist is absolutely sure the person is guilty journalism as we know it would be eliminated.

[Molinaro]

I have no problem with Nancy Grace. If you don't want to answer her questions, don't go on the show. If you didn't do anything wrong, then answer the questions. Simple as that.

It makes no sense for the mother to not be able to say where she was.

[shemp]

On top of all this, CNN saw fit to go ahead and air the interview even though, at the time it aired, Melinda Duckett had already killed herself.

CNN talk show reaches a new depth of sleaze

Quote:

Nancy Grace was in vintage form on her national talk show on CNN's Headline News. Her guest was a soft-spoken 21-year-old mother named Melinda Duckett. Police in Florida suspect Duckett had something to do with the disappearance of her 2-year-old son, Trenton, on Aug. 27.

But Grace wasn't satisfied with suspicion. She wanted to solve the case right there in front of a coast-to-coast television audience.

"Why are you not telling us where you were?'' Grace demanded, pounding the table. "Miss Duckett, you are not telling us for a reason. What is the reason?''

As the woman stumbled over her words, trying to come up with answers, a small yellow text box appeared at the bottom of the screen: "SINCE SHOW TAPING," it read, "BODY OF MELINDA DUCKETT FOUND AT GRANDPARENTS' HOME.''

That's right. Grace was interviewing a dead woman. Just hours before the taped interview aired last Friday, Duckett committed suicide at her grandparents' house.

Regardless of whether or not Melinda Duckett was guilty, I can think of a few choice words to describe Nancy Grace (and CNN) that I can't use here.

[Charlie Monoxide]

The story keeps getting, errr, unusual.

It seems Melinda took Trenton (the missing child) out to an islolated forest to practise using her newly bought shotgun. She was gone for about eight hours and claimed she was lost and couldn't find the public firing range that was suppose to be in the forest.

There are no witnesses that have come forward (yet) to support or refute her claims.

Charlie (in the state of confusion aka Florida) Monoxide

[Forty-Two]

Originally Posted by shemp

On top of all this, CNN saw fit to go ahead and air the interview even though, at the time it aired, Melinda Duckett had already killed herself.

Oh, disgusting. Innocent or guilty, that's despicable, particularly how they phrased it.

I take back my taking back of my earlier harsh statements. This is disgusting.

[Dave1001]

Originally Posted by shemp

On top of all this, CNN saw fit to go ahead and air the interview even though, at the time it aired, Melinda Duckett had already killed herself.

CNN talk show reaches a new depth of sleaze



Regardless of whether or not Melinda Duckett was guilty, I can think of a few choice words to describe Nancy Grace (and CNN) that I can't use here.

ewww. I need a shower. *shudder*

[davefoc]

OK, let's say your job is interviewing people for television.

Your employer has arranged an interview with a woman suspected of killing her children. Do you:

1. Tell your employer that you think it is inapproriate to do this interview and refuse to do it under all circumstances.

2. Tell your employer that you think it is inappropriate to do this interview but agree to do it if pressured by your employer.

3. Do the interview because you think it is a good idea.


And if you decide to do the interview do you:
A. Only ask softball questions because you don't want the woman to feel worse than she already does.

B. Do a normal interview including the kind of tough (badgering perhaps) questions that you are known for and are paid for.

The mood around here seems to be that Grace did some bad stuff here. I would like to understand what the Grace condemers think they would have done in her situation. Please fassume that you hold a lucrative job largely because you are willing to ask badgering type questions so understand that you will probably be considerably less well off financially if you take the softball route very often.

[Forty-Two]

Originally Posted by davefoc

Please assume that you hold a lucrative job largely because you are willing to ask badgering type questions so understand that you will probably be considerably less well off financially if you take the softball route very often.

At that point, you've already sacrificed ethics for a lucrative paycheck. We're not angry at Grace just for this interview; we're upset that she and her program thrive on these tactics and have no moral qualms about airing and profiting from an interview that most would consider to be at the least in poor taste and at the most morally repugnant.

[davefoc]

I thought the O.J. Simpson attorneys at times did things that were unethical and I was pretty sure that I wouldn't have done them.

Then I asked myself this question: There is five million dollars sitting on the table all you need to do is what the SImpson attorneys were willing to do to pick it up and keep it. Would I have done it. I, like everybody else, don't know the exact answer. For one thing it mignt not be the same answer at all times in all circumstances. For me, the only thing I was pretty clear that I wouldn't have done was participate in the scheme to get the juror removed that would probably have voted guilty. Everything else, even things that I think make it into the unethical column by my standards I might have done in some situations for five million dollars.

So if I ask myself a similar question about Grace. Would I go pick up the five million dollars lying on the table? All day long for most of the things Grace does. If I had sensed the woman was exceptionally distraught or on the edge of suicide I would not have gone forward even for the five million bucks. But I don't think there is evidence that Grace made that determination either.

Hmm, another, for me uncomfortable ethics question. Assuming picking up the 5 million dollars off the table required me to blather on about psychic detectives and lie detector machines (things that are I think are bogus) would I do it. First I think the ethics question is easier for Grace because I think she believes in that crap. I think for me, given the fairly good life I have, I wouldn't choose to pick up five million bucks if it meant I had to blather on about psychiic detectives, but given a life of poverty or struggle I'd probably pick up the five million dollars if all I had to do was tell some lies about psychic detectives.

Bottom line here, if you have made hard and fast ethical rules that you know you would follow under all circumstances I congratulate you. My ethical standards are a little shakier.

[Pyrrho]

People who want to play "bad cop" interrogators, shouldn't. Leave the interrogation to the professionals.

Anyway...what else does anyone expect from TV? It's the nature of the beast.

[BPScooter]

I haven't seen any of the relevant video, only read a few of the latest stories I googled (Seatlle Times, Orlando Sentinel) and some blogs (Reason, and some very left-wing one) and I get the idea that the mood out there is Nancy Grace didn't do the right thing.

Without a lot of background or bias, I'm wondering if anyone here thinks that "psychics and missing people," which gave a very productive thread, is related to "talk-show hosts and missing people" (Montel) and maybe now "pseudo-journalists and missing people." Seems to me that regardless of particulars, the psychics, talk-show hosts, and pseudo-journalists are not likely the best people to trust. Or even talk to. But on the other hand, if one wants access to millions of people with potential case-breaking clues, maybe they are useful. But are they accountable, responsible, or controllable?

Overall I just have a slight bummer going on about this whole cycle.

[shemp]

CNN Host Says Guilt Probably Drove Missing Boy's Mom To Suicide

Quote:

(CBS/AP) The family of a missing Florida boy says CNN's Nancy Grace and others in the media helped push the child's mother over the edge.

Investigators say Melinda Duckett shot herself to death Friday, the day after she was grilled by Grace in a telephone interview, and hours before the interview aired.

Grace told ABC News on Friday that it was more likely guilt than the media that drove Duckett to kill herself. "To suggest that a 15- or 20-minute interview can cause someone to commit suicide is focusing on the wrong thing," she said.

[Dave1001]

Originally Posted by davefoc

OK, let's say your job is interviewing people for television.

Your employer has arranged an interview with a woman suspected of killing her children. Do you:

1. Tell your employer that you think it is inapproriate to do this interview and refuse to do it under all circumstances.

2. Tell your employer that you think it is inappropriate to do this interview but agree to do it if pressured by your employer.

3. Do the interview because you think it is a good idea.


And if you decide to do the interview do you:
A. Only ask softball questions because you don't want the woman to feel worse than she already does.

B. Do a normal interview including the kind of tough (badgering perhaps) questions that you are known for and are paid for.

The mood around here seems to be that Grace did some bad stuff here. I would like to understand what the Grace condemers think they would have done in her situation. Please fassume that you hold a lucrative job largely because you are willing to ask badgering type questions so understand that you will probably be considerably less well off financially if you take the softball route very often.

To be clear, I'm not put off by the fact that Nancy Grace interviewed the woman in the way she did. I'm put off by the way they exploited the woman's death in airing the interbiew. Human dignity deserves a little more than a scrolling bar during an interview airing to mention that the subject died prior to airing, in my opinion.