Cable News Snake Oil: How Media ‘Experts’ Mislead the Public
Pat Brown is but one of dozens of self-appointed crime specialists who appear on cable news programs as “experts” in fields where they have no real knowledge. These snake oil peddlers may seem harmless at first glance but often they are responsible for providing misinformation to the public that has real-life consequences on criminal cases and public safety. Brown is perhaps best known as the “expert” who claimed Major Nidal Hasan wasn’t a terrorist and the Ft. Hood massacre wasn’t a terror attack.
In the aftermath of the Ft. Hood massacre, Brown was one of the few “experts” hauled out by the left-wing media to peddle a politically correct lie — that Hasan was not a terrorist. Here’s her appearance on Fox News that happened even after we knew Hasan had ties to radical cleric Anwar Al-Awlaki and was a self-proclaimed jihadist.
A swing and a miss! Except this one was missed on purpose because it’s clear that she’s splitting hairs just to avoid calling Hasan a terrorist. But why? We’ll never know because she rudely dismisses any attempts to get her to clarify her position.
Brown’s profile of the D-C. sniper case is equally inept. The American Journalism Review points out that Brown was one of a number of “experts” cable news organizations used to profile the snipers and that she was the one who got the most wrong:
And Pat Brown, a self-taught criminal profiler, author and ubiquitous television presence during the sniper case, told CBS on October 22: “I do believe he’s working between Montgomery County, Maryland, and Spotsylvania, Virginia. I think those are his two points. I think he lives in one location, possibly works in the other or has a relative down in the other one…. I have surmised from the beginning that he probably lives…somewhere about three miles from the Olney, Maryland, area.”
Less than 48 hours later, SWAT teams descended on a sleeping Muhammad and Malvo at a rest stop outside Frederick, Maryland, near the West Virginia border. Former residents of Washington state, the pair apparently lived in their 1990 Chevy Caprice and are suspected in killings in Washington state, Alabama, Louisiana and Georgia in addition to the spate of shootings in Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia.
An actual profiler and instructor for the FBI Academy’s profiling unit named Gregg McCrary singled out Brown for criticism, and in doing so provoked a response from the celebrity detective that illustrates just how unqualified she is to present herself as an expert:
He faults Brown, who has no formal police training, for criticizing police and for calling the shooter a “loser”–a remark that McCrary says could have provoked further violence.
“To put people on who say those things is reckless of the media,” McCrary says. “I hope something like this is a learning experience, that they’ll go back and look at the people they’ve put on, and say, ‘Are these really the best people to put on?’ Go back to the people who’ve really done this, worked cases, been qualified to profile, maybe been qualified in court as an expert in this area. Just declaring yourself to be a profiler doesn’t really make you a profiler.”
Brown disputes as “foolishness” the accusation that she might have provoked the snipers. The CEO of a nonprofit company that investigates murders free of charge for families of victims and police, Brown says she acquired her skills by reading “hundreds” of psychology and forensics books, attending training seminars and working “dozens and dozens” of homicide cases.
“There are many methodologies to learning profiling and to get the skills,” Brown says. “There is simply no way you can say, ‘This is what makes a good profiler.’ It’s really an investigative skill and a logic skill.” She recommends that reporters focus on “expert explanation” rather than “expert opinion” by asking profilers to explain the reasons for their theories.
In other words, Brown read “hundreds” of books and then deemed herself an expert. I’ve read hundreds of books on a variety of subjects, such as folklore, but I don’t claim to be an expert folklorist. I have written about hundreds of crimes and read books on criminology and victimology but I don’t present myself as a criminologist. By Brown’s logic, I could offer myself as an expert in those fields and the only fact-checking reporters who use my “expertise” should do is ask me to explain my work. I assume I would then get partial credit for wrong answers if my methodology was correct.
But we aren’t talking about a high school trigonometry class, we’re talking about giving out information about crime and safety to the public. Here the correct answer is what matters, and if Brown was to be graded solely by that criteria she’d fail.
Brown definitely didn’t want to explain her “process” when she removed a blog post she wrote claiming that the Falcon Lake murder last year didn’t happen. In that case, a young woman named Tiffany Hartley told police a harrowing tale of being ambushed by pirates while jet skiing with her husband. According to Hartley her husband was shot and killed during the encounter and she was forced to flee and leave his body behind. This is hardly a far-fetched story – piracy is epidemic on Falcon Lake, which straddles the border of Texas and Mexico. Bolstering Hartley’s story is the fact that a Mexican investigator looking into the murder was beheaded by suspected Zeta cartel members.
But a story of cartel pirates gunning down an American doesn’t have enough of a Law and Order twist for Brown and company. Pat Brown came out in support of a theory promoted by a “body language expert” named Lillian Glass, who claimed Hartley was “inconsistent” and that her story didn’t hold water because among other things:
While there been reports of Mexican pirates in the past, those who had any encounters were all unharmed, as the intention of the pirates were all about robbery, not shooting for sport.
“Expert profiler” Brown agrees with the idea that armed robbers from a lawless failed state have some sort of code of conduct that keeps them from murdering people when they feel like it. The same “expert” who claimed Hasan was not following any set ideology but was merely a “psychopath” who just wanted to kill people now supports a theory in which criminals who have a history of threatening people with guns are ruled out as murderers because they have nothing to gain from killing.
Next: What kind of profiler blames the victim?
She is not really a profiler…she is a media slut, engaged to support a predictable point of view. Lots of them out there. Jessie Jackson, shakedown artist, is constantly referred to as a civil rights activist. I include Dr. Phil, Psychology loser, (Psychology defined as a semi-precise occult science or Global Warming Lite) that like Jackson and Schumer jumps in front of any available camera inserting himself into any situation where he can peddle his crap. Al Gore…need I say more.
Yes indeed. Say more. Loved the Dr. Phil pseudo-freudian occultist.
Media whores…the very worst are Christiane Amanpour and Gloria Allred.
You forgot Chris Mathews.
And let us not forget the likes of Keith Olbermann. He praised the shouters that drowned out Bachmann at her own campaign rallies. That he calls free speech. Just can’t wait until the lack of leadership he supports drives us in the direction where a large group can burst down the doors at his studio and jabber over his jabber.
Then there are ‘academics’ such as Paul Ehrlich.
Snake oil salesmen ? They’re ubiquitous, filling up the airwaves with their pitches, their versions of reality, their narratives, their BS.
In Washington DC, you find them at the highest levels of government, companies controlled by democrat donors have been getting huge government grants ASIF taxpayer monies were the government’s personal piggy bank. When discovered, government snakespeople go into long diatribes about how their self-serving decisions were in the public good.
Back in the good ole daze, we were a lot better at calling out these guyz and girlz.
How have we sunk so low?
This is classic disinformation. Just like their Soviet cousins, the US Left peddles lies to muddy the waters even if few actually buy them 100%. Notice how she twists things to deny Mohammedan jihadists exist, or at least pose any threat to the US. Who else is pushing this fantasy? Mohammedan fifth-columnists, the O’bwana administration, and the mass media (as far as they are seperate entities). The whole idea of disinformation is simply to cause doubt or a minutes’ pause before responsive action. Hank Stram used to use formation-shifts to create what he called “a moment of hesitation”. That’s all that was required to make a play work. The phony CIA report on Iran’s nuke program, claiming it had been halted in 2003 or some other time, did nothing but cause GWB to hesitate before taking out Iran’s nuke sites. The best moment to act passed and W was frozen in place forever. Few people in the know beieved the report, but it gave ammo to Iranian sympathizers here and abroad. This highlights a fact that many inside-the-Beltway types and everybody living north of the Mason-Dixon Line cannot process, that the secret is courage, not intelligence. Life in a nutshell: the right thing to do is always simple, and hard; the wrong thing to do is complex, nuanced, gray-areas, etc., and easy. Just as W chickened out on destroying Iran’s nukes, so we can expect Romney to be just as paralyzed by Foggy Bottom hysterics as our current Beloved Leader is. I’m sure Neville Chamberain thought he was acting reasonably at every step in appeasing Hitler. He was probably well-educated and well-grounded in international relations. A well-qualified insider, who could handle every ambiguity (even when there were no ambiguities). But they needed Andy Jackson. Probably kind of a black-and-white thinker, but one who was always ready to kick butt.
“In the aftermath of the Ft. Hood massacre, Brown was one of the few “experts” hauled out by the left-wing media to peddle a politically correct lie — that Hasan was not a terrorist.”
The lawsuit announced yesterday by the families of the 13 slaughtered at Ft. Hood is a just cause, given the army’s failure to act on the very clear signs over a long period of time preceding the shootings, Hasan’s correspondence with al Awlaki, his speeches advocating jihad etc.
It’s truly appalling, all the signs and indications apparently blown off by the army, in the name of political correctness towards a Muslim.
There is not a dimes worth of difference between left wing run universities and the military academies. Both are now turning out the same product.
Obviously the woman is wrong a lot, and nasty to boot. Ordinary such are relegated to the Harold Camping category when they are so demonstrably and flamboyantly wrong.
Let’s go back to “cui bono?” who benefits. Why does CNN keep her around? Why do people read her books. Clearly her narrative fits well with many people here.
I believe that there is a better more elegant reason: she is playing Spiro Agnew for the Left. Her rants distract from the less blatant but more pernicious work of the other thinkers. Sort of a Rodney Dangerfield: if you want to look smart share the venue with witless people.
Good work exposing this ethically deprived mountebank. I’m sick to death of the never-ending news that needs to pad their overabundance of airtime, so they fill it up with pointless speculation as a way to keep a story going for weeks and weeks.
(One tiny point: possessive plurals. I think you mean “…the McCanns’ lawyers…” I’m an apostrophe cop… self-taught, of course!)
Regardless of this woman’s insensitivity and stupidity and lack of empathy, there is something important that no one is saying about the fort Hood shooting except for me. At least I haven’t heard anyone else saying it.
Unless a military person’s duties, such as performing maintenance in a highly confined space prevents due to safety, every military person should be armed at all times, and their firearms should be handy while they are sleeping. If the military people around the shooter had been armed he probably would never have done what he did. And if he did, they would have been able to defend themselves and prevented the deaths of some or maybe even several (maybe all?) of the deaths that occurred. A military person is just like a gun in some sense. If a gun isn’t loaded, it’s just an expensive rock. If a military person isn’t armed he is just an expensive person in a uniform. EVERY military person should be trained in self defense with their issued weapon, and every military person should be issued a GOOD weapon, and it should be kept in good repair. Part of their periodic assessments should include proficiency testing and weapon knowledge. Like drug testing it should be random and with no for warning, just like the Operation Readiness Inspections we used to get when I was in the Air Force and a very minor cog in the Strategic Air Command. Later on I was assigned special duties as a Cargo Courier (guard) for shipments from the Republic of the Philipines to Mississipi and was issued an M16. I never got any additional training (this was 6 years after my one and only experience shooting an M16 in Basic Training) nor did I receive any ammunition. When I asked my superiors why not they said “shut up and do your job.” At that point I had the epiphany about military people being armed at all times. If you can’t trust them with firearms, then what the heck are they doing in the military at all?
And to all my fellow Veterans, I wish you a belated Happy Veteran’s Day and to those who remember, a happy Armistice Day too.
The Marine Barracks in Beirut was destroyed in 1983 (killing 241 Marines & others) by a truck bomber who drove past several Marine sentries who had been ordered to keep their weapons unloaded. They frantically tried to load their rifles, to no avail.
The US military simply can’t trust their own people.
In the First Gulf War, my headquarters unit remained in Ad Dammam, a major port in Saudi Arabia. The higher command to which we were attached also ordered the sentries to be unarmed. I left instructions to have some of my people inside the perimeter locked & loaded & on high alert just in case.
It is possible for someone to be self-taught and still have a reasonable opinion. I won’t fault this woman for being “self-taught” or for having an opinion, even if it is ridiculous.
I fault the media hounds for not properly vetting who she is and whether her opinions represent any common views on the subject.
This is yet another indication, as if we needed one, that our fourth estate isn’t serving us well.
Except she’s not portraying her BS as opinion. She’s stating her lunacy is FACT, because, you know, she’s an “expert”.
“Excuse” criminality?
Please! As everyone knows, over the past 35 years the theory of “relativity” has over taken every facet of human existence. Truth is relative. That means that ‘intent’ is, also, relative.
This further implies a thread of socioeconomic, governmental and behavioral relativism from the ‘perception’, ‘front end’ or ‘input’ of the decision making process. Meaning that rules, policy, regulation, legislation and statutory law ALL share a liability of conceptual and applied truth in the eyes of both the subjugated and the courts.
All you have to do to become eligible for a similar “overlooking of protocol” is be a progressive.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1806840/posts
Considering how she made excuses for Al-Awlaki, I wonder if Brown would be so quick to blame Victoria Lindsay for her own beating if she was a middle eastern girl?
I’ve been thinking about this some more and I have started to wonder, if someone beat the crap out of her, would she blame herself? What the heck, her opinions surely offend someone to the point of wanting to do that. So it is her fault right?
“A conservative is a liberal who’s been mugged.”
“A crime is something that occurs because a person with a criminal mind can take advantage of another person with relatively low risk of penalty by society being enacted against him.”
So… by this logic, terrorists aren’t criminals, bank robbers (most of whom must know the risk they’re taking, and still choose to perpetrate the crime) aren’t criminals, and people don’t murder others to cover up another crime (think Shanaya Davis), but because they believe there is such a low risk to being caught and punished for murder… here “logic” baffles the mind.
So, as a long time Tolkien fan, I’ve read hundreds of fantasy novels. Therefore, I’m an elf.
Well, golly, so am I. And a scientist and an expert in just about everything.
Actually Lance, that makes you an expert on Elves and Elven Culture, not an actual elf.
RAAAAAAAACIIIIIIST!
What she is is a crackpot. A full on leftwing moonbat.
Geeee, I’m missing my true calling.
I’ve shot High Powered Rifles competetively since High School. I tune my own rifles and load my own custom ammunition.
Anyway, I remember when the D.C. Sniper case going on how I was Ridiculed for something I said;
“This guy probably isn’t a highly trained specialist at all. From the looks of the shootings, the latest in a parking garage, this guy isn’t selecting a target and dealing with the conditions, he’s selecting conditions and dealing with a target. Anyone can do that. I’ll bet that when he’s caught you’re going to find he has an Off-the-Shelf weapon with iron sights or the cheapest glass available.”
One thing I have over Brown, I was right.
Now how does one go about gettin on CNN as an Expert?
We should not get too caught up in credentialism as this tends to be the domain of leftists, e.g., “Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman” or “Herman Cain pizza pizza pizza never held office”. Of course, leftists love Roger Ebert’s economic theories, just as surely as they hate hypocrisy. We should avoid this hypocrisy, and let Pat Brown’s idiocy stand on its own, independently of any certifications she may have.
I should add that I was never a fan of the “Obama doesn’t have enough experience” strategy that was used in the last campaign. We see how well that turned out. The focus should have been on his far left record, and the difference between his rhetoric and his votes. Sadly, partially because of the duplicity of the media, and partially because of the idiocy of the GOP, lots of voters decided that a guilt by association campaign was being used with regard to Wright and Ayers. The correct strategy should have been “No, Obama doesn’t believe in US of KKKA rhetoric, but he did go to this church for 20 years for political reasons” and “Obama hangs out with far left professors” not “Obama hangs out with terrorists”. This should have just been part of the campaign, focusing on how his rhetoric did not match his votes on various issues, e.g., abortion. Obama’s record as President has hopefully given the GOP all the campaign talking points anyone could ever ask for, but never underestimate the stupidity of professional politicians.
It’s funny, I consider the media as a whole to be snake oil salesmen. Politicians too. By the standards of the msm, the lady described in the article is a paragon of logic.
Yes! Great detailed factual reporting here. Thank you. (THIS is what PJ Media should be know for, as opposed to its recent unjustified assault on Herman Cain). It reminds me of how the cable kids always go to Jesse “Bloody Shirt”) Jackson or Al “Tawana” Sharpton on ANY story that has a racial political angle. Even Bill O’Reilly does this. It’s sickening.
How is that a conspiracy? Pat Brown presents herself well on television and is a handsome enough woman. That’s how you get appearances on television. People who ramble or make a bad impression don’t make good guests.
It’s possible Fox is humiliating Brown intentionally, or she is an actress who doesn’t believe what she says. Not at all sure what the truth of it is.
You can see her say this same thing on various outlets, including Good Morning America. You can also read her writings on her various blogs. Why are you looking for an explanation other than she doesn’t know what she’s talking about?
Then she shouldn’t be on television. So there must be another factor to consider.
You think people who get on TV are picked because of knowledge and not telegenic performances?
Is she telegenic? To whom? That’s conspiracy talk…
like “jd” above i’ve had a fair amount of experience with firearms, starting as a teenager. i’ve read a multitude of books on the military arms that particulary interest me, and owned, shot, repaired and restored a wide variety of old military rifles and handguns. i’m largely self taught, with the above noted hands on experience, but for all of that i do not put myself out in public as an “expert”, as this “pat brown” person does. she cites no working field experience, just reading a lot. i’ve got a shelf full of books in my field, but i’m still learning, and if, after i pass on, some one calls me a “firearms expert” i’ll climb up the handle of the shovel to deny it.
While I have to agree with you in the spirit of your post, I to do not consider myself an expert in that way, BUT (But Monkey)
.
Unlike Lee Harvey Oswald, I have never qualified for Marksman by a slim one point. In fact I’ve never qualified as a Marksman. Neither have I ever qualified as a Sharpshooter.
Every qualification I’ve ever shot I have only received one ranking.
Expert!
And if I could just get a perfect score off hand I’d have an Expert Ranking with a perfect score. (sitting, kneeling and prone I always have had a perfect score it’s just off hand that kills me usually 2 or 3 off of perfect.)
.
So Technically I am a rifle (and pistol) Expert.
That aside, I to am always learning new and interesting stuff and do not consider myself to have ‘arrived.’
Spent 21 years in the Navy, was armed only when standing topside watches on subs.
I mention to people frequently that the United States has the world’s only unarmed armed forces. In South America, every soldier walking around on the street in uniform, on or off base, is armed. And presumably, locked and loaded.
THi nk of it for a moment. When was the last time you saw a soldier, sailor, airman or Marine with a firearm in public? You probablt haven’t.
I agree we should arm out military a little bit (lot bit) more.
The Process where the Network News appoints a know nothing expert has been going on since it was CBS and NBC Radio only seventy or eighty years ago. I think that it is a weakness of the medium and not something that anything can be done about.
There is always going to be reasons having to do with population and time of day why the news will broadcast out of New York and Washington DC and there are always going to be reasons hoeing to do with commerce and the cost of living why real experts will not live in either city.
As shows become more collections of videos exchanged over the Internet and then posted to the Internet the quality will improve but that will take time,
It goes beyond that, there is also the tendency to promote those who have proven themselves incapable in the past as well.
In 1981 Ted Kennedy stood on the floor of the Senate and declared that Ronald Reagan’s energy policy would result in $5.00 Gallon Gasoline by 1986!
When Gasoline was $0.99 in 1986 the media turned to Ted Kennedy to prognosticat about Reagan’s plans for Social Secruity, his previous record speaking for itself.
In 1997 the Media went to Ted again to help out with the effects of opening ANWR to drilling.
Mary Jo was not available for comment.
Thank you for finally being a news outlet that is calling out this woman for the charlatan that she is. Many of us have complained to news outlets to stop putting her on, but for some reason people like Nancy Grace put her on the air. She is a media whore.
If you want to read more about how she is taunting and harassing the McCann family, check out
http://thehoundingofthemccans.blogspot.com/2011/11/ms-brown-posted-on-haverbennetts-forum.html
She is suing them for libel when they haven’t EVER said anything about her.
The comment about Madeleine being the gift that keeps on giving was utterly sickening. She sits at her computer all day schilling her e-book and egging on her minions to harass and bully anyone that doesn’t agree with her depraved theories.
The gift to Pat, that never stops giving.
Victimizing Victims
Pat Brown has cornered that niche market.
Agreement with the unworkable policies of Leftism is the sole criteria of expertise. I may add,as is intelligence. Have you noticed how everyone who believes in huge government is intelligent, and whoever questions that prejudice is stupid? Ahem, speaking of stupidity !
This sort of thing is manufactured by the corporate plutocracy to distract the public from the real (social) causes of crime.Individual psychology means nothing, only the social forces of poverty and availability of guns.
When health care and food are not rights, but devices of death are,it is no wonder so many who live in unimaginable poverty, without food or shelter, and whose relatives are dying of treatable conditions but are left to rot becuase they have no insurance use the only right they have–to own guns–to get what they desperately need from a pitless corparchy.
Yes,psychology is meaningless because social forces are what matters. If Americans had a right to food, housing and health care instead of a right to guns crime would disappear. To heck with psychobabble, we need social justice!
So you’re saying people rape others or molest children because their poor? Really? That doesn’t strike you as Victorian moral elitism?
Did Joe Paterno cover up children getting raped because he lacked “social justice” or free health care? This is disgusting crime groupie-ism disguised as radicalism and you know it.
Oh, grow up.
The Soviet Union guaranteed every citizen a job, food, and housing. They banned firearms in the possession of anyone not sufficiently loyal to the Party.
They had a crime rate worse than many cities in the US.
You, sir, are no LovelyEarth.
Does your mom know you’re using her ‘puter again? Good Lord, I hope this is satire.
Americans aren’t “guaranteed” guns, you idiot. As long as your not a felon, drug addict or nuts, you have the right to acquire firearms. Just like food, housing, health care…..
“If Americans had a right to food, housing and health care instead of a right to guns crime would disappear.” Tell that to all the victims of beatings, stabbings and poisonings.
“If Americans had a right to food, housing and health care instead of a right to guns crime would disappear.”
Correct me if I’m wrong… but wouldn’t that fall under the header of “psychology”? I mean, it’s bullshit psychology, for sure. But it’s still psychology.
Please do not turn this into a left vs. right debate. I am left and I can see what this woman is doing.
This is about how people like Pat Brown prey on innocent victims. She laughs about them on her Facebook and Twitter accounts. She makes up sh*t about people and her drones eat it up. Any case that has any sort of media exposure, she “profiles” to get her name attached to it. She is nothing more than a media whore and parasite. She latches herself onto these cases and uses them for her own sick agenda.
What many of us should be doing is getting this woman off the air. We deprive her of oxygen and hopefully she will fade into obscurity.
“Please do not turn this into a left vs. right debate.”
Sorry, it isn’t random chance this woman only shows up on LeftMedia Networks.
This is about Left Leaning agendas and bias of certain Media Outlets.
And thiat is why you will be unable to get her off the air with properly trained profilers.
Actually Megan one of the difference between the left and the right is that I don’t begrudge her making a living. I want to challenge her ideas and claims publicly not limit her ability to make them. I believe in a Republic where all people’s rights are protected from the tyranny of the majority – even Pat Brown’s.
So there is a difference in how we want to handle Brown – which is the left/right issue.
The McCann were never *legally cleared* and Pat Brown has never accused them of murder. Not even in her e-book, that I downloaded and read for myself. The rights and wrongs of the rest of the work of Pat Brown, I cannot comment on as I do not know. But when an article contains such basic inaccuracies, it is very difficult to regard it in seriousness.
The Times of London ran an article in 2008 that’s actually titled Kate and Gerry Mccann cleared over Madeleine Disappearance that explains that. The Times requires a membership I think to see the archives but here’s an abstract
http://current.com/items/89123467_kate-and-gerry-mccann-cleared-over-madeleine-disappearance.htm
Such basic inaccuracies on your part shows that you simply take Brown’s word for it that they’re still suspects. They are not – though authorities may re-open the investigation if new evidence surfaces.
The Times of London is not always an accurate source of information. The same newspaper also wrote that Madeleine died of an overdose of drugs, the article is still there on their web-site for everyone to see. I have not said that the McCann are not suspects – just that they have not been cleared. It was the Portuguese AG who said it. And yes, I have down-loaded and read the Pat brown e-book, so I know exactly what is in it and what is not, there are no accusation of murder in there. I suggest you check your own facts, your own article is quite possibly libellous in some countries.
Then don’t play coy. Tell everyone Pat Brown’s theory of the crime and how that wouldn’t lead to some sort of homicide charges in America.
What does America have to do with it? The crime, if any, took place in Portugal. Maddie McCann I believe to be a citizen of the UK. The McCann can never be cleared until the little girl, or a body, is found and the truth known. I do not say I agree with this. That is how the situation lies, it may be unfair, but that is it. Please do not insult my intelligence, I do not *play* at anything. The life or death of a missing child, is no game for me. I have already said I do not know of the other work of Pat Brown, therefore I cannot or will not comment on that. I do have the right to point out where *facts* are incorrectly used as argument, and that is what I have done. If you cannot accept that then you are as dishonest as you claim Pat Brown to be.
Also why is the Times less credible than Pat Brown, who as I demonstrate above is consistently wrong?
You’ll also notice that I said “crimes they’ve been cleared off” not murder. You should actually read things before criticizing them. But I guess you don’t earn brownie points from a pseudo-celebrity for doing that.
Your “facts” were that I said that she wrote that the McCanns were murderers. I didn’t. Your “facts” were that the McCanns were never legally cleared. They were. Who’s the dishonest one here?
And again, regale us with Brown’s theories and let the audience decide the merit of your claim I’m being libelous.
And you are quite pompous and condescending, and have brought no information except that you have read Pat Brown’s book. That’s it! Case closed!
OK, so if the AG’s archiving dispatch concludes as follows:-
“The archiving of the Process concerning Arguidos GM and KM, because there are NO INDICATION OF THE PRACTICE OF ANY CRIME under the dispositions of article 277 number 1 of the Penal Process Code.”
Would you consider the persons in question cleared or not?
What the Brown followers claim is that nobody can be considered cleared of anything until they have been declared so in a court of law. So here we are, there is no evidence, so they won’t be charged with a crime, hence they can’t be cleared. EVER.
That’s their perverted idea of justice, you are presumed guilty (or at least suspect)until proven INNOCENT, not the other way around.
There are regimes where that idea of justice prevails, I sugggest they move there.
Exactly Tess. If I recall correctly Brown accused Corey Mitchell of making up a tale of his late wife’s abuse when she didn’t like his taste in movies. She has no evidence of this but has never apologized for making up this charge – and her followers still make it.
http://www.crimecrawlers.com/?p=308
The McCann can never be cleared until the little girl, or a body, is found and the truth exposed. It may be unfair, but that is how the situation lies.
But they can be legally cleared – or are you claiming the fact that no one knows for sure what happened or if they’re guilty has legal weight in court. They have been cleared by investigators – you brown lovers may not like that but that’s simply fact.
I can’t be sure you’re not Pat Brown – can she never be cleared of having sock puppets even if I decide their is no evidence you’re her?
But they can be legally cleared – or are you claiming the fact that no one knows for sure what happened or if they’re guilty has legal weight in court. They have been cleared by investigators – you brown lovers may not like that but that’s simply fact.
I can’t be sure you’re not Pat Brown – can she never be cleared of having sock puppets even if I decide their is no evidence you’re her?
Bravo Rob. Someone who finally gets it. Pat Brown can have as many sock puppets as she wants. She can complain all over the Web that she’s being discredited, but at the end of the day, it’s Pat that said, “Madeleine, the gift that keeps on giving…at least to a profiler”. Image of her tweet: http://i41.tinypic.com/29yobk2.jpg
If anyone thinks that’s acceptable they are sick in the head. We are talking about a missing child. A child that is still findable and Pat Brown and her ilk are hindering the search for that child. Madeleine deserves to be found and she deserves to have everyone looking for her. For Pat Brown to write her off in such a callous manner is cruel and inhumane. I will not allow Brown or anyone else to write Madeleine off. She should be called out for her ruthless terrorizing of this family and other victims of crime.
On this we agree 100%. Brown is terrible, and her constant attacks on people to make money are disgusting. The things she says publicly on the web should be enough to discredit her but for some reason it isn’t.
Rob, what I don’t understand is how the networks put her on the air. I can understand they want ratings, but how in the heck does she draw in ratings? Or is it that she speaks in such a manner that no one really understands and she’s just filler? Every time I see her, I change the channel. She literally makes me want to throw-up. She’s so mean and vindictive. Anyone that crosses her is fair game too.
She literally stalked a woman to the point the woman almost committed suicide. Brown used her limited connections and hounded the woman and had her followers do the same. They trashed her reputation, lied about her and said anything and everything they could on the Web about the woman. It was a disgrace. She’s nothing less than a bully and should be brought up on charges for constant harassment of victims.
http://web.archive.org/web/20040816162009/sheprofilers.com/pages/abou/nicegirl.htm
I have met a couple of people who ave that experience with her. My non-expert “profile” of Brown is that she bluffed her way into some fame and is very dedicated to ensuring she remains that way.
For those coming on her defending their idol Brown, please do us all a favor and just stop. Those of us that have been exposed to this hack’s lies for years are not as dimwitted as you are. Mr. Taylor is spot on with his analysis of Ms. Brown. She is a two-bit hack and a fraud. Her lawsuit is without merit. NOT ONCE have the McCanns’ said anything about her.
She has said plenty about them. And to that person above who has said that she hasn’t accused them of murder, I beg to differ. She openly says that Gerry carried Madeleine’s mummified corpse back to the UK. Anyone can read it in her “profile”.
Ms. Brown’s “profile”: http://tinyurl.com/6lzl4n3
Factual Rebuttal: http://tinyurl.com/3r6kuzp
Yes, I bought this crap ’cause I wanted to see what she said. It’s all lies based ofd Internet gossip. She didn’t even bother to read the police files. And yes, they were cleared.
Ms. Brown was notified of the inaccuracies in her profile, but she chose to dig her feet in and entrench herself even further and not admit that she was wrong. That’s the problem with people like her. She’s so Hell-bent on being right that when it slaps her in the face that she’s terribly wrong, she lashes out at victims. She’s done this on numerous occasions. She stalks and harasses victims. She is vindictive and merciless.
http://i51.tinypic.com/2ccpegk.jpg
http://i51.tinypic.com/10h2l3m.jpg
I don’t know about anyone else, but those posts above sound like she’s accusing Gerry and Kate of murder.
Dont forget the ultimate Snake Oil salesman the Affirmative Action Teleprompter Kid the USURPER in Chief Obambi. His whole life story is one big lie which the Lame Stream EneMedia orgasmed over and which no one has ever yet fully exposed for fear of being called a Racist by the left wing moonbats.
Rob, what I would like to see is the main stream media call out this woman for the fraud that she is.
She was told point blank that her ebook was full of lies and yet she continues to shill it all over Facebook and Twitter. If anyone wants to read the rebuttal to her ebook, you can find it here: http://tinyurl.com/3r6kuzp
Even after Brown was notified of the inaccuracies in her profile, but she chose to dig her feet in and entrench herself even further and not admit she is wrong. That’s the problem with people like her. She’s so Hell-bent on being right that when it slaps her in the face that she’s terribly wrong, she lashes out at victims. She’s done this on numerous occasions. She stalks and harasses victims. She is vindictive and merciless. Gerry and Kate McCann just happen to be her latest targets.
House Judiciary Committee Makes SOPA Hearing a SOPA Lovefest November 13, 2011 – by Donny Shaw
http://www.opencongress.org/articles/view/2427-House-Judiciary-Committee-Makes-SOPA-Hearing-a-SOPA-Lovefest
So she’s now posted how we all have it wrong. She’s a saint and she doesn’t stalk and harass victims. She does all of this for the children. Oh, pu-lease! The woman is a parasite and a leech. She is also a pathological liar. I’ve talked with friends at the FBI and Homeland Security and they would not touch her with a ten-foot pole. She’s known in law enforcement as a fraud. Check out her latest ramblings. She goes on and on about how great she is, but she never says any cases she’s actually helped solved. It’s because she hasn’t. She knows no one even wants to associate with her–except for that loser Levi Page.
http://patbrownprofiling.blogspot.com/2011/11/criminal-profiling-topic-of-day-truth.html
I’m going to write to the people I know in the media and beg them to stop giving this woman air time. She’s hurting so many people and this isn’t about free speech. Free speech doesn’t cover bullying, harassment and stalking. We all need to take a stand and not allow this woman or people like her to continue hurting innocent people.
Notice that in her posts it’s all strawman arguments?
Rob Taylor
Notice that in her posts it’s all strawman arguments?
Yes, I did. I loved how she went through all the points, but totally missed what was said. It’s funny how she just makes sh*t up. I loved the part about being there for children.
Pat Brown: Victoria may have suffered a good deal of fear and pain during this slap down but, if she were my kid, the first thing I would have asked her is “Did you deserve it?” And if she did, I would have told her I hope she learned her lesson.
I hope Victoria learned hers.
Criminal Profiler Pat Brown
Where was her support for a child then or her outrage? No, Victoria deserved what she got according to Brown.
And then there’s her blatant hypocrisy.
Here is where the Internet becomes open season for propaganda and disinformation, lies and half-truths that are spread without concern of any penalty, often spread by people whose names are never known. These untruths may be repeated over and remain on the Internet for decades.
She’s the poster-child for misinformation and lies. She sits at her computer all day long spouting lies about people she has never met and cases she’s never been asked to profile. If it’s high-profile, you can bet she will try and get her name attached to it. She says she’s not a media whore, but I beg to differ. She’s nothing less than a media whore. She uses anyone and everyone to get what she wants. If she truly wasn’t in it for the attention, why be on Facebook and Twitter all day? Why have a blog? I believe she has to work pro-bono because no one would pay her for her crap profiles.
What disturbs me even more is that the media outlets in this country put her on and some can say it’s the left-wing media. Fox news is definitely not left-wing. The media in this country thinks we are all a bunch of illiterate idiots. That’s why they can put people like Brown on the air. She uses buzz words and reads up a little on a case and then spouts off what other commentators say. In the McCann case, she didn’t even bother to read the police files. She went straight to the Internet and thought she knew the case. She’s so off the mark on this particular case that I do hope the UK media picks it up. The UK media is merciless and they will pick her apart for her lies and deluded theories. I mean come on….really? Gerry McCann took Madeleine’s corpse back to the UK in a duffle bag?
She also says in her I’m a saint blog post that if she wanted to make money, she would jump on the WM3 or McCann bandwagon. I’m not certain how she thinks that’s some sort of gravy train. From what I understand, it’s the people that oppose the McCanns that have tried to make money off of Madeleine and Brown is no exception, except she’s told everyone she’s in it for the money. See tweets…
http://tinyurl.com/6opkx2j
http://tinyurl.com/8y55jyp
If she truly didn’t care about the money, then why is she going after the McCanns? She’s doing it for money. That whole freedom of speech rant is a smokescreen. CR asked Amazon to pull the leaflet and Brown had the opportunity to work it out, she chose not to. AND she’s still selling her book on Barnes & Noble and Smashwords. So how have they hindered her business prospects?
It shall be interesting to see what happens. I believe this lawsuit is a total fabrication. Something else more interesting will come about here in the US and she will latch onto that. Watch this space…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Offender_profiling
Murder inquiries may be misled or delayed by psychologists who see themselves as real-life Crackers, researchers claim.
Police forces routinely ask behavioural scientists to draw up profiles of killers who are still at large, based on a knowledge of the victim and details recorded at the crime scene.
But according to a team of psychologists at Birmingham City University, the practice of offender profiling is deeply unscientific and risks bringing the field into disrepute.
In many cases, offender profiles are so vague as to be meaningless, according to psychologist Craig Jackson. At best, they have little impact on murder investigations; at worst they risk misleading investigators and waste police time, he said.
The origins of profiling can be traced back to as early as the Middle Ages, with the inquisitors trying to “profile” heretics.