Tuesday, January 20, 2026

Atlanta Serial Killer Memories (Wayne Williams and Gary Michael Hilton)

                                       The boardwalk and lake of Murphey Candler Park


Murphey Candler Park in the Atlanta, Georgia suburb of Brookhaven is a 135-acre outdoor lovers' treasure. Manicured baseball fields, a small football stadium, hiking trails, a fishing lake, public swimming pool, tennis court, and playgrounds are some of the recreational features of this popular site. I grew up there, in the suburb of Chamblee. My family lived in one of the multiple intertwining neighborhoods surrounding the park for eight years, in the mid-1970s through the early '80s. Some of the happiest years of my life were spent at the Murphey Candler amenities. On the playground, the other neighborhood kids and I got dizzy holding on for survival on the merry-go-round, burned our legs on the hot metal slide, and launched ourselves off the swings to see who could achieve the furthest landing. In the summers, I was at the pool, following a strict, self-imposed regimen of laps, solo synchronized swimming choreography, and diving practice. I can still taste the delight of Zero candy bars and syrupy, food coloring-drizzled snow cones my visiting cousins and I would order from the concession stand during "Adult Swim." With its dozens of covered picnic benches, Murphey Candler is also the perfect setting to celebrate a birthday. One year, my parents rented ponies for my sibling's birthday party. We enjoyed pony races on the banks of the lake, slurped popsicles, and cut the birthday cake under one of the picnic pavilions. 

Generation X knows the fun of having grown up with minimal adult supervision. If you resided in the suburbs like I did, you probably had even more freedom than city kids. There was a built-in sense of safety living in middle-class suburbia because you were surrounded at all times by houses, houses occupied by neighbors you were friendly with and trusted. When kids weren't in school, church, or at extra-curricular activities, parents rarely knew where the young'ins were most weekends, school-vacation days, and summers - except for that one week of sleep-away camp - nor did they worry. There was a sub-conscious assurance that children were in the company of other kids - riding bikes on low-speed, low-traffic residential streets, playing in one of the neighbor's basements, or jumping on somebody's trampoline without permission or safety netting - and they'd be home either for dinner or when the buzzing street lights flickered on. Gen X'ers were dropped off at a myriad of public venues - the park, the pool, the roller rink, the arcade, the movies, the mall, Six Flags and other attractions - with a little spending money and a quarter to call home from a pay phone when we were ready to be picked up in Mom's station wagon or Dad's convertible. 

Even inside this idyllic, insulated bubble of life, this safe haven of childhood, though, brushes with counter-culture and a slightly more criminal element were inevitable on the outskirts of a growing metropolitan like Atlanta (or, "Greater Atlanta"). At the end of my neighborhood's cul-de-sac, one that backed into the woods of Murphey Candler Park, a rough motorcycle gang would frequently hang out in the 1970s, drinking beer and smoking who-knows-what. Nothing untoward ever happened, but my friends and I would make the turn-around on our bicycles well before the cul-de-sac, just in case one of the leather-jacketed biker guys decided to jump out of the bushes and snatch us. 

One afternoon, my next door neighbor Natalie (a classic Gen X latch-key kid) arrived home from school and called me, puzzled. "Um, I think my house has been robbed. . . ." she said. My mom grabbed the phone from my hands and urged Natalie to get out of the house, lest the burglars still be inside, and she'd call 911. Fortunately, the thugs had already vacated the house and Natalie was safe.

Another incident occurred when my friend Leslie and I, both age seven or so, were walking around the neighborhood together and a beat-up car pulled alongside us. We were suspicious as soon as we saw the car; it didn't look - or sound - like the vehicles we were familiar with. A white guy in his twenties rolled down the passenger window and leaned over the seat.

"Can you give me directions to the Sing store?" he requested. (Sing was a nearby convenience mart the local kids often walked to to buy candy and soda). 

We tried to provide driving directions out of the winding neighborhood, but the guy wasn't following along. "I don't understand," he said, "Can you get in the car and show me the way?" 

"No," we refused, shaking our heads. After he drove off, we rolled our eyes and scoffed at his lame kidnapping attempt. We may have been sheltered kids, but we weren't gullible! 

I was likely younger than seven when some neighborhood girls and I encountered a pervert in Murphey Candler Park. We were the only ones strolling through the playground section of the park that day when we came upon a man with his pants down, facing away from us and toward some trees. He was white, looked to be in his thirties. As we passed behind him, a distance away, he suddenly became aware he wasn't alone in the park and yanked up his pants, shuffling a few steps from his spot. We kept moving and somebody whispered, "He's jerking off."

A little younger than the other girls, I was clueless what they were talking about. "What's he doing?" I asked.

"He's playing with himself," they explained. I figured things out quickly. 

"Or he could be peeing," another friend suggested. 

After passing him, I looked back over my shoulder and saw the man had once again dropped his pants and returned to his spot, facing the trees. 

"He's doing it again!" I gasped. We continued laughing about the lone weirdo the rest of our outing. I wondered why, after he'd been noticed, he didn't move away to a more secluded location to finish up his
. . . business.

"He probably got turned on from seeing a bunch of young girls," someone mused. This reasoning was both disturbing and sobering.

As the neighborhood kids grew up, the oldest of my social circle, Margaret, began babysitting. One night she was sitting the two boys next door to my family when she called our house, panicked and screaming, "Please help me! I just got a call on the Wrights' phone, and a man said he's outside watching me! He said he's going to break in and get me and the kids!" I didn't hear the phone conversation; I just saw my dad tearing out the front door. Stepping outside, I saw Mr. Colepeper also racing toward the Wright house from across the street. Margaret must've been terrified. My dad and Mr. Colepeper stayed with her until Mr. and Mrs. Wright arrived home later that night. In the early eighties, there was no *69 and no Caller I.D., so it was never determined who the caller was; I heard the adults rationalizing later that it was probably a schoolmate of Margaret's, prank calling her. Maybe; but if you grew up hearing about or seeing the movie When a Stranger Calls (1979) and remember the repeat caller asking the babysitter over and over, "Have you checked the children?" you take anonymous babysitting messages very seriously.


Me, Summer 1980, age 8, posing on my mom's way-cool station wagon. Loved my banana-seat bicycle! Dig the garage door curtains - my parents had converted the garage into a playroom for us kids when we moved in. My hard-working dad did all our yard work, every weekend, while listening to the Atlanta Falcons games on a transistor radio attached to his lawn mower.


Each of these minor, illicit events was trivial, however, compared to what gripped the city of Atlanta beginning in 1979: The Atlanta Child Murders. That's the moniker history gave it. At the time, the case was called the Missing and Murdered Children of Atlanta. And I, in my free-spirited, fun-loving, Gen X world of roller-skating, Barbies, Olivia Newton-John, Halloween-themed birthday parties, Nancy Drew, garage disco dances, side ponytails, and Gloria Vanderbilt jeans, grew up in close proximity to all the horror.

The population of Atlanta has always been predominantly black. Consequently, when raised there, kids don't process information through a racial or cultural lens, whether they're black or white. Even during the seventies and eighties, when blacks primarily lived in downtown Atlanta (or Atlanta proper) and whites mainly lived in the suburbs (i.e., Greater Atlanta), natives didn't discern residential division. Atlanta had been a central location for the Civil Rights Movement; Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was - and still is - revered by the city; and, since the sixties, Atlanta has stood out as an exemplary American metropolitan for the commercial prosperity and local government representation of people of color. Therefore, when the children of Atlanta began disappearing in the summer of 1979, it didn't register in my seven-year-old brain that black children in downtown were going missing; children in the city where I lived were being abducted - and it was frightening.

News of the abductions and murders was impossible to miss at the time, even for youngsters like me who didn't watch or read the news. With children, teens, and several young adults (mostly males) being murdered at an alarming rate of approximately one a month for nearly two years, the tragic epidemic was familiar not only to every Atlantan, but eventually to the whole country, as well. My neighborhood friends and I would discuss whatever bits and pieces we'd learned, passing on developments to one another. But I don't recall parents or teachers talking to us about it, nor receiving any safety lessons, even though I, on rare occasions, felt vulnerable. My mom told me years later that she and my dad weren't worried for my sibling's and my safety because it was children of color who were being targeted. Understandable. (Though my parents were always open to discussing any subject we might have questions about, it wasn't a common practice back then for parents to introduce a family dialogue about current affairs or to ask kids how they "felt" about mature matters.) A friend I made in high school said that during the murder spree, she'd feared summer whitewater rafting excursions through Atlanta along the Chattahoochee River because bodies were being dumped in the river; she imagined coming upon corpses bobbing on the water's surface. Clearly, the violent ordeal was on the minds of Atlanta's Gen X'ers far more than adults realized.

Before the invention of cable TV in the early 1980s, there were really only three TV channels; although in Atlanta, we had four, with TBS. Therefore, people didn't watch much TV during the weekdays, unless you were home sick from school. But Friday nights were a network juggernaut, and my family would gather around the huge, wood-encased console television every Friday night to view The Dukes of Hazzard (which was filmed in several towns outside of Atlanta), The Incredible Hulk, and Dallas. Many Saturday nights, we tuned in to CHiPsThe Love Boat, and Fantasy Island. It was during these weekend nights - when a later bedtime was permitted and we were lounging in front of the tube - that my most vivid memory from the Atlanta Child Murders case developed. Every night, seven days a week, for two years, a public service announcement was broadcast across Atlanta TV stations, just before 10:00 network programming: It's 10 P.M. Do you know where your children are? asked the ominous voice as the same words lit up the screen. It was in those moments that I - and probably all Atlantans - was most haunted by the disappearance of so many kids throughout the city.



One very undignified event related to the case left an indelible stain on Atlanta media history during this era. Two Atlanta radio d.j.s were performing their live afternoon show and made the following announcement over the air waves: 

"This next song is dedicated to all the missing and murdered children of Atlanta." 

They then played Queen's hit song, Another One Bites the Dust. . . . and were immediately fired on-air. I personally didn't hear the show, but everyone was talking about it afterwards.

In early 1980, at age eight, I became seriously immersed in year-round, competitive baton twirling, which I'd been training at for three years. Then, at the beginning of the 1980-1981 academic year that autumn, I transferred to a new school to start third grade. The murder epidemic was still rampant and heavily covered by local and national media; but I was involved in new experiences, and, thus, took less and less notice of it. I remember learning of Wayne Williams's arrest in June 1981; but by the time of his trial in early 1982, the case had faded to mere background noise in my adolescent life. 

Decades later, with a faint twinge of fear toward the boogeyman of my childhood, I revisited the case, cursorily. I was surprised to discover that, despite the high victim count associated with the Atlanta Child Murders and Wayne Williams (28-30 victims), very little attention is paid to the case in the true crime community. Whether it's because Williams adamantly denies any involvement (and is, thus, a dead-end interviewee), or because he's a rather uncharismatic serial killer, or because few believe Williams is responsible for all the murders and recognize the nearly insurmountable prosecutorial task of proving other suspects' culpability in several-to-many of the homicides, true crime enthusiasts seem to have very little interest in studying or discussing this case. What a shame; none of Atlanta's murdered children ever received justice, as Williams was convicted for the murders of only two young men.


 The murdered children, teens, and young men of Atlanta, 1979-1981; beyond heartbreaking

-   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   - 

My family moved away from Chamblee and nearby Murphey Candler Park in 1984. Sixteen years later, I moved back, this time to Dunwoody, another Atlanta suburb, adjacent to the one Murphey Candler is part of. I had dogs now and began visiting all the parks in north Atlanta that offered lengthy, wooded trails on which we could hike. And so I returned to the grand park of my adolescence and started building new, equally happy memories there as a single, twenty-nine-year-old dog mom. Frequently, my mutts, Skye and Angel (a.k.a., "Little Tubbs"), and I hiked the loop-the-lake path and began getting to know the other regular dog walkers and park visitors. After five years of adventures, "Little Tubbs" passed away in '05. I rescued a beagle, Boomer, the following year; then he, too, joined Skye and me on all our park outings.

One afternoon in early January 2008, my parents dropped by my home for a visit. Knowing I didn't watch or read the news, they wanted to apprise me of a new, urgent story.

"Be very careful the next time you visit Murphey Candler," they warned. "A man has a warrant out for his arrest for murdering a young woman New Year's Day in the north Georgia mountains. Police don't know where the suspect currently is, but he's recently lived in his van at Murphey Candler."

They likely reported a few other details of what little they knew of the case. But it didn't take much more description; I guessed right away, "That's gotta be Gary."

I don't remember when, during the seven-year period of 2000 - 2007, that I first met who today is known as Gary Michael Hilton, the National Forest Serial Killer. But I must've known him for a couple of years. In 2007, I didn't see him much; it was a sickly year for me and - as I later learned - Hilton was busy killing people in North Carolina and Florida during the latter part of the year. 2006 was definitely the last year I encountered him regularly.

I saw Gary before I met him. I likely heard about Gary before I met him, too. You see, everyone at Murphey Candler knew Gary (and not because he was a jovial, likable fella). Gary was decidedly unlikable, very disgruntled, contentious, and very peculiar. He hiked around the park carrying enough camping gear on his back for a month's sojourn, which stood out because Murphey Candler has no camp grounds and the loop-the-lake trail is only about a 40-minute walk (unless a visitor chooses to circle the lake twice, as many do - but that still didn't necessitate all the effects Gary carried). Gary walked with his golden retriever, Dandy, who was reddish in color, and quite pretty. Gary also traversed the property with a high quality camera around his neck and, according to rumor, a police baton strapped to his side.


Gary and all his camping gear; unknown location; unknown photo credit


Word was getting around about this stranger.

"Hey, Cynthia!" a park regular waved to me one day as she approached. "Have you seen that guy with the golden retriever?" She described Gary.

"Oh, yeah," I replied. "I think I have."

"Well, be careful around him with your dogs off-leash." (I had an irresponsible habit back then of letting my dogs roam the parks without restraint. Everyone at Murphey Candler was cool about it, but it was still illegal.)

"Why is that?" I asked.

"Well, the guy has been hiding in bushes around the park, taking pictures of people. He claims it's to catch dog owners with their dogs off-leash to report to police; but some of us think he's secretly taking pictures of women," my friend informed me.

"Oh, wow! OK. Thanks for the heads-up," I said, slightly alarmed. "What's this guy's name?"

"We don't know yet," she shrugged. "Everyone just calls him 'The Photographer.'"

Eventually I met Gary face to face and introduced myself and my dogs, who liked Dandy. Dandy was very sweet, good with other dogs, and let strangers pet him. Gary looked to be in his sixties (he turned 60 in 2006), was average height and weight for a man, had very short, balding grey hair and rough, grey beard stubble. What stood out about Gary was his huge, piercing blue eyes; they were sinister-looking. (Years after Hilton's arrest, when his full criminal history was uncovered, those unforgettable, menacing eyes had me convinced Hilton had begun killing long before the 2007 date authorities suspected.)

Never one to shy away from a purported trouble-maker, antagonizer, or outcast, I decided on an approach with Gary contrary to everyone else's: being friendly while betraying no guardedness. Despite Gary's surly, brash demeanor, I reasoned that if I were nice and respectful toward him, he would reciprocate the treatment. So I'd wave and call hello to him at the park, or if we crossed paths, I'd stop, pet Dandy, and exchange dog chitchat. It was no different than how I socialized with any acquaintance at various stomping grounds. He wasn't personable or relatable, but he was decent to me. 


Gary and Dandy, always in the woods; unknown location; photo posted in subReddit, r/serialkillers, by u/Kbudz


One day, Gary and I were starting on the trail at the same time and ended up walking alone together for the entire loop around the lake. Gary launched into whatever profanity-laced grievances he was resentful about. He seemed an all-around angry person. He talked about his past experience serving in the armed forces. I can't remember if he told me he'd been involved in combat during the Vietnam War or not, but if so, it would've been a lie, I now know. As we walked - my dogs on-leash this time! - and chatted, I became aware as we entered more isolated sections of the trail - ones farthest from the park's two front entrances - that if Gary and his police baton were to have a go at me, it would happen here. So I was little uneasy at brief times. However, I knew the chances of my being attacked were quite slim; I was very obese during this stage of my life and concluded an assailant would have a very difficult task hauling my body - alive or dead - to a more concealed area.

I came away from our interaction with the distinct impression Gary might have PTSD or a brain injury. Whatever it was, he was definitely imbalanced. As anti-climactic as the story is, I can honestly say I never felt unsafe during my private walk with Gary Michael Hilton. Except for his creepy eyes, he didn't scare me; plus, the park was - and is - simply too populated during the late afternoon and evening hours when I would visit to be an ideal location for attacking a woman without attracting potential eye witnesses.

That was the one and only time I hiked alone with this future serial killer; but our encounters continued, as did more stories about Gary. My friend Hayes, who wasn't a walker but patronized Murphey Candler almost daily with her elderly mother, Molly, to feed the ducks, told me once that the regulars had called the cops on Gary for severely abusing Dandy. I never saw anything but affection from Gary toward Dandy, and was angered and saddened to learn such news. Whatever transpired during the police's on-scene arrival, Dandy remained with Gary every time I saw them thereafter. One day I had paused on the path, talking to some of the regulars, when suddenly we heard a blood-curdling scream coming from the other side of a small hill. Shortly, an extremely irate, attractive young woman emerged, storming over the hill toward us. Then we saw Gary, trailing behind the woman, who yelled again over her shoulder, "LEAVE ME THE FUCK ALONE!" She seemed to be speaking with a Russian dialect, and couldn't get away fast enough from Gary, who by now had hung his head, was lagging, and said nothing. Though we never heard of Gary harming anyone during his stint at Murphey Candler, this incident stayed with me, and I wondered exactly what anti-social behavior Gary must've exhibited to upset the woman so much.

When I rescued my dog Boomer in '06, I knew nothing about beagles. Specifically, I knew nothing about beagles' hunting instincts and behaviors. So, of course, I just continued the practice of unleashing my dogs at parks the way I'd been doing for years. Problems with Boomer soon developed: if he scented wildlife, he would go tearing off after it, barking his head off. Beagles are bred to track an animal, corner it by forcing it either up a tree or into a ground hole, and yelp loudly and continuously until a hunter locates the dog and easily shoots the trapped animal. Only then will beagles cease their baying. Many times when Boomer charged after his prey through the woods, I could not physically follow him, as he'd be down a ravine or among thorny, unnavigable brush. Sometimes I could hear his baying, but I couldn't find him. And then a few other times, Skye and I would find ourselves alone in the woods late at night - 10, 11:00, 11:30 - calling for Boomer and searching for him. I had no idea that it was during that first year with Boomer - 2006 - Gary Michael Hilton was living in his van, in the Murphey Candler swimming pool parking lot, 20-30 feet from the loop-the-lake trail that led a short distance to the patch of woods I was searching. I only learned that little factoid less than two years later - shortly before his arrest on January 8, 2008 - when my parents came over to warn me about the fugitive in the news. Thank you, Lord, for your divine protection, despite my obstinance, irresponsibility, and risk-taking.


My babies, Boomer (left) and Skye (right); photo taken in January 2008


After Hilton's arrest, a park regular told me she'd been one of two callers who'd identified Gary and his van while he was evading authorities. After he'd killed the young hiker and dumped her dismembered body in the north Georgia park of Dawson Forest, Hilton had returned to the Atlanta suburb of Brookhaven and was cleaning out his van at a gas station not far from Murphey Candler, when the woman who knew him from the park, as well as a man who'd seen the news, recognized him. They phoned authorities immediately, and Hilton was apprehended at the gas station. 

We were all appalled as discovery of additional murder victims linked to Hilton in other states was released to the public. In total, there were four victims. My friend Hayes - the one who'd told me the story about Gary's abusing his dog Dandy - and I devised a plan to retaliate against Gary. We wanted to visit the jail where he was temporarily incarcerated, sit across from him with the partition between us, and taunt him over the visitors' prison phones: "We have Dandy. You have no idea what we're doing to him nor can you stop us. You will never see Dandy again."

Gary would've punched through the partition to strangle us if he could have; Dandy meant so much to him. But Hayes and I never followed through.


         Gary Michael Hilton, the National Forest Serial Killer. This was how he looked when I knew him.

-   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -   -

The last of my dogs, Skye, passed away in 2010, and I didn't rescue another one for 12.5 more years. But I continued to frequent Murphey Candler, mainly the surrounding neighborhoods where my family once lived, as they provided multiple, rigorous hills for a runner to train on. (I'd lost one hundred pounds in recent years and began competing in triathlon and road races.) My bestie often joined me at Murphey Candler, and we nicknamed the park "Serial Killer Hike." Hey "Homeboy," I'd text her, wanna join me for Serial Killer Hike? 

Approximately five years after Hilton's arrest, I visited the hiking destination where he'd abducted the young woman, Meredith Emerson, killing her several days later. Ironically, the site is called Blood Mountain; it's part of Georgia's Chattahoochee National Forest. With picturesque views from the 4,461-foot summit and the challenging, roughly 1,400-foot/2.5-mile hike up a steep incline, Blood Mountain became my favorite hiking destination. During my numerous visits, I never took the time to search for the possible area of the trail where Hilton overcame Meredith. "Homeboy" and I were too busy racing up the mountainside like maniacs to see how fast we could summit; it was too imperative we surpass our past records to be deterred, sleuthing the terrain.


Me on Blood Mountain, October 25. 2015, either at or near the peak; photo credit "Homeboy"


In 2023, I rescued an aggressive-breed dog, and she, too, has experienced many adventures at the same Atlanta parks - plus some newly discovered ones - I've been visiting off-and-on during the last twenty-five years as a Dunwoody resident. I keep this dog on-leash, though, for the safety of all park-goers and their pets! I don't speak as much as I did twenty years ago to other dog owners while we're walking; it's best to keep "Cujo" moving. I think about Gary from time to time; I've even contemplated visiting him on death row in Florida to see if I can coax earlier murder confessions out of him. I delight in the fantasy that had "Cujo" met Gary all those years ago, she would've mauled him and lives would've been saved. Too late now; instead, I am content knowing I'm safer than I've ever been hiking in the woods with her by my side.

I never saw any of the Murphey Candler Park regulars of the early 2000s after Skye died in 2010. But January 1st of this new year, 2026, I chose "Cujo's" and my New Year's Day hiking site as Murphey Candler. Meredith Emerson, whose last hiking day of her life was New Year's 2008, was on my mind. I never knew her, but my cousin, K.T., had taken martial arts lessons with her; she was traumatized for years by Meredith's murder. As I was padding along the trail, I suddenly recognized - first, one; a little later, another; then, yet another - three of the old park regulars from twenty years ago. There was Bill and Lucy's dad and Chloe's mom! (In dog world, you remember dog names better than pet-owner names.) Of course, their own babies had long since passed away. They didn't seem to register facial recognition of me like I did them, and, like I said, I'm not as outgoing as I was in my youth. So I kept moving, my heart a bit warmer and more uplifted having seen them. Maybe they, too, were visiting the park where they had also known Gary in order to pay quiet homage to Meredith. 

One thing I know after fifty years of patronage is the somewhat mystical force of Murphey Candler - be it the fond memories or the tranquility of nature in the middle of an otherwise bustling city - lures many of its lovers back to the park, time and time again. The inevitable changes in life are not always welcome, particularly the infiltration of toxic elements, no matter how temporal. During those seasons, something offering stability and sanctuary is often craved. Murphey Candler Park has been such a source for me, and my connection to its timeless landscape is too deep-rooted to ever fray.


Murphey Candler Park, as photographed seven years ago by a now-deleted Reddit user and posted in the subReddit, r/Atlanta 

* Some names have been changed to protect privacy. *


Copyright © (2026) Cynthia Walker. All Rights Reserved.

Saturday, December 21, 2024

LOATHING NICHOL KESSINGER by DREW B.


This outstanding article by guest writer Drew B. was originally posted on another blog in December 2019, where it generated thousands of views and abundant feedback. It even prompted the interest of podcast Team Phoenix, where an abridged version of the article was read aloud by host Chris W., with a follow-up live episode in which author Drew B. made an appearance to discuss the Chris Watts case. As the article offers a critical perspective of Nichol Kessinger's connection to the Watts crime, True Crime, True Life™ blog is proud to feature such a resource to the study of this case. 

1.) "Loathing Nichol Kessinger....Watts Maligned Mistress" Team Phoenix episode: 
2.) "Interview with Tania Hagan, Author of 'No Inclination' inspired by the Chris Watts case" Team Phoenix live episode (Drew B. appears beginning at 53:55):


"Loathing Nichol" 

Part 1.

By Drew B.


"There is perhaps no phenomenon which contains so much destructive feeling as 'moral indignation,' which permits envy or hate to be acted out under the guise of virtue."

--Erich Fromm: Man For Himself: An Inquiry into the Psychology of Ethics.


"Hypocrisy is the homage vice pays to virtue."

--Francois de La Rochefoucauld


"Show me there's a reason for your wanting me to die, You're far to keen and where and how, but not so hot on why."

--Andrew Lloyd Weber and Tim Rice: Gethsemane


While somewhat late to a detailed study of this case, I have recently spent some time attempting to better understand the tragic and somewhat incomprehensible classification of murder known as familicide. Familicide occurs when a perpetrator (the majority of which are men) murders multiple family members. Familicide is generally premeditated and often concludes when the perpetrator commits suicide. Today, familicide is better understood but there is still a great deal about these rare cases that leave researchers with two questions for every answer. There is no doubt that these cases are as complicated as they are destructive. 


In the early morning hours of August 13, 2018, Christopher Watts committed familicide when he murdered his wife Sha'nann (34) and fifteen weeks pregnant, and daughters Bella (4) and Celeste (3). Later that morning he disposed of their bodies at his petroleum industry field worksite. Missed almost immediately by close friends and business associates due to Sha'nann's ever-present social media activity, as well as a missed appointment with a physician, Watts initially claimed that Sha'nann and his daughters were out on a play date with friends.


From his first contact with law enforcement (who were called to conduct a welfare check at the Wattses Frederick, CO home) his peculiar and dispassionate behavior made him an immediate suspect. That Sha'nann left behind her vehicle (with car seats) her purse, cell phone, medications etc..., did nothing but add to a rapidly growing suspicion that Chris Watts had done something truly awful. He settled on a strategy of playing dumb and oblivious. 


His story was a nightmare of speculative improbabilities and a poorly executed strategy of narrative misdirection and obfuscation. Watts, though tragically lethal, was also shockingly inept. As the investigation surrounding the whereabouts of his missing family intensified, scrutiny of his implausible story and general insouciance began to dictate the tone of the investigation. After several unconvincing media interviews, lengthy questioning by local, state and federal authorities (including both the Colorado Bureau of Investigation [CBI] and the FBI) Watts agreed to sit for a polygraph examination. He was informed by authorities that he'd not only failed but that he was perhaps one of the worst liars in the history of polygraphs. Whether his results were reported accurately (or he was bluffed) he quickly began to unravel.


Watts has told several versions of the murders and what occurred (including a staggeringly idiotic version in which he claimed to have killed Sha'nann in a reflexive rage response to Sha'nann killing their young daughters) but eventually Watts confessed to murdering his family. As part of his confession and plea deal with the Weld County Colorado D.A., Sha'nann's own family asked that the prosecution set aside the possibility of Watts receiving the death penalty. Watts will spend the rest of his life in prison. 


During the initial investigation of his then missing family, authorities discovered that Watts had been involved in a two month affair with a thirty-one year old female co-worker. Her name is Nichol Kessinger. She might be the most hated woman in America. Rooted in a bitter mixture of karmic permissibility and a refillable script of selective indignation, loathing Nichol has become a morbid form of sport. And it's become a problem.


While Nichol was in fact involved in a romantic affair with Chris Watts, and while her initial reaction to realizing that Chris Watts had likely wiped out his entire family, Kessinger did attempt to both hide the affair and clean up electronic links to the affair. It didn't look particularly good, but it was absolutely understandable. It was self-preservation and it was unapologetically efficient. It raises some questions but it doesn't come close to revealing a co-conspirator. As such, authorities have not charged Nichol Kessinger with a single crime related to the murders of Sha'nann, Bella, and Celeste. Not a single criminal charge. Prior to the confession that led to his being sentenced, Watts never came close to suggesting that anyone else was involved in the planning, commission, or concealment of his murders.


One of the most fascinating, and sadly overlooked aspects of Nichol Kessinger's proximity to such a horrible crime is less about who she is a person and more about what she came to represent to the case in relation to the victims and the motivation of their husband/father murderer. In a number of comments and opinions (found in various social media posts/video comment sections) discussing Kessinger and the case, people tend to avoid trying to understand Kessinger the person. I'm not surprised. The totality of her life has been edited down to a moment of her life. This moment of her life strikes at the very core of what those who hate her most, need most from her. To justify their understandable moral outrage directed at Watts, some have felt compelled to bolster their social media witch-hunting cred by insisting that Kessinger, even if not directly involved, is no less guilty than Watts himself. In their need to understand the why of such a terrible crime, they need the fuse, and the match that provided the spark. They need Kessinger to be a shallow and reprehensible family-jacking whore with no morals and no integrity. Once she is all of those things, it requires just a small step forward to call her a murderer. And even if the latter is never proven criminally, they draw comfort from a moral failure conviction for the former.


Thinking of her as a flawed human being who willingly got involved in an affair with a then married man (who spent a great deal of his time convincing her that his marriage was fractured and damaged beyond repair) humanizes her. Those who advocate for her being "convicted," are always more sure of the need for a desired outcome than they are about legal requirements and due process. The idea that a man capable of murdering his wife and young children might also be capable of manipulating a female colleague into believing that his marriage was over, is completely lost on them. That Kessinger was naive, impetuous, and far too romantically optimistic is, without a doubt, a fair charge. I very much doubt that she would attempt a defense of such a statement. But even if true in a manner that reveals character traits conducive to situationally suspect moral fiber, it's miles away from legal or moral responsibility for the obliteration of a family.


Those who hate Nichol Kessinger for participating in an affair cannot separate the affair from the murders. This is usually sidestepped in a blizzard of nonsensical word salad that nearly always fails to admit that what they really want simply isn't feasible. They want to lock away what she represents. She represents fear. The fear of profound personal betrayal (haven't we all had moments of anxiety as it relates to the fragility of marital/relationship fidelity) and doesn't that fear strike at the very things (e.g., esteem, self confidence, self worth, and trust) we attempt to protect most? Once the terrible truth about Watts and the savage murder of his family was flashed to our media saturated lives, "case-canon," was inevitable. Justice for the murdered was rightfully demanded. But what of the other woman? The hatred and suspicion was automatic. Again, what followed was predictable. "She did this. She caused this. SHE has blood on HER hands. She is just as guilty as Chris." That small step taken, presumption of innocence was replaced by an assumption of guilt. 


The initial script read:


"Because Kessinger participated in an affair with a married man, who then killed his wife and kids, she too is guilty. She seduced him. He's the monster but she was in the lab cooking up the psychopathy. This is what happens when you target and stalk a beautiful family. She's evil, awful, disgusting (once on a roll, the insult/adjective dam usually fails, flooding the landscape with invective) and that family would probably be alive today if she hadn't forced her way in. She used her body and sexuality to lure him. She wanted what Sha'nann had."


This is basically the blindfolded masses drunkenly and wildly swinging at logical fallacy pinatas. 


Not only does this provide a disgusting level of cover to Chris Watts (more on that later) it ignores the deeper questions. If a six-eight week affair caused an otherwise mentally healthy father and husband to annihilate his family, why is this outcome the exception and not the rule? If some hold that Watts killed his family in order to secure a relationship with a "willing," Kessinger, why can't the argument be made that he would have killed them in order to change the mind of an unwilling Kessinger? We know the actual circumstances that led to his decision to kill his family. But we don't know that those were the only circumstances that would have resulted in similar actions with a modified reason. His cowardice compelled him to identify a reason. That doesn't mean he wasn't pathetic enough to make those reasons malleable. 


The narrative set, many thought it would only be a matter of weeks before Kessinger would be arrested and tried as an accomplice. But it didn't happen. Unwilling to even entertain the idea that authorities simply found no evidence that warranted criminal charges, newly created YouTube channels offered the 120-minute criminology degree with a minor in identifying each of the 2,327 distinct facial twitches that "prove," guilt. Home security cameras and pixelated images of red cars. Cell tower pings, (analysis then provided by people who don't understand cell phone tower pings) deleted texts, pawn shop rings, and Kessinger's Google searches would finally produce the anticipated mugshots. Still, it didn't happen. It still hasn't. It probably won't. The narrative was dead. Hate with a karma chaser has replaced evidence and truth.


One of the many problems with viewing Kessinger in this light is that it leads to believing that we can right a moral failure with a judicial solution. Hubris then leads some to believe that it's their duty to collect on that moral debt. I have read thousands of comments that prove this very point. A comment I read a few months ago said: "Even if she didn't actually participate in the murders, she caused them. She should be sent to prison for life." Another measured and not at all hysterical comment read: "I don't even care what they arrest her for, as long as she's convicted." 


Really? Anyone else see how a judicial system regulated by karma and moral indignation might be a massive shit show? On the fringes of Kessinger haters there are people who wouldn't lose a moment of sleep if Kessinger was hauled to Salem, Massachusetts and tried for being a witch. And even if most would argue against it going quite that far, a number of people are absolutely fine with her social isolation and hiding. For others, her personal shame is actually a source of happiness. Talk about low standards. That their personal glee in the isolation of a person who hasn't been accused, tried, or convicted of a single crime, says something more profound about them than it does about Kessinger is lost on them.


Some argue that one of Kessinger's biggest failures is that she hasn't "proven," that she is innocent of involvement in the murders. Those people argue that she should "have," to take a polygraph. Sometimes they go on to argue that she should apologize for the affair. Arguments like these are the result of people becoming obsessed and manic in their belief that Kessinger owes anyone anything or that anything she did would change a single made up mind. Our legal system requires the state prove a defendant guilty, not that a person (who hasn't even been charged) prove their innocence. And even if she tried, it would be a disaster. If Kessinger wrote a thousand letters of apology and passed twenty polygraph tests, the very people who demanded she do so wouldn't be moved in the least. 


*No polygraph: "She's guilty and afraid to submit to a polygraph. She'd be caught lying." 

*Multiple passed polygraph tests: "See, she's so sociopathic, she learned how to beat them. She's even more evil than we thought." 


An odd phenomenon is now active as it relates to Kessinger, Chris Watts, and Sha'nann Watts. So much of the visceral hatred of Kessinger has given fuel and cover for a coward in a Wisconsin maximum security prison to once again look for a woman to blame for his actions. Those who continue to put even a portion of his crimes on his mistress, are reducing his culpability. I imagine that he enjoys that. First, he blamed Sha'nann for killing his daughters and now some are allowing him to blame Kessinger. Congratulations. Way to give him a small measure of peace. As long as people refuse to hold him accountable for every aspect of his crimes, he feels less culpable. Kessinger has been investigated by multiple law enforcement agencies and not a single charge has been filed. If that changes, I will see what the state has and what a jury finds. But until then, she is guilty of having participated in an affair with a garbage human who murdered his family. The affair was his responsibility to stop. He was married. He had taken marriage vows. He was responsible. Every single time I read a comment about how Kessinger seduced him and was basically a force of nature that Watts couldn't resist, I feel the onset of a crushing headache. That line of reasoning plays right into his hands. Because if Kessinger really was something so strong that he against his will he was pulled into an affair, then just wait for him to argue that Sha'nann being a Type-A personality that made him feel unappreciated and small, played a part in his killing her. If he is allowed to be super weak when it comes to Kessinger, he'll argue the same as it relates to Sha'nann. 


I can hold that I don't like what Kessinger did (the affair) and still hold that her participation in the affair isn't the unforgivable sin. Millions of people have committed adultery. It's not a great look and it harms people and relationships. But it isn't comparable to murdering a wife and mother. 


Those who continue to wish all manner of misery and plague to befall Ms. Kessinger are free to harbor such wishes and thoughts. But their doing so doesn't honor the memories of a murdered mother and her children. It's the felexive slashing at the curtain that hides behind it a simple truth. Chris Watts murdered his family because he wasn't enough of a man to address and deal with the problems that for years, had consumed his life. He wouldn't confront and he wouldn't fight to make better a marriage that was badly broken by lack of communication, uncontrolled debt, hubris, poor health, and structure. In Nichol Kessinger he found escape. In Chris Watts, Kessinger thought she had found a chance at her own version of happiness. That she was among the many people in his life that couldn't see the rage and resentment grow to the point of a final terrible fracture, doesn't make her responsible for all of the micro-fractures that he had become practiced at concealing. 


He is responsible. He alone is responsible. Absent a needle, an easy to hit vein, and a cocktail of drugs that would've paralyzed his diaphragm and stopped his heart, he's where he should be. He doesn't deserve compassion manufactured by his residual manipulation, and Nichol Kessinger doesn't deserve a life sentence of bitterness and blame for a crime she did not commit. I'll defend that stance in the second and final part of this article. 


(End, Part 1)



Copyright © 2019 Drew B. All Rights Reserved.
Copyright © 2024 Cynthia Walker. All Rights Reserved.

Tuesday, July 5, 2022

The Billy Jensen Fallout: An Op-Ed


There is a trend in the true crime community attempting to gain traction with hashtag use attached to posts regarding a recent case of sexual harassment involving one of the TCC's own, true crime investigative journalist and podcaster, Billy Jensen. The trend is called, #StartByBelieving. "Start By Believing" is a public awareness campaign launched in 2011 by the organization EVAW International (End Violence Against Women), and, according to its social media pages, focuses on "the public response to sexual violence." Part of this campaign initiative is teaching the proper response to accounts of sexual violence, which should include phrases like, "I believe you," "I'm sorry this happened," and "I am here for you." Such empathetic, supportive statements are entirely appropriate for one-on-one confidences between victims and their counselors or loved ones, but are in direct conflict to the required protocol human resource departments and law enforcement agencies are required to follow when investigating claims. The question as it pertains to the study of true crime is: SHOULD we believe?

Some victim advocates emphatically apply the principles of this social justice movement - which also endeavors to end the silence surrounding sexual assault by emboldening victims to report their experiences - to non-violent cases of sexual harassment and misconduct, as well. Incidents - like Billy Jensen's - that are typically handled through confidential mediation in the workplace are being publicized by champions of the movement, without regard for the privacy of the accused. The Fifth Amendment U.S. constitutional right to due process and the concept that "there are two sides to every story" are summarily dismissed by radicals who insist on standing by every woman who comes forward with a sexual assault allegation. Social media commenters expressing a dissenting opinion or suggesting a more levelheaded approach (such as, "let's see how this plays out with officials") are instantly attacked and accused of perpetuating the cycle of violence against women. One true crime group mandates in their rules that discussion of a particular case is permitted, but any remarks deemed as critical about an alleged abuse victim will result in a permanent ban; rules about speculating on the culpability of the suspect - as yet uncharged by law enforcement - are far more relaxed, however. One advocate even admonished "insensitive" comments about victimization because they could be potentially triggering to other sexual assault survivors reading a post. How are we supposed to educate, spread awareness, and have the discussions - as crusaders of various causes are always imparting - if benign, yet unpopular or alternative points of view are suppressed? 

Though I have not participated - or been shunned - in any social media group discussions surrounding this topic, my personal solution is to take the issue to my blog, where no one will tell me what to believe and where I will freely express my opinion with the same conviction a victim is encouraged to have in sharing their truth. But most true crime enthusiasts don't use such a platform; they look to online community posts to learn and engage. They, too, are interested in contributing their own thoughts and receiving validation, but are often afraid themselves of being victimized by the intimidators who shut down insights which are anything less than blindly supportive of accusers. Even worse, the only reason I can even even write this article is I'm a woman; a man questioning a sexual abuse claim hasn't a prayer of surviving in an online community; he will inevitably be labeled a misogynist, an incel, a victim basher, or toxic in his masculinity. In this post-#MeToo era, men are terrified to participate in discussions about sexual harassment in the workplace.

As this issue pertains to the Billy Jensen case, a smattering of screenshots taken from various social media public posts regarding the still-developing news is posted below. (A little backstory: the Billy Jensen/Paul Holes podcast, The Murder Squad, went on hiatus last December during an internal investigation into a sexual misconduct allegation against Jensen by a co-worker. The investigation concluded with the firing of Jensen, followed by a lawsuit filed by the accuser against the podcast's parent company, Exactly Right Podcast Network, which is owned by My Favorite Murder podcasters, Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark. The lawsuit, which did not depose Jensen, was settled through mediation. Exactly Right announced in May that Murder Squad was canceled, but offered no explanation or statement about Jensen, likely due to non-disclosure agreements. Rumors abounded, confusing allusions were posted via social media by community leaders, but nothing definitive was known until true crime podcaster, Jenn Tisdale of Too Many Jennifers, took to her microphone June 15 to address her insider knowledge of the Exactly Right mediation, as well as recount her own, separate, unreported sexual abuse incident with Jensen from 2019.)

The first hints of a brewing crisis began with this victim advocate's post on June 13, via Twitter; the suggestion of "Allegations should be enough to stop supporting those" harkens back to the Salem witch trials:

Replies on the same Tweet, including a snarky and defensive retort from the original poster:


Misguided, cruel comments lobbed at user "j.b. @s.c." during a June 18, 2022, discussion on Instagram about the Billy Jensen debacle, when much of the true crime community was still in the dark about the bombshell dropped on accuser Jenn Tisdale's podcast June 15. Ironic statement "Don't defend people you don't know anything about" by a user who is defending accusers she knows nothing about:
1.)
2.)

On a June 21, 2022, Instagram post, the true crime community at large was instructed to #StartByBelieving Jensen's accusers, with these succeeding comments:

*     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *   

So, why shouldn't we automatically believe claims of assault in the true crime community? Researchers of the Ted Bundy case know the simple answer to this question: Rhonda Stapley. (Message me if you need enlightening.) For everyone else, if Depp v. Heard wasn't enough to convince the world that women are capable of both defaming their former partners with false abuse allegations, as well as being domestic violence aggressors themselves, here are a few other examples of female crime-fabrication at its finest: Sherri Papini, Susan Smith, Diane Downs, and Jennifer Wilbanks (the "runaway bride" from Georgia). Each of them - with the exception of Smith - intentionally (not mistakenly) purported false sexual or physical assault against them to authorities. Famous - and dramatic - cases aside, perhaps you've known a scorned woman determined to retaliate against her ex with manufactured assertions of spousal abuse, infidelity, embezzlement, or parental neglect. Even if she doesn't file charges with police or in a divorce/custody petition, she may launch a smear campaign in her and her former partner's community. How easy it is in the digital and social media age to damage a person's reputation with a few strokes of the keyboard. Hell hath no fury.

From Twitter, regarding the Jensen case; hats off to this user:

Skepticism is healthy. It's what inspires students of true crime to ask questions about the knowledge they've accumulated and investigate for themselves. Why would critical thinking and independent thought ever be discouraged in an environment of learning? The challenges and diversity that open-mindedness produces are beneficial to group discussion, as they provide color and context to a subject matter, and enhance the cognition of everyone involved. True crime groups insist on respectful treatment of all members, and differences of opinion are protected through debate moderation. Outside of group governing, however, such ethical practices are only sporadically observed on personal posts or in public forums, as the first sequence of screenshots above disappointingly attest.

*     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *

Lest we forget in the wake of #MeToo when accusations of sexual misconduct preponderated the news and powerful men fell from grace like dominoes, that women, too, can be sexual predators. Even as this article is being written, yet another school teacher has been charged with raping her teenage student in New York, and Ghislaine Maxwell has been sentenced to twenty years in prison as a convicted sex offender/child sex trafficker. In serial killer history, both Karla Homolka and Rose West actively participated in the sexual violence (and murders) of many young girls and women alongside their husbands. As it turns out, sexual predation by a female - to a lesser degree than the aforementioned cases - is the predominant theme in the he-said-she-said involving Billy Jensen and Jenn Tisdale.

There is a lot to this story, as well as other events which have transpired within the Jensen debacle. This article is not aiming to present a transactional report, but uninformed readers can gather more from several podcasts which have covered the scandal, as well as Reddit threads, which have been surprisingly thoughtful, organized, and educational. Briefly, after Tisdale (on her podcast) accused Jensen of slapping her during drunken foreplay in a hotel, Jensen released a statement on his website denying the slap and posting a wealth of text messages between the two friends (or amicable colleagues) which demonstrated a smitten Tisdale pushing for years-long, continued correspondence and meetings with Jensen after their hookup - not a traumatized assault victim harboring fear or resentment. (Tisdale admitted she forgave Jensen for the alleged slap after he - according to her - didn't recall it, but apologized anyway the next day.) 

The incident itself isn't terribly relevant, especially when considering how it would have played out in court had Tisdale pressed charges or filed suit against Jensen (assuming the case wouldn't be thrown out). Tisdale would make an easy target for character assassination by Jensen's defense attorney. Her admitted, ongoing use of cocaine and prolonged, "feral" physical abuse of a former boyfriend that resulted in seven arrests would be introduced. Her diagnosis of borderline personality disorder - including its manifestation of emotional blackmail of guys to appease her abandonment phobia - would be crucified, supported by texts in which she attempted on multiple occasions to manipulate Jensen into spending time alone with her; (he repeatedly declined these invitations). Her morals would be suspect, substantiated by her admission of being "a horny gal" and the publicly accessible porn tapes she filmed with adult film star, James Deen, in which she is often slapped on her buttocks. She would be mercilessly grilled about her decisions to both a.) not lodge a complaint against Jensen soon after the incident, and b.) her motivation for publicizing it three years later, which was preceded by a Tweet proclaiming she was "champing [sic] at the ol' bit" to talk about her experience. As a former stand-up comic and now media personality who frequently parades her very personal matters, she would be portrayed as an attention-seeker in need of an audience. 

But perhaps the most damaging line of questioning in this hypothetical cross-examination would concern Tisdale's texts to Jensen two days after the 2019 incident, requesting to come to his hotel room yet again, and for him to send her "a beanie pic for my spank bank." See, Tisdale was the director of a true crime festival, Death Becomes Us, where this hookup with a then-unknown Jensen took place. The root of any sexual harassment incident is power - when did Jensen have the power? After such annihilation in court, Tisdale would be vilified as the power-abusing aggressor, and - as is already the case - perceived as vindictive and opportunistic in coming forward, the impropriety of a nonconsensual slap, thus, invalidated. Perhaps during the next sexual misconduct drama to rock this community, advocates should trot out a more credible "victim" to prop up their hopeful initiative of sweeping the TCC with our own #MeToo movement.

*     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *   

The cult-like demands for blind loyalty by victim advocates who've pounced on the Jensen case are reminiscent of expectations in another, far more severe, crime from recent years in the TCC: Chris Watts. Though Watts was not a sexual violence case, community response was significant for its imbalanced treatment of victims and inflexible mentions of the dead. Students of this familicide experienced backlash not from community leaders, but from fellow, amateur participants who were aghast at any criticism leveled at Shan'ann Watts. Comments about Shan'ann's emasculation of Watts; her hypochondria and possible Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy; her excessive spending that landed the couple in financial bankruptcy; and her questionable decision to keep her children in daycare for approximately eight hours a day while she worked her multi-level marketing scam - er, job - from home, were tantamount to blaming Shan'ann for her own death. Community members refusing to address such elements in the couple's marriage missed out on a great deal of understanding about Watts's criminal psychology. Shan'ann, for all her faults and mistakes in this world, became a saint in death, to be revered as nothing less than a shining icon of domestic perfection. This hero worship of the victim was surpassed only by rabid, vengeful calls for justice - specifically, the arrest of this horror story's villain, the evil harlot, Nichol Kessinger. A figure never charged with a single offense in this case, Kessinger was nonetheless subjected to such unabashed vitriol, doxxing, and threats, she changed her name, went into hiding, and hasn't been heard from since 2018 - that would include an "impending" arrest predicted by most case followers. There was no "Start By Believing" hashtag rally for Kessinger, even though she did qualify for and receive victim support services from the state of Colorado.

Furthermore in this example of how filtering speech about victims can be unreasonable and taken to extremes, the mission to silence Shan'ann's critics has recently evolved into a large-scale lawsuit spearheaded by Shan'ann's family. Circumventing YouTube policy which proved unfavorable to them, the Rzuceks have retained a British law firm specializing in Internet law with the hope of shuttering YouTube content creators who are financially compensated for inventing conspiracy theories about the Watts case. The Frankie Rzucek, Jr., "Stop Being Mean To Me!" campaign also endeavors to threaten legal action against social media users who post hateful remarks against his sister. Apparently inept at simply powering off his computer, Frankie, Jr., says the relentless online "torment and slander" has caused the Rzuceks unbearable suffering. He wants it known that he doesn't wish to trample on free speech rights nor impose stricter governmental controls, though. You, too, can donate to this unending fundraiser for attorneys' fees, the goal of which is £25,000 - no wait, it's £45,000; my bad - it's now £75,000.

*     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *     *   

In the cases of murder and violence we as a community study, of course we empathize with victims (and their families); we seek to understand the psychology of perpetrators, but never condone their crimes. In fact, nothing seems to offend or unite us more than the stereotype that we're all dangerous and mentally ill like the  criminals we research. Though the majority of true crime cases conclusively identify victims, sexual harassment isn't always a definitive criminal or prosecutable offense. In such polarizing cases, a deference to the law, rather than alliance to a "side," may be the prudent choice for the uninvolved periphery: 

1.) Sexual harassment, though not always a crime, is litigable in civil court.  
2.) Americans are afforded a presumption of innocence, as well as a protected guarantee, under the Sixth Amendment, to confront one's accusers in a criminal trial (a right equalized for victims with the allowance of victim impact statements during a sentencing hearing). 
3.) Both assault and libel are punishable offenses. So rather than "#StartByBelieving" or blasting conjecture, gossip, and personal drama across social and content-creation networks, leaders should advise accusers and suspects alike to proactively pursue resolution through mediation or arbitration. 
    Victims are in the best possible position in history to receive judgments in their favor; the #MeToo movement forced most companies to revise their sexual harassment policies and case management procedures.  

(Though not obvious in his reply here, the verified red-circle user has exploited the Jensen case to vocalize his own bitter, professional grievances against Jensen throughout the TCC.) The replies from the yellow-circle user are the incisive ones worthy of spotlighting; from Twitter:
1.) 
2.)

Sexual harassment - particularly when the lines are blurred between "assault" and "violation" - is a difficult, touchy subject matter to cover, and one that will likely - if this article is even read - ignite controversy amounting to the same ambivalence about writing it. As much of a train wreck as Jenn Tisdale is, other rumored instances of sexual misconduct attributed to Billy Jensen - plus the disingenuous, deceitful apology he issued regarding his anonymous co-worker's claim - culminate in a portrait of him as an equally reprehensible sleazebag. I have no horse in this race and am not attempting to absolve Jensen; for the record, slapping anybody - female or male - is wrong. Some TCC members believe a responsibility to warn the community about predatory behavior is incumbent upon those in the know. However, in this cancel culture, the ease with which anyone can take to their social media platforms to impair another's life, rejecting official avenues of confrontation and solution, is outrageous. Reiterating, defamation and cyberbullying are criminal offenses just like sexual abuse; they require as much cowardice from offenders as sexual predation on the physically weaker, younger, and subordinate does. I can only wonder if extremists would so passionately defend alleged victims who were accusing and slandering their own fathers, husbands, brothers . . . . . or sons.


Copyright © (2022) Cynthia Walker. All Rights Reserved.