DrPhil: The Worst of Trash TV?
May 29, 2014 at 7:42 am
(This post was last modified: May 29, 2014 at 7:44 am by Aractus.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b02B04soSkY
So this episode aired on Australian TV today, I saw part of it and watched some of the sequel on YouTube (though not overly intently so I may get some of the things I'm about to say slightly wrong)...
Okay, it's jaw-dropping just how rubbish the show really is, and I can't understand how anyone can take it seriously - especially if episodes like it are the "norm".
DrPhil uses some of his favourite phrases like "the evidence doesn't lie" or "the science doesn't lie" - but then subjects the two witnesses to the death of "Jacob Limberios" to polygraph tests - WHAT THE FUCK?
Now I'm not going to mince words, but what's the point in this trash - here is he saying "now I think maybe one of you accidently shot Jacob, but doesn't want to say so ..." No. Bullshit - who the fuck is DrPhil to decide that??
And furthermore, why the fuck does he let the parents lie about their son? The parents said "our son would never shoot himself accidently because he knows proper gun safety" - right proper gun safety?
So is it proper gun safety to bring a revolver to a drinking party, then let people who've never operated a gun before shoot the gun after consuming alcohol? Nah, their son is a fucking idiot, and that kind of bullshit can't be "proper gun safety" - doing that could result in serious injury or death - wait that's exactly what happened, who the fuck would have thought?
So why are they allowed to say their son knew gun safety?? Why didn't DrPhil say "excuse me but that's bullshit, it's not safe to operate gun after drinking, just like it isn't safe to operate a motor vehicle after drinking".
Okay, then he goes on and on about how the physical evidence disagrees with the witness statements because there's no burn mark on the entry wound, so he had to have been shot from further away? SO FUCKING WHAT??
You know when I was a kid I had a friend who's father took him shooting, and one of the things he taught him was that "guns don't kill, people kill". Now I would hope that most people don't believe that bullshit, but this is a perfect example of what can happen when a gun goes off and kills someone. Jacob probably dropped the gun, it went off and shot him through the head - he didn't have to hold onto it at all.
What I'd be more concerned about is why the fuck was it originally ruled as suicide? It's not fucking suicide if a gun goes off when you don't want it to, call it what you want (an accident or mechanical fault) but it's not suicide. They also found that the safety on the gun was faulty, so even with the safety on, if he'd pulled back the hammer and dropped the gun on the floor it could have shot and killed him exactly how it was supposed to happen.
But even if it was in his hands - the coroner didn't say that there "wasn't and burn marks" what he said was he couldn't find any - there's a huge fucking difference. And it still could have happened that he was holding the gun, safety on (remember the safety doesn't work), hammer back and bumped it on something and it went off. Guns fucking kills - they're fucking dangerous - especially revolvers, why the fuck DrPhil never once in the two episodes said this I have no idea, the gun went off on its own either in Jacob's hands or after he dropped it - it's really that fucking simple.
They exhumed the body, after it had been cleaned, make-up may have been applied, and buried for a length of time - so it's going to be less likely that you'll find burn marks than if the examination had been done prior to funeral arrangements.
But to top it all off, DrPhil then subjects the two witnesses to polygraph tests, and then tells each of them they've failed the polygraph. THE FUCK? Polygraph tests are not reliable, they're considered junk-science ie they have very little scientific credibility. This is a perfect example of why you should never agree to take one - no lawyer anywhere in the world would advise you to take one under any circumstances!
Now everything I just wrote was before I even read this article, so look at this:
In a statement released today by DeWine's office, the attorney general said that officials have gathered new evidence showing that Limberios ‘was likely holding the weapon at very close range when it fired accidentally without a trigger pull.’
Isn't that exactly what I just said above? So why didn't they ever say at anytime on the DrPhil show that the gun could have gone off on its own?? It seems so fucking obvious to me. The only two possibilities explored on the DrPhil show were that Jacob shot himself or that somebody else shot him - why didn't they say "what if the gun went off on its own" - which is obviously what it did.
What an arrogant show - I mean why suggest that the witnesses are covering anything up when even in DrPhil's on words "they didn't do anything wrong" - the only person who did something wrong, the only one that did, was Jacob because he was stupid enough to let people who were drinking operate a gun - that's not what caused the accident, but Jacob was the dumbass that thought that was a good idea.
So this episode aired on Australian TV today, I saw part of it and watched some of the sequel on YouTube (though not overly intently so I may get some of the things I'm about to say slightly wrong)...
Okay, it's jaw-dropping just how rubbish the show really is, and I can't understand how anyone can take it seriously - especially if episodes like it are the "norm".
DrPhil uses some of his favourite phrases like "the evidence doesn't lie" or "the science doesn't lie" - but then subjects the two witnesses to the death of "Jacob Limberios" to polygraph tests - WHAT THE FUCK?
Now I'm not going to mince words, but what's the point in this trash - here is he saying "now I think maybe one of you accidently shot Jacob, but doesn't want to say so ..." No. Bullshit - who the fuck is DrPhil to decide that??
And furthermore, why the fuck does he let the parents lie about their son? The parents said "our son would never shoot himself accidently because he knows proper gun safety" - right proper gun safety?
So is it proper gun safety to bring a revolver to a drinking party, then let people who've never operated a gun before shoot the gun after consuming alcohol? Nah, their son is a fucking idiot, and that kind of bullshit can't be "proper gun safety" - doing that could result in serious injury or death - wait that's exactly what happened, who the fuck would have thought?
So why are they allowed to say their son knew gun safety?? Why didn't DrPhil say "excuse me but that's bullshit, it's not safe to operate gun after drinking, just like it isn't safe to operate a motor vehicle after drinking".
Okay, then he goes on and on about how the physical evidence disagrees with the witness statements because there's no burn mark on the entry wound, so he had to have been shot from further away? SO FUCKING WHAT??
You know when I was a kid I had a friend who's father took him shooting, and one of the things he taught him was that "guns don't kill, people kill". Now I would hope that most people don't believe that bullshit, but this is a perfect example of what can happen when a gun goes off and kills someone. Jacob probably dropped the gun, it went off and shot him through the head - he didn't have to hold onto it at all.
What I'd be more concerned about is why the fuck was it originally ruled as suicide? It's not fucking suicide if a gun goes off when you don't want it to, call it what you want (an accident or mechanical fault) but it's not suicide. They also found that the safety on the gun was faulty, so even with the safety on, if he'd pulled back the hammer and dropped the gun on the floor it could have shot and killed him exactly how it was supposed to happen.
But even if it was in his hands - the coroner didn't say that there "wasn't and burn marks" what he said was he couldn't find any - there's a huge fucking difference. And it still could have happened that he was holding the gun, safety on (remember the safety doesn't work), hammer back and bumped it on something and it went off. Guns fucking kills - they're fucking dangerous - especially revolvers, why the fuck DrPhil never once in the two episodes said this I have no idea, the gun went off on its own either in Jacob's hands or after he dropped it - it's really that fucking simple.
They exhumed the body, after it had been cleaned, make-up may have been applied, and buried for a length of time - so it's going to be less likely that you'll find burn marks than if the examination had been done prior to funeral arrangements.
But to top it all off, DrPhil then subjects the two witnesses to polygraph tests, and then tells each of them they've failed the polygraph. THE FUCK? Polygraph tests are not reliable, they're considered junk-science ie they have very little scientific credibility. This is a perfect example of why you should never agree to take one - no lawyer anywhere in the world would advise you to take one under any circumstances!
Now everything I just wrote was before I even read this article, so look at this:
In a statement released today by DeWine's office, the attorney general said that officials have gathered new evidence showing that Limberios ‘was likely holding the weapon at very close range when it fired accidentally without a trigger pull.’
Isn't that exactly what I just said above? So why didn't they ever say at anytime on the DrPhil show that the gun could have gone off on its own?? It seems so fucking obvious to me. The only two possibilities explored on the DrPhil show were that Jacob shot himself or that somebody else shot him - why didn't they say "what if the gun went off on its own" - which is obviously what it did.
What an arrogant show - I mean why suggest that the witnesses are covering anything up when even in DrPhil's on words "they didn't do anything wrong" - the only person who did something wrong, the only one that did, was Jacob because he was stupid enough to let people who were drinking operate a gun - that's not what caused the accident, but Jacob was the dumbass that thought that was a good idea.
For Religion & Health see:[/b][/size] Williams & Sternthal. (2007). Spirituality, religion and health: Evidence and research directions. Med. J. Aust., 186(10), S47-S50. -LINK
The WIN/Gallup End of Year Survey 2013 found the US was perceived to be the greatest threat to world peace by a huge margin, with 24% of respondents fearful of the US followed by: 8% for Pakistan, and 6% for China. This was followed by 5% each for: Afghanistan, Iran, Israel, North Korea. -LINK
"That's disgusting. There were clean athletes out there that have had their whole careers ruined by people like Lance Armstrong who just bended thoughts to fit their circumstances. He didn't look up cheating because he wanted to stop, he wanted to justify what he was doing and to keep that continuing on." - Nicole Cooke
The WIN/Gallup End of Year Survey 2013 found the US was perceived to be the greatest threat to world peace by a huge margin, with 24% of respondents fearful of the US followed by: 8% for Pakistan, and 6% for China. This was followed by 5% each for: Afghanistan, Iran, Israel, North Korea. -LINK
"That's disgusting. There were clean athletes out there that have had their whole careers ruined by people like Lance Armstrong who just bended thoughts to fit their circumstances. He didn't look up cheating because he wanted to stop, he wanted to justify what he was doing and to keep that continuing on." - Nicole Cooke
