I'm not here to insult anyone's profession (except those costhots need to know to their roles) but I'm having a hard time believing these lawyers are this dense or gullible. Like remember these lawyers barely know Vic but he's public enemy #1 due to them believing all this. But seriously this lawsuit can not be this disgusting for them when lawyers of R Kelly or Harvey Weinstein exist and those are people with evidence on them. They really believe that crap notion "suing because he was called mean names" or "silencing his victims" or whatever. And for professional lawyers I really have a hard time understanding the difference between watching a depo and reading a depo. And no I mean actually watching not watching out of context clips from Dom about meaningless shit like him hiring prostitutes. I know they don't want to listen to Nick commentating over it (thats why they got out of context Marc) but come on they can't be this stupid about this biased toward spreading misinformation and get on Nick's case for supposedly doing the same thing
I'm not here to insult anyone's profession (except those costhots need to know to their roles) but I'm having a hard time believing these lawyers are this dense or gullible.
How about this then Kickvic. we eliminate the idea of victimhood. there is only guilt by accusation. how about that? oh you suddenly want due process to determine false claims?
then shut the fuck up you stupid bimbo and let the adults handle things. before some harpy screenshots this and tries to run with it, I want to be clear. I'm calling both kickvic men and woman bimbos. In fact, I'm aiming the insult squarely at the men of kickvic. because they're too wimpy to be considered men. rather than face facts they rather snivel and hide behind woman like the cowards they are.
Not a thought I've ever had, but an outsider to all this might think you're just being extra salty about Low-T Greg when you write stuff like that. But goddamn, he really is that stupid. It's almost a shock, because one might think, "No...nobody could be that dumb for real. It's just not possible."
Not a thought I've ever had, but an outsider to all this might think you're just being extra salty about Low-T Greg when you write stuff like that. But goddamn, he really is that stupid. It's almost a shock, because one might think, "No...nobody could be that dumb for real. It's just not possible."
“Amanda Winn Lee used to have a very active career doing voice over in anime, but now she mainly just enjoys hanging out with her kid. Read all about this extremely talented mom here: https://t.co/hJUObioQf9”
I don't really pay attention to what LawTwitter has to say. What I have seen so far from them, I haven't been impressed. They don't really have a stake in the case so, they just shit on the case for free asspats. It is still foolish for people to say Vic admitted to everything. He said the Monica rape story did not even happen.... at all. That's not an admission. So... there ya go. He didn't admit to everything happening from that alone... People will only hear what they want to hear. So if Vic can remember a similar situation that someone decided to grossly embellish... doesn't make the embellished story totally true. Taking an innocent situation and exaggerating it to make someone look bad happens all the time.
Ohayocon inviting AWL isn't much of surprise. It's the only con that invites her consistently. I wonder if she's friends with the con owner or something. Although it is amusing to see everyone speak about how shitty she is on Twitter in the comments.
First and foremost I wish to give a big and warm thank you to @Coach Kreeton Of All That whom kindly gave, time, energy and effort into reviewing this, and offered helpful advice along the way. Without his help it would have looked far uglier and been a far less clever in the language portion. It was wonderful to co-op with you.
Meet Sharon Grigsby. The one and only, hit-piece “journalist” from the Dallas morning news. Why? An opportunist, she write low-tier grade articles like all current year trenders to generate feels over facts. Well she has shown to be completely biased, incapable of looking up simple facts, check sources, wrongly cited others, and over-all been reluctant or fully un-willing to apply journalistic ethics to all parties involved in any pickle.
Name(s): Sharon Faye Grigsby, Sharon Grigsby, Sharon Morton, Sharon F. Morton, Sharon Faye Morton Grigsby, Sharon Grigsby Morton…..you get the idea.
Age: 62
DOB: 11/19/1956
Working currently: The Dallas Morning News
Home Address: 903 Cordova St Dallas, TX 75223
Work Address: 1954 Commerce Street, Dallas, Texas 75201
Number registered in her name: 214 977-8855
Contact info: sgrigsby@dallasnews.com, sharon.morton@worldnet.att.net, cmorton@dallasnews.com (her husband's e-mail)
Married to: Clay Morton, 04/29/1955, 64 years old.
29th Jan 1983, Dallas County.
His name's attached to a different addres. However a person with the same surname as him resides there. It is not him, and they are probably renting it out to a family member. Therefore that address is not included in this d0x.
GRIGSBY, SHARON F who was 26 (born ABT 1957) married 29 JAN 1983 in DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS, U.S.A. a groom named CLAY MORTON who was 27 (born ABT 1956).
Children: Matthew T Morton and Pierce Z Morton.
Press Reader Article
Funny how the article wasn't spell-checked and starts with a typo.
It started with these two tweets and the aforementioned first article:
Dallas Morning News failed to TAG their own journalist properly. Some other poor woman from Florida ended up spammed, had locked and privated her account. With Dallas Morning News issuing a halfhearted apology that doesn't even come off with the slightest sincerity.
Here's Grigsby's tweet:
Nick's tweets are missing from the line of answers down below. Although he was mentioned and quoted in the article, he was never contacted nor interviewed regarding what she used from/about him in the article.
For those who do not know how journalists construct stories, it normally goes like this:
Pick a headline that will draw in the audience; think mild clickbaiting. In this case the hit-words are: Anime, MeToo, Clash, Dallas.
Anime to appeal to that part of the audience. MeToo to draw in SJWs and feminists. Clash to make it sound dramatic and it certainly is. Dallas of course, to draw in the locals.
After a headline is made, a small paragraph in bold letters gets printed with a few sentences. This captures the essence of the story wanted to be push. It's to captivate audiences and sucker them in to reading.
It's often here readers will find the angle or slant the author is going to spin the story in. Since I already pointed out the keywords above, and many probably read the article, I'm assuming you know how it goes from this point.
The information you WANT your audience to read is often placed in the beginning of the article. It should be what is most pertinent to the article, but in this day and age, with clear bias, it has become whatever the publication and author wants you to read. Since almost everyone knows that no one bothers to read the whole thing, or seldomly do. Then some more useful information is put at the end of online articles since people will often scroll down for the conclusion or summary. Everything that is something they don't want to draw your attention to is in the middle and towards the end.
This is what she leads with:
Of this is completely factually wrong. Vic holds no power in position or status. That glory belongs to Chris Sabat. She also goes straight for some numbers to show that surely he has had some success. Foregoing entirely that voice-actors aren't well-paid by the companies that hire them, and then proceeds to go for the inappropriate behaviour and "unwanted sexual advances." Which, also has been debunked time and time again had she bothered to look or talk to someone who wasn't Team MoRonica.
Afterwards, she follows up these in-directly: he is a sexual assaulter, statements with his fans harassing the victims and doxing them. Sharon if you're reading this, all their information is out in the public. Some even plastered it out over their twitter and Facebook for the world to see. All we do is hoard it. Either way, to continue on that note, she makes no mention of how Mignogna has not partaken in any of that twitter-mudslinging, never engaged either defendant either online. In fact, he has been entirely silent about the matter aside his denial, and attempt at an apology. An apology he didn't know what he apologized for (see his deposition for further info on that). This makes it seem like Vic somehow took part, encouraged or instrumented these things, which he has not done.
So once she has sufficiently smeared his name and fanbase, we scroll our way down.
Everything looks kinda bland, disineteresting. Until she suddenly breaks up the article with a large headline once more and uses the same picture as above.
Again, with the title and quick following sentence you see her intent with the article. She makes no mention that the affidavits were debunked, disproved, that one of the people handing in an affidavit has been punished by the law for falsely reporting a crime before. Another, Jennifer Lynn Hunt, has made 18574 versions of her story and none of them hold water. Others are extremely tame, and pretty much goes to extent of ' he felt creepy'. Which is not a crime. She also makes no mention of the otherwise false claims and stories that already have been disproven.
The entire article ends with a terrible photo of our West-Nile boi Lemoine, who looks 20 older than he is in that photo. He too with that dramatic lighting. Suppose they were sticking to a theme. They point out he is part of the team of lawyers representing Marchi and Rial. Which is sort of wrong, and sort of right since they can't have the same team of lawyers.
Further down it uses such hit-phrases as: war against two women "With everything I’ve been through — the death threats, the hatred, the trying to ruin my career, trying to get me fired because I came out and told the truth,” Rial said. “That is worth it if it saves one woman, one girl from having to deal with this kind of situation again.”
Then sort of happy but strong women ending with sisterhood: Both women also said they were thankful to be in this together. “We know this is going to be awful and who knows how long it’s going to be this awful,” Rial said. “But as long as we’ve got each other, and we’re standing together strong, let’s get the truth out there.”
Not being the sort to stop at the lack of balanced article, they put it on the front page of their printed newspaper. Whose face did they put on the front page do you ask? Why Vic's of course....Nothing like good ol' due process and innocent until proven guilty eyh!
So in short, they/she, had quite a few days to put this together. Yet all sources are clearly from the side of the defense. No attempts to explore any other sources from the other side were made, may it be looking for debunked stories, or even just checking basic facts against the claims. There was a blurb somewhere she claimed to have tried to get in touch with Ty Beard, but what would he possibly talk to her about without aboslutely ruining client/attorney priviliege and letting her spin it into something odd? Probably nothing. It is almost like she is incapapable of looking up sources on her own and it was a paid piece.
In the end I suppose that stuff doesn't sell as much as just smashing up a sex-scandal story, like she did with the Baylor sexual assault story scandal. Of course, this takes us to......
How is this relevant you may ask? Well, it was about a sexual assault scandal. You may have heard of it: The Baylor Sexual assault scandal
Her nomination a little odd as her articles almost always cite back to other in-house authors from The Dallas Morning News. A lot, and I mean a lot, appear to be he-said, she-said. Occasionally you’ll stumble over some reliable sources such as the plaintiffs papers, but it is still only one-side of the story. In other words, there is a lack of validity and equal representation of both sides of the case. I will add in I have not delved deeply into this case and therefore do not know the facts as well so I will not make commentary or jdugement on right or wrong. I am merely curious about their prior approach and how it may be utilized in the future for Vic's case.
In: Baylor's Obstinacy in Full View There is one source linked, which is surprisingly external, the Texas Tribune Archive
In: Baylor Sex Assault Scandal 7 of 9 links leads to in house articles on the subject, the 2 others belong to the Waco Tribune, and 1 of those 2 are gone/taken down. One can only speculate as to why.
What she wasn't nominated for however was her writing on Sam Ukwauchu.
In 2019, Sam Ukwuachu, a young African-American football player who had been accused of sexual assault, had his sentence overturned and he was cleared of all charges. I am no expert on this story, and I am not sure what parts ring true or not. I am merely reporting on what I am seeing. But what was said in the article is as follows:
July 10, 2019: After finding prosecutors used false testimony and violated his due-process rights, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals reverses the 2015 sexual assault conviction of Sam Ukwuachu and grants him a new trial.
If they went to such an extent to convict someone, one have to question the validity of the remainder of the claims and convictions as well, since the young man was then, well, a little railroaded.
Sharon’s article was linked on Facebook has a dead link. It can be found through Google Cache.
It's also worth noting that it had been put underneath the section called ‘opinion’. Because that is exactly what good journalism shouldn’t be. It was for her work on the sexual assault scandal she was nominated for a Pulitzer. Now I'm wondering if this is her second go at it. Perhaps this is why they went to her (they must have, they had their picture taken at their locales). Lemoine already had ties to the station, and knowing her news-history knew she'd be interested in this sort of thing. It's clear what narrative she pushes, and how biased it is. I pity her if it all backlashes against her. All information here was public.
As for karma: They now have an adblocker and paywall.
First and foremost I wish to give a big and warm thank you to @Coach Kreeton Of All That whom kindly gave, time, energy and effort into reviewing this, and offered helpful advice along the way. Without his help it would have looked far uglier and been a far less clever in the language portion. It was wonderful to co-op with you.
Meet Sharon Grigsby. The one and only, hit-piece “journalist” from the Dallas morning news. Why? An opportunist, she write low-tier grade articles like all current year trenders to generate feels over facts. Well she has shown to be completely biased, incapable of looking up simple facts, check sources, wrongly cited others, and over-all been reluctant or fully un-willing to apply journalistic ethics to all parties involved in any pickle.
Married to: Clay Morton, 04/29/1955, 64 years old.
29th Jan 1983, Dallas County.
His name's attached to a different address, as seen above. But a person with the same surname as him resides there. However it is not him, and they are probably renting it out to a family member.
GRIGSBY, SHARON F who was 26 (born ABT 1957) married 29 JAN 1983 in DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS, U.S.A. a groom named CLAY MORTON who was 27 (born ABT 1956).
Children: Matthew T Morton and Pierce Z Morton.
Press Reader Article
Funny how the article wasn't spell-checked and starts with a typo.
It started with these two tweets and the aforementioned first article: View attachment 978802
Dallas Morning News failed to TAG their own journalist properly. Some other poor woman from Florida ended up spammed, had locked and privated her account. With Dallas Morning News issuing a halfhearted apology that doesn't even come off with the slightest sincerity.
Nick's tweets are missing from the line of answers down below. Although he was mentioned and quoted in the article, he was never contacted nor interviewed regarding what she used from/about him in the article.
For those who do not know how journalists construct stories, it normally goes like this:
Pick a headline that will draw in the audience; think mild clickbaiting. In this case the hit-words are: Anime, MeToo, Clash, Dallas.
Anime to appeal to that part of the audience. MeToo to draw in SJWs and feminists. Clash to make it sound dramatic and it certainly is. Dallas of course, to draw in the locals.
After a headline is made, a small paragraph in bold letters gets printed with a few sentences. This captures the essence of the story wanted to be push. It's to captivate audiences and sucker them in to reading.
It's often here readers will find the angle or slant the author is going to spin the story in. Since I already pointed out the keywords above, and many probably read the article, I'm assuming you know how it goes from this point.
The information you WANT your audience to read is often placed in the beginning of the article. It should be what is most pertinent to the article, but in this day and age, with clear bias, it has become whatever the publication and author wants you to read. Since almost everyone knows that no one bothers to read the whole thing, or seldomly do. Then some more useful information is put at the end of online articles since people will often scroll down for the conclusion or summary. Everything that is something they don't want to draw your attention to is in the middle and towards the end.
Of this is completely factually wrong. Vic holds no power in position or status. That glory belongs to Chris Sabat. She also goes straight for some numbers to show that surely he has had some success. Foregoing entirely that voice-actors aren't well-paid by the companies that hire them, and then proceeds to go for the inappropriate behaviour and "unwanted sexual advances." Which, also has been debunked time and time again had she bothered to look or talk to someone who wasn't Team MoRonica.
Afterwards, she follows up these in-directly: he is a sexual assaulter, statements with his fans harassing the victims and doxing them. Sharon if you're reading this, all their information is out in the public. Some even plastered it out over their twitter and Facebook for the world to see. All we do is hoard it. Either way, to continue on that note, she makes no mention of how Mignogna has not partaken in any of that twitter-mudslinging, never engaged either defendant either online. In fact, he has been entirely silent about the matter aside his denial, and attempt at an apology. An apology he didn't know what he apologized for (see his deposition for further info on that). This makes it seem like Vic somehow took part, encouraged or instrumented these things, which he has not done.
So once she has sufficiently smeared his name and fanbase, we scroll our way down.
Everything looks kinda bland, disineteresting. Until she suddenly breaks up the article with a large headline once more and uses the same picture as above.
Again, with the title and quick following sentence you see her intent with the article. She makes no mention that the affidavits were debunked, disproved, that one of the people handing in an affidavit has been punished by the law for falsely reporting a crime before. Another, Jennifer Lynn Hunt, has made 18574 versions of her story and none of them hold water. Others are extremely tame, and pretty much goes to extent of ' he felt creepy'. Which is not a crime. She also makes no mention of the otherwise false claims and stories that already have been disproven.
The entire article ends with a terrible photo of our West-Nile boi Lemoine, who looks 20 older than he is in that photo. He too with that dramatic lighting. Suppose they were sticking to a theme. They point out he is part of the team of lawyers representing Marchi and Rial. Which is sort of wrong, and sort of right since they can't have the same team of lawyers.
Further down it uses such hit-phrases as: war against two women "With everything I’ve been through — the death threats, the hatred, the trying to ruin my career, trying to get me fired because I came out and told the truth,” Rial said. “That is worth it if it saves one woman, one girl from having to deal with this kind of situation again.”
Then sort of happy but strong women ending with sisterhood: Both women also said they were thankful to be in this together. “We know this is going to be awful and who knows how long it’s going to be this awful,” Rial said. “But as long as we’ve got each other, and we’re standing together strong, let’s get the truth out there.”
Not being the sort to stop at the lack of balanced article, they put it on the front page of their printed newspaper. Whose face did they put on the front page do you ask? Why Vic's of course....Nothing like good ol' due process and innocent until proven guilty eyh!
To make things even more interesting, she was followed by quite a few interesting folks. Such as, but not limited to: View attachment 978830
sourced from @Yuusha-sama
So in short, they/she, had quite a few days to put this together. Yet all sources are clearly from the side of the defense. No attempts to explore any other sources from the other side were made, may it be looking for debunked stories, or even just checking basic facts against the claims. There was a blurb somewhere she claimed to have tried to get in touch with Ty Beard, but what would he possibly talk to her about without aboslutely ruining client/attorney priviliege and letting her spin it into something odd? Probably nothing. It is almost like she is incapapable of looking up sources on her own and it was a paid piece.
In the end I suppose that stuff doesn't sell as much as just smashing up a sex-scandal story, like she did with the Baylor sexual assault story scandal. Of course, this takes us to......
How is this relevant you may ask? Well, it was about a sexual assault scandal. You may have heard of it: The Baylor Sexual assault scandal
Her nomination a little odd as her articles almost always cite back to other in-house authors from The Dallas Morning News. A lot, and I mean a lot, appear to be he-said, she-said. Occasionally you’ll stumble over some reliable sources such as the plaintiffs papers, but it is still only one-side of the story. In other words, there is a lack of validity and equal representation of both sides of the case. I will add in I have not delved deeply into this case and therefore do not know the facts as well so I will not make commentary or jdugement on right or wrong. I am merely curious about their prior approach and how it may be utilized in the future for Vic's case.
In: Baylor Sex Assault Scandal 7 of 9 links leads to in house articles on the subject, the 2 others belong to the Waco Tribune, and 1 of those 2 are gone/taken down. One can only speculate as to why.
What she wasn't nominated for however was her writing on Sam Ukwauchu.
In 2019, Sam Ukwuachu, a young African-American football player who had been accused of sexual assault, had his sentence overturned and he was cleared of all charges. I am no expert on this story, and I am not sure what parts ring true or not. I am merely reporting on what I am seeing. But what was said in the article is as follows:
July 10, 2019: After finding prosecutors used false testimony and violated his due-process rights, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals reverses the 2015 sexual assault conviction of Sam Ukwuachu and grants him a new trial.
If they went to such an extent to convict someone, one have to question the validity of the remainder of the claims and convictions as well, since the young man was then, well, a little railroaded.
Sharon’s article was linked on Facebook has a dead link. It can be found through Google Cache.
It's also worth noting that it had been put underneath the section called ‘opinion’. Because that is exactly what good journalism shouldn’t be. It was for her work on the sexual assault scandal she was nominated for a Pulitzer. Now I'm wondering if this is her second go at it. Perhaps this is why they went to her (they must have, they had their picture taken at their locales). Lemoine already had ties to the station, and knowing her news-history knew she'd be interested in this sort of thing. It's clear what narrative she pushes, and how biased it is. I pity her if it all backlashes against her.
As for karma: They now have an adblocker and paywall.
“Amanda Winn Lee used to have a very active career doing voice over in anime, but now she mainly just enjoys hanging out with her kid. Read all about this extremely talented mom here: https://t.co/hJUObioQf9”
First and foremost I wish to give a big and warm thank you to @Coach Kreeton Of All That whom kindly gave, time, energy and effort into reviewing this, and offered helpful advice along the way. Without his help it would have looked far uglier and been a far less clever in the language portion. It was wonderful to co-op with you.
Meet Sharon Grigsby. The one and only, hit-piece “journalist” from the Dallas morning news. Why? An opportunist, she write low-tier grade articles like all current year trenders to generate feels over facts. Well she has shown to be completely biased, incapable of looking up simple facts, check sources, wrongly cited others, and over-all been reluctant or fully un-willing to apply journalistic ethics to all parties involved in any pickle.
Married to: Clay Morton, 04/29/1955, 64 years old.
29th Jan 1983, Dallas County.
His name's attached to a different address, as seen above. But a person with the same surname as him resides there. However it is not him, and they are probably renting it out to a family member.
GRIGSBY, SHARON F who was 26 (born ABT 1957) married 29 JAN 1983 in DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS, U.S.A. a groom named CLAY MORTON who was 27 (born ABT 1956).
Children: Matthew T Morton and Pierce Z Morton.
Press Reader Article
Funny how the article wasn't spell-checked and starts with a typo.
It started with these two tweets and the aforementioned first article: View attachment 978802
Dallas Morning News failed to TAG their own journalist properly. Some other poor woman from Florida ended up spammed, had locked and privated her account. With Dallas Morning News issuing a halfhearted apology that doesn't even come off with the slightest sincerity.
Nick's tweets are missing from the line of answers down below. Although he was mentioned and quoted in the article, he was never contacted nor interviewed regarding what she used from/about him in the article.
For those who do not know how journalists construct stories, it normally goes like this:
Pick a headline that will draw in the audience; think mild clickbaiting. In this case the hit-words are: Anime, MeToo, Clash, Dallas.
Anime to appeal to that part of the audience. MeToo to draw in SJWs and feminists. Clash to make it sound dramatic and it certainly is. Dallas of course, to draw in the locals.
After a headline is made, a small paragraph in bold letters gets printed with a few sentences. This captures the essence of the story wanted to be push. It's to captivate audiences and sucker them in to reading.
It's often here readers will find the angle or slant the author is going to spin the story in. Since I already pointed out the keywords above, and many probably read the article, I'm assuming you know how it goes from this point.
The information you WANT your audience to read is often placed in the beginning of the article. It should be what is most pertinent to the article, but in this day and age, with clear bias, it has become whatever the publication and author wants you to read. Since almost everyone knows that no one bothers to read the whole thing, or seldomly do. Then some more useful information is put at the end of online articles since people will often scroll down for the conclusion or summary. Everything that is something they don't want to draw your attention to is in the middle and towards the end.
Of this is completely factually wrong. Vic holds no power in position or status. That glory belongs to Chris Sabat. She also goes straight for some numbers to show that surely he has had some success. Foregoing entirely that voice-actors aren't well-paid by the companies that hire them, and then proceeds to go for the inappropriate behaviour and "unwanted sexual advances." Which, also has been debunked time and time again had she bothered to look or talk to someone who wasn't Team MoRonica.
Afterwards, she follows up these in-directly: he is a sexual assaulter, statements with his fans harassing the victims and doxing them. Sharon if you're reading this, all their information is out in the public. Some even plastered it out over their twitter and Facebook for the world to see. All we do is hoard it. Either way, to continue on that note, she makes no mention of how Mignogna has not partaken in any of that twitter-mudslinging, never engaged either defendant either online. In fact, he has been entirely silent about the matter aside his denial, and attempt at an apology. An apology he didn't know what he apologized for (see his deposition for further info on that). This makes it seem like Vic somehow took part, encouraged or instrumented these things, which he has not done.
So once she has sufficiently smeared his name and fanbase, we scroll our way down.
Everything looks kinda bland, disineteresting. Until she suddenly breaks up the article with a large headline once more and uses the same picture as above.
Again, with the title and quick following sentence you see her intent with the article. She makes no mention that the affidavits were debunked, disproved, that one of the people handing in an affidavit has been punished by the law for falsely reporting a crime before. Another, Jennifer Lynn Hunt, has made 18574 versions of her story and none of them hold water. Others are extremely tame, and pretty much goes to extent of ' he felt creepy'. Which is not a crime. She also makes no mention of the otherwise false claims and stories that already have been disproven.
The entire article ends with a terrible photo of our West-Nile boi Lemoine, who looks 20 older than he is in that photo. He too with that dramatic lighting. Suppose they were sticking to a theme. They point out he is part of the team of lawyers representing Marchi and Rial. Which is sort of wrong, and sort of right since they can't have the same team of lawyers.
Further down it uses such hit-phrases as: war against two women "With everything I’ve been through — the death threats, the hatred, the trying to ruin my career, trying to get me fired because I came out and told the truth,” Rial said. “That is worth it if it saves one woman, one girl from having to deal with this kind of situation again.”
Then sort of happy but strong women ending with sisterhood: Both women also said they were thankful to be in this together. “We know this is going to be awful and who knows how long it’s going to be this awful,” Rial said. “But as long as we’ve got each other, and we’re standing together strong, let’s get the truth out there.”
Not being the sort to stop at the lack of balanced article, they put it on the front page of their printed newspaper. Whose face did they put on the front page do you ask? Why Vic's of course....Nothing like good ol' due process and innocent until proven guilty eyh!
To make things even more interesting, she was followed by quite a few interesting folks. Such as, but not limited to: View attachment 978830
sourced from @Yuusha-sama
So in short, they/she, had quite a few days to put this together. Yet all sources are clearly from the side of the defense. No attempts to explore any other sources from the other side were made, may it be looking for debunked stories, or even just checking basic facts against the claims. There was a blurb somewhere she claimed to have tried to get in touch with Ty Beard, but what would he possibly talk to her about without aboslutely ruining client/attorney priviliege and letting her spin it into something odd? Probably nothing. It is almost like she is incapapable of looking up sources on her own and it was a paid piece.
In the end I suppose that stuff doesn't sell as much as just smashing up a sex-scandal story, like she did with the Baylor sexual assault story scandal. Of course, this takes us to......
How is this relevant you may ask? Well, it was about a sexual assault scandal. You may have heard of it: The Baylor Sexual assault scandal
Her nomination a little odd as her articles almost always cite back to other in-house authors from The Dallas Morning News. A lot, and I mean a lot, appear to be he-said, she-said. Occasionally you’ll stumble over some reliable sources such as the plaintiffs papers, but it is still only one-side of the story. In other words, there is a lack of validity and equal representation of both sides of the case. I will add in I have not delved deeply into this case and therefore do not know the facts as well so I will not make commentary or jdugement on right or wrong. I am merely curious about their prior approach and how it may be utilized in the future for Vic's case.
In: Baylor Sex Assault Scandal 7 of 9 links leads to in house articles on the subject, the 2 others belong to the Waco Tribune, and 1 of those 2 are gone/taken down. One can only speculate as to why.
What she wasn't nominated for however was her writing on Sam Ukwauchu.
In 2019, Sam Ukwuachu, a young African-American football player who had been accused of sexual assault, had his sentence overturned and he was cleared of all charges. I am no expert on this story, and I am not sure what parts ring true or not. I am merely reporting on what I am seeing. But what was said in the article is as follows:
July 10, 2019: After finding prosecutors used false testimony and violated his due-process rights, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals reverses the 2015 sexual assault conviction of Sam Ukwuachu and grants him a new trial.
If they went to such an extent to convict someone, one have to question the validity of the remainder of the claims and convictions as well, since the young man was then, well, a little railroaded.
Sharon’s article was linked on Facebook has a dead link. It can be found through Google Cache.
It's also worth noting that it had been put underneath the section called ‘opinion’. Because that is exactly what good journalism shouldn’t be. It was for her work on the sexual assault scandal she was nominated for a Pulitzer. Now I'm wondering if this is her second go at it. Perhaps this is why they went to her (they must have, they had their picture taken at their locales). Lemoine already had ties to the station, and knowing her news-history knew she'd be interested in this sort of thing. It's clear what narrative she pushes, and how biased it is. I pity her if it all backlashes against her.
As for karma: They now have an adblocker and paywall.
Great job getting all this info up there, but let me give you a little word of advice: please don't ever show that disgusting photo of Donkey and Shrek on this page ever again. I don't need brain damage and a stomach flu.
"Extremely talented mom"...excuse me while I go bash a brick over my head.
Great job getting all this info up there, but let me give you a little word of advice: please don't ever show that disgusting photo of Donkey and Shrek on this page ever again. I don't need brain damage and a stomach flu.
Yeah, thanks a lot, Monica. Because of you, I can no longer enjoy Ghostbusters. Because now I think of you every time I see this: View attachment 978861
First and foremost I wish to give a big and warm thank you to @Coach Kreeton Of All That whom kindly gave, time, energy and effort into reviewing this, and offered helpful advice along the way. Without his help it would have looked far uglier and been a far less clever in the language portion. It was wonderful to co-op with you.
Meet Sharon Grigsby. The one and only, hit-piece “journalist” from the Dallas morning news. Why? An opportunist, she write low-tier grade articles like all current year trenders to generate feels over facts. Well she has shown to be completely biased, incapable of looking up simple facts, check sources, wrongly cited others, and over-all been reluctant or fully un-willing to apply journalistic ethics to all parties involved in any pickle.
Married to: Clay Morton, 04/29/1955, 64 years old.
29th Jan 1983, Dallas County.
His name's attached to a different addres. However a person with the same surname as him resides there. It is not him, and they are probably renting it out to a family member. Therefore that address is not included in this d0x.
GRIGSBY, SHARON F who was 26 (born ABT 1957) married 29 JAN 1983 in DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS, U.S.A. a groom named CLAY MORTON who was 27 (born ABT 1956).
Children: Matthew T Morton and Pierce Z Morton.
Press Reader Article
Funny how the article wasn't spell-checked and starts with a typo.
It started with these two tweets and the aforementioned first article: View attachment 978802
Dallas Morning News failed to TAG their own journalist properly. Some other poor woman from Florida ended up spammed, had locked and privated her account. With Dallas Morning News issuing a halfhearted apology that doesn't even come off with the slightest sincerity.
Nick's tweets are missing from the line of answers down below. Although he was mentioned and quoted in the article, he was never contacted nor interviewed regarding what she used from/about him in the article.
For those who do not know how journalists construct stories, it normally goes like this:
Pick a headline that will draw in the audience; think mild clickbaiting. In this case the hit-words are: Anime, MeToo, Clash, Dallas.
Anime to appeal to that part of the audience. MeToo to draw in SJWs and feminists. Clash to make it sound dramatic and it certainly is. Dallas of course, to draw in the locals.
After a headline is made, a small paragraph in bold letters gets printed with a few sentences. This captures the essence of the story wanted to be push. It's to captivate audiences and sucker them in to reading.
It's often here readers will find the angle or slant the author is going to spin the story in. Since I already pointed out the keywords above, and many probably read the article, I'm assuming you know how it goes from this point.
The information you WANT your audience to read is often placed in the beginning of the article. It should be what is most pertinent to the article, but in this day and age, with clear bias, it has become whatever the publication and author wants you to read. Since almost everyone knows that no one bothers to read the whole thing, or seldomly do. Then some more useful information is put at the end of online articles since people will often scroll down for the conclusion or summary. Everything that is something they don't want to draw your attention to is in the middle and towards the end.
Of this is completely factually wrong. Vic holds no power in position or status. That glory belongs to Chris Sabat. She also goes straight for some numbers to show that surely he has had some success. Foregoing entirely that voice-actors aren't well-paid by the companies that hire them, and then proceeds to go for the inappropriate behaviour and "unwanted sexual advances." Which, also has been debunked time and time again had she bothered to look or talk to someone who wasn't Team MoRonica.
Afterwards, she follows up these in-directly: he is a sexual assaulter, statements with his fans harassing the victims and doxing them. Sharon if you're reading this, all their information is out in the public. Some even plastered it out over their twitter and Facebook for the world to see. All we do is hoard it. Either way, to continue on that note, she makes no mention of how Mignogna has not partaken in any of that twitter-mudslinging, never engaged either defendant either online. In fact, he has been entirely silent about the matter aside his denial, and attempt at an apology. An apology he didn't know what he apologized for (see his deposition for further info on that). This makes it seem like Vic somehow took part, encouraged or instrumented these things, which he has not done.
So once she has sufficiently smeared his name and fanbase, we scroll our way down.
Everything looks kinda bland, disineteresting. Until she suddenly breaks up the article with a large headline once more and uses the same picture as above.
Again, with the title and quick following sentence you see her intent with the article. She makes no mention that the affidavits were debunked, disproved, that one of the people handing in an affidavit has been punished by the law for falsely reporting a crime before. Another, Jennifer Lynn Hunt, has made 18574 versions of her story and none of them hold water. Others are extremely tame, and pretty much goes to extent of ' he felt creepy'. Which is not a crime. She also makes no mention of the otherwise false claims and stories that already have been disproven.
The entire article ends with a terrible photo of our West-Nile boi Lemoine, who looks 20 older than he is in that photo. He too with that dramatic lighting. Suppose they were sticking to a theme. They point out he is part of the team of lawyers representing Marchi and Rial. Which is sort of wrong, and sort of right since they can't have the same team of lawyers.
Further down it uses such hit-phrases as: war against two women "With everything I’ve been through — the death threats, the hatred, the trying to ruin my career, trying to get me fired because I came out and told the truth,” Rial said. “That is worth it if it saves one woman, one girl from having to deal with this kind of situation again.”
Then sort of happy but strong women ending with sisterhood: Both women also said they were thankful to be in this together. “We know this is going to be awful and who knows how long it’s going to be this awful,” Rial said. “But as long as we’ve got each other, and we’re standing together strong, let’s get the truth out there.”
Not being the sort to stop at the lack of balanced article, they put it on the front page of their printed newspaper. Whose face did they put on the front page do you ask? Why Vic's of course....Nothing like good ol' due process and innocent until proven guilty eyh!
To make things even more interesting, she was followed by quite a few interesting folks. Such as, but not limited to: View attachment 978830
sourced from @Yuusha-sama
Hasn't Funimation kind of been seen as not ideal for how they handle the dub? And has the "they're not 4Kids" high worn off yet?
And Greg Douchette View attachment 978826
Thanks to @3 Cucks None The Richer
So in short, they/she, had quite a few days to put this together. Yet all sources are clearly from the side of the defense. No attempts to explore any other sources from the other side were made, may it be looking for debunked stories, or even just checking basic facts against the claims. There was a blurb somewhere she claimed to have tried to get in touch with Ty Beard, but what would he possibly talk to her about without aboslutely ruining client/attorney priviliege and letting her spin it into something odd? Probably nothing. It is almost like she is incapapable of looking up sources on her own and it was a paid piece.
In the end I suppose that stuff doesn't sell as much as just smashing up a sex-scandal story, like she did with the Baylor sexual assault story scandal. Of course, this takes us to......
How is this relevant you may ask? Well, it was about a sexual assault scandal. You may have heard of it: The Baylor Sexual assault scandal
Her nomination a little odd as her articles almost always cite back to other in-house authors from The Dallas Morning News. A lot, and I mean a lot, appear to be he-said, she-said. Occasionally you’ll stumble over some reliable sources such as the plaintiffs papers, but it is still only one-side of the story. In other words, there is a lack of validity and equal representation of both sides of the case. I will add in I have not delved deeply into this case and therefore do not know the facts as well so I will not make commentary or jdugement on right or wrong. I am merely curious about their prior approach and how it may be utilized in the future for Vic's case.
In: Baylor's Obstinacy in Full View There is one source linked, which is surprisingly external, the Texas Tribune Archive
In: Baylor Sex Assault Scandal 7 of 9 links leads to in house articles on the subject, the 2 others belong to the Waco Tribune, and 1 of those 2 are gone/taken down. One can only speculate as to why.
What she wasn't nominated for however was her writing on Sam Ukwauchu.
In 2019, Sam Ukwuachu, a young African-American football player who had been accused of sexual assault, had his sentence overturned and he was cleared of all charges. I am no expert on this story, and I am not sure what parts ring true or not. I am merely reporting on what I am seeing. But what was said in the article is as follows:
July 10, 2019: After finding prosecutors used false testimony and violated his due-process rights, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals reverses the 2015 sexual assault conviction of Sam Ukwuachu and grants him a new trial.
If they went to such an extent to convict someone, one have to question the validity of the remainder of the claims and convictions as well, since the young man was then, well, a little railroaded.
Sharon’s article was linked on Facebook has a dead link. It can be found through Google Cache.
It's also worth noting that it had been put underneath the section called ‘opinion’. Because that is exactly what good journalism shouldn’t be. It was for her work on the sexual assault scandal she was nominated for a Pulitzer. Now I'm wondering if this is her second go at it. Perhaps this is why they went to her (they must have, they had their picture taken at their locales). Lemoine already had ties to the station, and knowing her news-history knew she'd be interested in this sort of thing. It's clear what narrative she pushes, and how biased it is. I pity her if it all backlashes against her. All information here was public.
As for karma: They now have an adblocker and paywall.
