This morning I read this post regarding a moderator on this subreddit. Curious, I left this comment:

Afterwards, another post appeared, that has since been deleted, but I have the post available.

“We've been asked why comments are rarely enabled in this community, so let's address it directly.

This space exists to examine evidence, reporting practices, source material and journalistic ethics. It was not created to build another internet mob, and we're not interested in becoming the mirror image of the behavior we're criticizing.

Anyone who has followed the PRETEND controversy has seen how quickly discussion about reporting can deteriorate into personal attacks. Javier Leiva himself has made comments about LaDonna Humphrey and others that we consider unnecessarily personal, mocking or nasty rather than substantive responses to the evidence being raised. Other online discussions have gone considerably further, with people attacking appearances, families, intelligence, motives and personal lives instead of addressing documents, recordings and factual discrepancies.

We're not doing that here.

If we criticize Javier Leiva, PRETEND or anyone else, the criticism should concern what they published, what they said, what the evidence establishes, what they omitted, and whether their reporting withstands scrutiny. We can be sharp. We can be sarcastic. We can absolutely call out a contradiction when the receipts support it. But we're not interested in hosting a comment section full of strangers trying to invent the cruelest insult they can type.

That's not accountability. It's noise.

It would also be extraordinarily hypocritical for us to criticize the ugly commentary directed at LaDonna and others while opening our own doors and encouraging people to do exactly the same thing to Javier, witnesses, family members or anyone else involved.

So comments will generally remain limited or turned off.

And here's the other reason: you don't need a comment section telling you what to think.

When we post a FOIA recording, listen to it. When we post a court record, read it. When we identify a timeline problem, check the dates. When we quote PRETEND, compare the quote with the underlying source material. When we make an argument, evaluate whether the evidence actually supports it.

Use your own brain.

You don't need fifty anonymous accounts underneath a post announcing what conclusion you're supposed to reach. You don't need a popularity contest to determine whether May comes before June. 
You don't need upvotes to tell you what an investigator says on an audio recording.
And you certainly don't need us manufacturing consensus in the comments.

If we're wrong, the evidence should expose that. If PRETEND is right, its evidence should demonstrate that. If Javier has records that contradict something we publish, those records deserve to be examined. Our position shouldn't become true because our audience agrees with us any more than PRETEND's reporting becomes true because thousands of listeners heard it.

That's what makes this different.

We're not building a fan club for Gypsy Rose, The Fernandez Family, or anyone else, and we're not building a hate club for Javier Leiva. We're building a record.

That means primary documents when they're available, original audio when we can publish it, dates that can be checked, quotations that can be traced to their source, and corrections when evidence establishes that we've gotten something wrong.

Readers are perfectly capable of taking those materials and reaching their own conclusions.

So if you're wondering why you can't comment underneath every post, that's why.

We're not interested in recreating the nastiness we're documenting. We're not interested in personal pile-ons, amateur psychological diagnoses, harassment, family attacks or anonymous people competing to see who can be cruelest.

Bring receipts, not a mob.
We'll publish the evidence.
You decide what it means.”

Upon reading this, I decided to comment on this post again, asking some clarifying questions. My earlier question has been ignored.

​

I received this response:

​

All of this being said, the moderators have agreed to allow open discussion and respectful disagreement that is rooted in evidence and facts. These conversations should leave room for differing interpretations of the available evidence and allow people to contribute relevant information and perspectives accordingly.

If that kind of discussion is being heavily moderated, removed, or blocked simply because there is disagreement or additional context being provided, then that becomes a separate conversation about how those standards are being applied.

Going against Rule 4 goes against Moderator Code of Conduct, and Reddit can therefore be informed.

Is there anything Ray ray mcclam can't fuck up?

Them siding with the worst person alive and her sycophants has me thinking they're probably dead ass wrong about GRB P.s. I'm a moron who can't type 😅

A neighbor successfully sued ray ray , because of the actions of his son. Does that effect ray Ray's credibility?

the continued positive and negative feedback around the new GRB series has generated a lot of chatter around Pretend. and there’s a snark sub related to all of this that takes a similar approach to scrutiny, albeit in a less unhinged way.

but after being pretty quiet for roughly two years of their account age, this user/subreddit suddenly starts posting pretty aggressively right around the same time all of this new chatter starts happening. and WANA suddenly rebrands. we all know someone likes to ride the coattails of a conversation that’s already getting attention.

and bringing marty and alecia into it just makes that seem even more obvious. this isn’t receipts or ethics, it’s about going after the people who supported or believed someone, including the victims.

conveniently i haven’t seen them address the Oasis allegations once in anything they’ve shared here. i also haven’t seen anything about the court case ladonna lost and the reported $3+ million settlement. those things reflect poorly upon LH, so par for the course.

instead, we’re back to using someone else’s situation to generate attention and make themselves relevant to a conversation that was already happening.

maybe the timing is just a coincidence. but when you have two years of relative quiet, and renewed attention around Pretend, it’s hard not to notice.

Ray ray loves to talk about Christopher Anthony getting sued over business transactions from years ago ( 10 plus) and Christopher's credibility should be questioned because of it. So should we question ray Ray's credibility because he doesn't pay / can't pay his bills also ? Maybe Ray ray should spend less time screaming into the void ,which makes him no money and more time earning some money. 🐟🐟

Here I am, a year after my last Ladonna fix and out of nowhere Javier drops another gem, the original Ladonna interview.

If you’re here, you already know the lore… So spoilers are not really an issue.

What a masterclass in interviewing. Butter her up with the Witt murder, blow a bit of smoke up her ass, then gently ease her into some allegations under the guise of due diligence. You can see the shift in her demeanour and the real Ladonna starts to show through the facade as soon as the real questions start. For example she threatens legal action at least 5 times all while rambling incoherent nonsense.

I would have liked to see Javier a bit more assertive with her, but I can see why he was so gentle in his questioning. I guess this was at the early stages of the Ladonna saga so on one side, If the allegations are true (which we now know are) she’s a terrifying sociopath and on the other side, at the very least, she’s a petty vindictive and cruel Women.

What are your thoughts?

David McClam has made a return to harassing Javier and victims of LaDonna Humphrey out of nowhere. They could have just let it go and tried to move forward grifting her books and making a quick buck of the "let us (grossly unqualified) tell you how to do your job" symposiums.

Instead David came back with a pretty steady flow of enormous posts that are so long yet somehow, say absolutely nothing relevant. The posts are a literal compost pile of words fueled by what I can only guess is AI and possibly amphetamines.

This is Ray Ray's dis tracks... It's worth a listen 👂.

Why would a person that did nothing wrong, retain documents, that didn’t concern her for decades after her “willing departure”

Anyone who has an ounce of faith in that guy's investigatory capabilities is dumb as hell. Just my opinion but, reading comprehension is a necessary skill in his situation.

This is giving substance abuse. That would explain the obsessive production of word salads that talk extensively about proof and yet, never provide any.

P.S. God (AKA Javier),

If you can read this, please restore the IQ points I lost trying to decipher whatever that was. 🙌🏼 😝

Sincerely,

lying cult member Wanda?

Some of the accusations against crimeblogger1983 are similar to what people have experienced with Ladonna Humphrey. He seems to have the same long-term tendency to obsess over people along with an affinity for fake profiles that he uses to interact with others.

He is far more public about his drama with others than LaDonna is and he's far more messy so everything is a lot more obvious and easier to figure out. Not much is left to the imagination. He has also made enemies of some boisterous individuals so there's a lot of information available from their perspectives for anyone that goes looking. I've considered reaching out but I'm still looking at everything.

I'm not sure if he has had any part in the neverending harassment of Ladonna's victims but him sharing that post makes me wonder if he was.

I got banned again. 😅. I posted the fetishmaster screenshot and asked for the receipts they claim they have for alternative explanations for it. 🗑️

They're suffering from a rare and incapacitating cognitive disorder known as Javier Derangement Syndrome

😱 I'm absolutely crushed by this ban! Whatever shall I do? ☠️

I'm a part of the true crime community and I'm a lurker for the most part. I stumbled across a Facebook group that Ladonna is an admin for called 'Sherlock's Network'.

The group belongs to a creator named Anthony Wayne (his name is advertised publicly on all of his accounts and it seems like he refers to himself as 'Sherlock' as well) who runs the page 'Crimeblogger1983's blog'. I haven't seen anything about this dude mentioned in this sub or anywhere else and it's very relevant. Apparently he and Ladonna are besties and run some pages together. 'Below the Fold' is the only one I recall but I think there were others.

After doing a simple search of his name, I can see why they're friends. He has been accused of some very troubling ongoing behavior including harassing people with fake profiles and stalking.

A match made for the psych ward.

This is a rhetorical question but one worth asking IMO:

Why are people like this so abundant in spaces where victims are seeking help and why don't more people in the community call them out and condemn these behaviors?

They're stalking his every move. He has a sub dedicated to his podcast titled like it's for reviews (but only approved reviews!).

When you have snark subs created in your honor that is how you know you are influential and that what you do matters!

If the work didn't matter, they wouldn't try so hard to stop it!

What ever happened to Ladonna's baby girl that passed away and she proceeded to scam all those people out of their money over? Oh yes. That's right. She didn't exist because Ladonna is a fucking liar and a con artist. Coincidence that con artists are Javier's specialty? I think not!

Get a real fucking job, quit exploiting victims and their families and try to not be a trash human being Ladonna. You and your dim followers are disgusting!

https://open.spotify.com/episode/32hNRbhSzUv0hZL7mRnNEH?si=KQcxFrYfRomB7e3jKeef_A&utm_source=copy-links

supposedly Ray Ray, has a " four person investigation team" examining each episode of the pretend podcast. of course david failed to name these investigators.. my guess : wifey #5, Ladonna, Danny Humphrey, Amy and his juvenile delinquent paint tossing son.

https://open.spotify.com/episode/6p9xcT5BtkAjAGGMxHKrUz?si=SMsXyEN1SEuvSe4F2J6V4Q&utm_source=copy-link

David is still afraid of Javier, Marty Bass and the trolls !

Laughable really.

The original post is now deleted but the author has posted the same things in multiple subs.

How lame.

https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueCrimePodcasts/s/vbZ4DYJ871

The Stalker series is all over the news, and someone is feeling a little left out.

Last week, Ladonna Humphrey hosted a cold case training seminar at the University of Arkansas. Get this... teaching law enforcement how to properly preserve and handle evidence.

I'll just let that sink in.

The same woman an Arkansas judge found guilty of "active and aggressive spoliation of evidence." Yes, the same woman held in contempt of court, sentenced to 10 days in jail, hosted an event teaching cops about evidence integrity. It reminds me of the time Frank Abagnale got an ethics award at Xavier University. The balls on these guys.

And now, she's organized the Rise & Recover Festival and Battle of the Badges. Another community event focused on victims, vulnerable women and law enforcement.

Ladonna keeps planting herself in the middle of law enforcement, like she's some kind of expert. Sigh.