Comments by "L.W. Paradis" (@l.w.paradis2108) on "Dr. Todd Grande" channel.

  1.  @chad3232132  Of course he escalated the situation. He had no business chiding a stranger, or speaking to anyone without wearing his mask. So he broke a rule, too. He doesn't know her ethnicity, or the ethnicity of her immediate family, either. You'd be surprised if you think you do.
    6
  2.  @maaduufan5140  Her father had had a heart attack, he couldn't come. (You forgot?) Did you know how he paid for all of his kids' college? It's really cool: he won a $1,000,000 loto.
    6
  3.  @comfortablynumb5597  He's also generalizing about men. Plenty of "high testosterone" men are protective of all weaker beings. Their instinct is to protect, not crush, women, children, and fragile elderly adults. And small animals. Why blame them on the basis of generalizations and stereotypes if they did not themselves take steroids? They were born with testosterone.
    6
  4. I can listen to these horrifying cases only when Dr. Grande explains them. I cannot bear sensationalized accounts of what is already shocking and tragic. I need a calm, balanced voice and person to explain something like this. I learn so much this way, because I might never be able to listen to accounts of these events otherwise.
    6
  5.  @Hollylivengood  For a negligent homicide? Then the law is insane.
    6
  6. I'm a lawyer, and have read the books Peterson claims to rely on. I don't agree with his viewpoints, I don't find them original in the least, and can easily criticize him point by point. He slips in unsupported opinions all the time, and tries to make it look as though he has supported them scientifically. He is just pandering. This critique is too generous. I feel for him as a person because he and his family have had to struggle with health issues that are well beyond what most people have, and they are not to blame for it. He feels they need money because of these struggles, and that is why he is doing what he's doing. He's riding this wave. I could never do it, but maybe I should be more assertive.
    6
  7.  @Rokaize  Please reference the Supreme Court case that ratifies the police decision to draw guns in a case such as this one. I know I've never seen it.
    6
  8.  @Rokaize  I just downloaded the civil rights complaint, which took all of one minute to find. I suggest you do likewise. Everything Dr. Grande said in his presentation was correct, by the way, and very carefully expressed. (He'd make a great lawyer.) Happy reading.
    6
  9.  @joed1950  Well, a conscience would interfere with completing CIA assignments, one would think.
    6
  10.  @oldenmarlow339  A trust is not anonymous, but you're right, you may have some legal issues and need expert advice.
    5
  11.  @JB-nc1ug  Full approval gives anyone injured by a vaccine access to the 1986 compensation fund. Yes it matters.
    5
  12.  @thedarlingofdirling  Those are usually a bad sign. The opposite is true.
    5
  13. Good for you.
    5
  14.  @stevenkelby2169  In a society that provides you with nothing but scorn if you are one of the few harmed by a vaccine (or by the pandemic economy, etc., etc.). The countries with the highest vaccination rates have (1) comprehensive health care; (2) a comprehensive disability system; and (3) a more honest media, that candidly informs the public of the risks. It was Israel that noted myocarditis and endocarditis are a risk for young men who receive an mRNA vaccine. Our CDC still thought it was a coincidence. Israel has a higher vaccination rate, BTW. I'm not surprised. Think it through. Not stopping at red lights is vastly more dangerous to me and others than COVID. The analogy is inapt.
    5
  15.  @kristis4147  Ignoring the sworn testimony of someone who stated under oath that he believed, rightly or wrongly, that Rittenhouse was an active shooter, and concentrating on Huber is NOT unbiased.
    5
  16.  @cglenn1457  Non sequitur. No one suggested a jury cannot ignore a witness. They have every right to discount any testimony they consider lacking in credibility. The issue is why Grande is speculating on matters never entered into evidence, when actual evidence on that very question exists. Don't you ever wonder about things?
    5
  17.  @tove236  So sorry.
    5
  18. Two things about the wife's mental health and the drugs found in her system: first, if she was experiencing panic disorder, this could have been due to some intuitive sense of not being safe with her husband. That doesn't mean he killed her, because there were certainly other things he did wrong that she may have known or sensed, but her disorder by itself certainly does not make it more likely she committed the crime, either, and her panic could have been exacerbated by feeling unsafe with him. Second, the medications in her system: never underestimate the fact that major corporate interests are aligned against recognizing that some widely-prescribed drugs are very dangerous to a tiny group of people. So, there were interests involved in suppressing that possibility. That would make it harder for the defense to get a qualified expert to testify for their side. This is a tough case. Apparently, a lot of people who analyzed his entire statement to police agree it would be hard to fake believing his family was alive without slipping, and hard to fake interest in seeing the video of what happened. But that doesn't point to guilt or innocence, necessarily. It just means he really did have a traumatic memory lapse, making it impossible to assist in his defense.
    5
  19.  @NKN112011  I am as well. But I would never sentence anyone to death, man or woman, where there was substantial evidence of being used sexually. Not to take away from how phenomenally dangerous Arias was and is, and certainly not to blame the victim. I don't believe she would have stopped at one murder, frankly! That's the impression I get.
    5
  20.  @ralsharp6013  Well, not only that, but where else in the world does high school have a cheerleading squad? It's ridiculous, really. If they have to do it, to please their "customers," then tone it down. Make it more athletic, open to boys and girls, and not put girls on display. Serious private high schools here don't have this. It is a mixed message.
    5
  21.  @ralsharp6013  Exactly. At college, varsity cheerleading is entirely different, involves certain acrobatics that can be done safely, and includes men and women. But in high school, you often see minor girls sexualized. It depends on the school, but usually the uniforms are in poor taste or skimpy, no boys are involved, and very little gymnastics, acrobatics, or modern dance is taught. So what is it for? To teach girls to cheer boys -- who themselves are playing a school sport where they risk a head injury? I thought school was supposed to be for improving your brain. I wonder if most people know how odd this is, globally speaking. No one else has sports of this nature for young adolescents.
    5
  22.  @shiroganejpg  WOW, YOU MADE MY DAY!!! BTW, look up the first person to swim the English Channel four times without stopping. This you have got to see! ;)
    5
  23.  @kf10126  Bless you!
    5
  24.  @christinabernat6709  Great comment!
    5
  25. ​ ladyj7085 What do the two have to do with each other? Did Heard stay married? Is she a mother? Sickest jealousy I've seen broadcast openly. Save it for your little gauleiters.
    5
  26.  @SuMMeRFLi5  False. You clearly do no know the law or the facts.
    5
  27. One of the Manson family women married a Harvard Law grad. She died in prison. I don't know what happened to him.
    5
  28.  @therealdeal3672  But that fact is exceedingly well known. Oprah creates blockbusters in the book world. Her endorsement is literally better than the Pulitzer Prize or the Nobel, almost always.
    5
  29.  @therealdeal3672  We're on the same page after all.
    5
  30.  @chad3232132  The clearance rate for solving homicides has fallen from what it was, say, 50 years ago.
    5
  31. Can you move? Do you have security cameras, wrought iron storm doors, an alarm? Do you have an attached garage? I don't mean to sound alarmist. I think the risk is tiny. It is not worth the tiny risk is my point.
    5
  32.  @hedleybutler9706  Exactly. Close your social media accounts. I don't have any.
    5
  33.  @annettespizuoco9947  We don't know. It is suspicious. The risk is there. The risk of physical harm is, perhaps, very tiny, but is the risk worth taking?
    5
  34.  @markferguson3745  Narcissists are known to be extremely personable and appear to be not only normal but exceptionally accomplished in some way. This is how you will see perfectly good parents trust their child with someone who turns out to be an abuser, for example. Parents, plural: more than one family. An entire community, a beloved coach, clergyman, teacher, etc. (In denial much?)
    5
  35. Yup. One that will jeer at or shun anyone who fails to get vaccinated and comes down with severe COVID, or gets vaccinated and is injured by the vaccine. That's the society we live in. Oh, and no comprehensive disability system or health care, unlike UK, Israel, etc., countries with excellent vaccination rates. I wonder why . . . ?
    5
  36.  @m_christine1070  Which is not a formula for trust. It is pure manipulation. (I.e., what you've just described)
    5
  37. ​@yorgostsitsikas4350 Why should I believe a woman who needs to run to a major publication and "tell all," in order to deal with her romantic disappointments?
    5
  38. Correct. Calling the police on your own minor child for a crime that presents no risk of bodily harm to anyone is an incomprehensible betrayal. Yes, do rethink that before having children.
    5
  39.  @pagemastrogiovanni9195  Not correct. If someone asks me whether I heard Person A say something, and I did, I can testify to the fact that I heard Person A say it. What I cannot do is testify in Person A's place, as to whether Person A made a true statement, why they said what they said, etc. The bare fact of Person A saying something, or making any sound, is something I can testify to, if I personally heard Person A. Suppose this: a woman testifies to being raped. The defense contends she had a consensual relationship with the assailant and made up a rape story later. Can her friend testify that she claimed she was assaulted the very next day? Can hospital personnel testify to that as well? How else would you prove prior consistent statements? Her prior consistent statements don't prove she was raped (she might not have been truthful all along). They do prove she was saying the same thing all along.
    5
  40.  @Rokaize  Still can't find the civil rights complaint, huh?
    5
  41.  @JillJ-y5f  Dr. Grande just told you, that reaction does not last for hours. She might have simply passed out. But she was not "frozen" for hours.
    5
  42.  B0omer96  This is the attitude I appreciate! Much needed!! :) EDIT: I said this in reference to your INITIAL post only! Let's QUIT with the name calling! Even when goaded!
    5
  43. Seriously? The latest meme-slur impresses you all that much? "Cringe." LOL
    5
  44. But it's also common in scientists, writers, and university professors.
    5
  45.  @VonSolo5  Too tragic. No matter how bad things were, who could foresee THIS? I really want to learn to read people better. I tend to be overly optimistic.
    5
  46. Bill Clutter develops the contrary theory. Juries almost always return guilty verdicts, even against the factually innocent. I'd be petrified to stand trial for anything. I don't know that Clutter is right, but this is in no way an easy case the way most family murders frankly are.
    5
  47.  @xpsxps1339  They remained silent except to their lawyer. Their lawyer, however, did not remain silent. The facts have already been established in court hearings.
    5
  48.  @mjowsey  It may have. He had a rare form of treatable cancer, unlike most pancreatic cancers.
    5
  49.  @LKABCD  We were told it was his fault when it happened. No one could cover this up.
    5
  50. What are your thoughts about a minor going to an area of civil unrest with a large rifle strapped across his chest?
    5