“Blame the victim” is wrong when the harm was done by another human being. When the harm is done by a force of nature that everyone should know about, it’s a different story.

This site takes some sort of glee in willfully misrepresenting this case.

It does not matter if she wanted him dead, the local law* and common sense requires the wearing of a life jacket. He didn’t. And nothing she is accused of doing would have killed him.

Because it was the hinge of the prosecution’s case in addition to her [possible/likely] coerced confession after many hours of plying her with coffee and asking her the same question over and over again. Her confession appears like it was said out of frustration just so she could get the eff out of there.

She’s innocent. That’s the reason you’re confused. No life jacket, alcohol, choppy dangerous water, equipment not suited for the task... it was an accident, that’s all.

No one has placed that outside the realm of possibility. But when you look at all the facts, it’s way more probable that he died by accident. Even if she were a sociopath plotting his demise, she was so incompetent that her actions couldn’t even be a contributing cause to his death.

So, my husband and I kayak, and I really do think she was steamrolled. Honestly, neither of them had any business being out in a couple of playboats on the Hudson at night after having downed multiple beers. He should have been wearing a wetsuit and a PFD, and he was wearing neither. The kayaks they had were for…

Love Jez- but can you take more than 5 minutes to full understand the story you’re writing about before making a clickbait/false headline?

You’re not the only one. I kind of believe her at this point. The possibility she was railroaded due to ill-advised statements to police has been at the back of my mind every time this story comes up, and it certainly wouldn’t be the first time authorities have done something like that.

I’m convinced that the prosecution used her emotional state and the fact that English isn’t her first language to railroad the woman.

This is like the fifth article on this site about this case that has said that this woman was accused of “deflating” a kayak that cannot possibly be deflated. If you guys don’t care about facts, why should we.

SIGH. Every time this story is updated:

I love how he blames the Democrats for not doing something he doesn’t want done. What a time to be alive.

I can’t speak to all the redlining questions in the article, but as far as the specific woman it references, there are very significant gaps in the story that would preclude someone from saying she was “denied over and over again for a home mortgage, despite her obvious financial qualifications”.

I see your point. I can understand that her sense of humour might not be to everybody’s taste, but I like her books (they are funny to me) and I liked her Netflix show because she tried to make a talk show different from the other late night formats. And once Canada legalizes weed, if she sells her strain here, I’ll…

Really? I feel like Chelsea Handler knows her weed well, not sure why but she definitely comes across to me as someone who knows how to get dank shit.

How did Bethenny make popcorn and margaritas suck? Is this the hipster equivalent of “I liked it first, but now everyone else likes it, so I hate it.” ?

Not that we have to hold hands and sing kumbaya all the time, but honestly, what is the point of articles like this? What inspired you? I hate Chelsea Handler, so why don’t I write an article about how much her new business venture is gonna suck.

Woof - I would smoke Chelsea Handler’s weed. For one, let’s fucking support a woman for trying to break through a “man’s” world.

David you planning on going after Mitt Romney too are you just going to beat your and every man’s grudge with Hillary to death?