No Heroes Here

by Holly Hughes

As the last Thanksgiving holiday came and went, the social media sites were busy reminding us all that we have much to be thankful for. A lot of postings were put up honoring our military. Those brave men and women who literally sacrifice their lives so that we might be free. They are heroes. They should be honored, remembered and thanked every day that we breathe the air of freedom and enjoy all the rights afforded to us by this great country of ours.

Then my thought turned homeward. As proud as I am of our fighting men and women, I am equally appalled and embarrassed by what is happening on our college campuses across the country. We call them institutions of higher learning. The young people attending them are supposed to be our best and brightest. What a sad state of affairs. What exactly are we teaching these young people? Certainly not honesty, integrity, decency or compassion. Arguably, a well-rounded individual would be encouraged to learn and grow morally and spiritually as well as intellectually.

Instead, what has come to light, shockingly, is a hierarchy that values the reputation of a football program over the physical and psychological well-being of children. As we watch the Penn State Pedophilia Scandal unfold it becomes increasingly aware that multiple adults were aware of what Jerry Sandusky was doing and yet, not one stepped up to do the right thing. Despite the fact that Pennsylvania has mandatory reporting laws, the head-coach, the graduate assistant, the janitor, the janitor’s co-worker, the janitor’s supervisor, the head of finance and the head of business decided to disregard those laws and allow a pedophile to continue abusing children unchecked. We have all heard the expression that it takes a village to raise a child. All it would have taken here is one man. Just one to step up, to “man up” as it were. 

Instead, we see conspiracy of silence carried out by the very people who are supposed to be setting examples for our young people. Most, if not all, of these men knew that Sandusky had six adopted children and took in foster children. Not to mention, the hundreds of children he had access to through his “charity”, The Second Mile. Can any of these men argue with a straight face or a clear conscience that they thought pedophilia was a one time event? Part of the Penn State Alma Mater reads “may we do nothing here that would bring shame” or words to that effect. They have certainly failed miserably in this instance. The example they have set is one of dishonesty, deceit and disregarding the law if it might affect their bottom line. There are no heroes here.

Next, we turn to the Syracuse mess. Assistant coach Bernie Fine has been accused publicly of molesting at least two young boys with a third recently raising new allegations. At first blush, this case seems distinguishable. There was not a long grand jury investigation which unearthed multiple victims. We had no eyewitnesses to this alleged abuse. Or, so we thought. In a sick twist we now find out that not only did coach Fine’s wife know about what was happening, but she even made jokes about it with one of the alleged victims. She admits in a 2002 recording that she “knew everything” that coach Fine did to this young boy. In fact, she tells him, she looked through the window one time and watched while she was pretending to take out the trash. In my humble opinion the trash she should have taken out of her home was not the sack of garbage she was carrying. 

Here again, we have a coach, an authority figure, who not only betrayed the young boys he is accused of molesting but every student to whom he held himself out as a role model. Then we turn to the wife, who is, incidentally, still married to this man. The same man who she explained on the 2002 tape “had no interest in me and vice versa." The same man she told the alleged victim could only get satisfaction from boys and not her. A mother of three children herself, not only did she not rescue this young boy from the abuse, but she herself engaged in a sexual relationship with him when he turned 18. The woman with the power to stop this situation, instead exacerbated it. There are no heroes here.

Another disturbing university incident comes to us out of University of Florida, A & M. This past year a young man, a 26 year old died as a result of hazing. Which fraternity, you might ask? None. This was the band. Yes, the band. In the wake of this death we are now hearing an alarming number of parents coming out to the press and saying they had lodged numerous complaints about the hazing in the past. Some authorities at the school have come out in defense of themselves blaming it on certain students. They claim they strongly discouraged hazing and taught that it was a prohibited practice. But, ultimately, doesn’t the buck stop with the leaders? If they knew there were “rogue” students out there continuing to engage in this practice, why weren’t they dismissed from the band? Could it be, again, the reputation and monetary advantage to having them remain untarnished? I don’t know. What I do know is that a young man is dead and it could have been prevented. There are no heroes here.

Lastly, I turn to the events at UC-Davis. A group of peaceful protestors, sitting cross-legged on the ground with their arms intertwined were sprayed full-on in the face with pepper spray by the university police. I am a huge proponent of law order. As a felony prosecutor for ten years I got to know a lot of police officers and have enormous respect for them and the job they do. But, having said that, I cannot support the decision here to pepper spray a bunch of college students in the face for exercising their right to free speech. In all the reports released on this incident there is no claim that these students were threatening, verbally or otherwise. There is no allegation that any of them had weapons. No hint that the crowd standing around was rushing at the police or being intimidating in any way. Once again, the people in authority have failed to act appropriately. The people with the power to set a good example, instead used excessive force simply because they didn’t get their way. There are no heroes here.

It has been a sad and disturbing year for colleges in the news. Hopefully, these terrible tragedies will cause those in power to review their policies and their priorities. An acknowledgment that being charged with the molding of America’s youth is not a challenge to be taken lightly. We must not only tell them to do the right thing, we must set an example by doing it ourselves. If we trained our college students like the military is training our troops, with honor and a sense of duty we might turn out some heroes of our own.

Photos:

Striking Photography by Bo;

Marsmet551 

Lisa Ann Rogers 

NicoMachus

Tweet

What is Wrong With People?

by Holly Hughes

The more I hear about the Penn State pedophilia scandal, the angrier I get. A bunch of grown men sat around and did nothing for years, allowing who knows how many young boys to be sexually molested. 

It boggles my mind that a grown man walked in on the rape of a child and did nothing to stop it. Forget for a moment the whole question of who it should have been reported to. Just pause and think about what really happened back in 2002 in a Penn State locker room shower. Mike McQueary, a grown man, a graduate assistant at the time, has said he heard the sound of skin slapping on skin. He went into the shower area and saw a young boy, whose age he estimates to be around ten, with his hands pinned up against the wall and Jerry Sandusky was having anal intercourse with the child. In response to this assault McQueary turns and walks away. He doesn’t yell out or stop Sandusky from raping this little boy, he just simply leaves. He goes home and tells his father. Still, neither of them telephone the police. 

To this day, despite the indictment and charges levied against Sandusky, that little boy from the shower is still unidentified. No one knows if he is even alive today. Unfortunately, the statistics tell us that abused children often get into drugs, prostitution and other trouble with the law. McQueary tells his “boss,” Joe Paterno, who passes the information on to Tim Curley and Gary Schultz and nothing is done.

This case is a cautionary tale in many respects. Time after time there were multiple opportunities to stop this monster, Sandusky, from abusing children. As early as 1998, Sandusky was reported to authorities as having inappropriate contact with young boys. Despite the fact that Sandusky admitted to the boy’s mother, on tape, that he had showered with her eleven year old son and other boys and “wishes he was dead”, nothing is done. Despite interviewing another young boy who also reports that Sandusky showered with him, nothing is done. The District Attorney at the time, Ray Gricar, declines to prosecute this predator, and nothing is done. Thomas Harmon, who headed the campus police force at the time, closed the investigation and nothing is done. 

In 2000, a janitor named Jim Calhoun tells a co-worker and his supervisor that he saw Sandusky engaged in sexual activity with a young boy in the showers. The supervisor tells Calhoun who he can report it to if he wants. Again, another grown man, this time Calhoun, does nothing to stop the sexual assault of a child while it is in progress. No one, not Calhoun, his coworker or his supervisor calls the police and nothing is done. 

Another highly disturbing aspect is that all of these grown men (and more) knew Sandusky had six adopted children, took in foster children and ran a charity he had established for “troubled” youth. Did these men honestly think that those children were safe in Sandusky’s care? It is unconscionable to me that all of these men turned away and did nothing at the expense of every victim since the first reported one in 1998. Not one of them can honestly say they thought pedophilia was a one time event. Their behavior is indefensible. 

The average pedophile is said to have 100 victim over his lifetime, but I fear Sandusky is far worse than the “average” pedophile. This is a man who, thanks to his friends, had an endless supply of young boys to victimize. They enabled a child molester to continue unchecked for years. 

The Penn State officials, who had a mandatory duty to report suspected child abuse, never did so. Their answer was to take away Sandusky’s keys to the locker room. Really? Really? So, what’s the message there, “It’s okay to rape children, just don’t do it on our campus"? I have heard all the excuses. They didn’t want to destroy the integrity of the football program? Well, how’s that going for you boys? The janitor didn’t want to lose his job. How about his humanity? His compassion? His sense of decency? 

Having prosecuted homicides, hate crimes and high profile cases for ten years, I didn’t think there was much that could still shock me. I was wrong. The depth of this cover up at the expense of children is sickening. Even as I write this piece, more victims are coming forward. Sadly, there will be more victims unidentified than the number we will know about. 

As the Senate schedules congressional hearings and the California legislature proposes laws to prevent this from happening again I can’t help but think of the sad irony. It takes a tragedy like this for people to wake up and realize that we are failing the children of this country in horrifying ways. 

Frighteningly, it didn’t take a special hearing of Congress to prevent this particular tragedy. It would have only taken one of those grown men to “man up” and take a stand. To report this monster and expose him, before he abused all of his victims. 

Sometimes it takes a village, sometimes it just takes one good man. How tragic that we didn’t have one here.

Tweet

Another Missing Baby

by Holly Hughes

Once again, another child has gone missing and another mother tells an evolving story. On Tuesday, October 4th, 2011, at approximately four a.m., the alarm was sounded when ten month old Lisa Irwin was reported missing by her parents, Deborah Bradley and Jeremy Irwin. The mother, Deborah Bradley, initially reported that she last saw her baby girl when she put her to bed at ten thirty p.m. Now, weeks into the investigation, it comes to light that she last saw her at six forty p.m. 

She has steadfastly refused to speak with local media, when clearly, they would be the most effective outlet to keep Baby Lisa’s story alive in their neighborhood and the surrounding locales. Yet, when she does give an interview to a national media outlet, we hear more disturbing and unbelievable claims. 

Deborah Bradley insists she hasn’t spoken to her two boys, ages five and eight, about the night that Lisa disappeared. Another puzzling statement she has made is that she didn’t go looking for her baby, even in her own backyard because she “was afraid of what she might find.” On top of all that, neither Bradley nor Irwin are cooperating with the police and have denied police access to the two little boys who were admittedly present that night, until this week.

All of these behaviors are inconsistent with a mother who desperately wants to find her child. If my child went missing, the police would not have to be hunting me down, begging for an interview. I would be in their face, on their phones and setting up shop in their precinct. I would be tearing around my entire neighborhood, including my own back yard, looking high and low, shouting her name.

I would not lie to the police about the crucial time in question, altering my story by four hours. Surely, Bradley must know that in child abduction cases, every second counts. A perpetrator could be hundreds of miles away, seriously changing the scope and course of the investigation. I don’t think I’m alone in this. I believe this is the way most parents would behave who were not involved.

But does this odd behavior mean she is guilty of anything? It certainly raises eyebrows. Is it consciousness of guilt or just quirkiness. Are there too many coincidences and oddities here? The very first night that Irwin works the overnight shift, Lisa goes missing. The same night, incidentally, that Bradley is passed out drunk. Admittedly someone else could have known that Irwin was to begin the night shift, but who could have possibly known that Bradley would drink herself into oblivion?

They have hired attorneys and a private investigator to handle things. Well, that is hardly going swimmingly. They seem to making a bigger mess. The attorneys made a big deal of announcing they were going to be giving daily press releases and they would open the house, the crime scene, so the press could walk through. Well, neither of those things occurred, raising even more questions.

Much ado has been made about the fact that a “cadaver dog” hit in the bedroom of Bradley and Irwin. Unfortunately, that does not mean there was a decomposing body there. It could be blood from an old wound, sloughed off dead skin, or any number of other things. The forensic testing done on those samples will hopefully give us more definitive answers and point us in the right direction.

Although things don’t seem to look good for Bradley, there are other possible scenarios here. Maybe she is just an emotionally immature young woman who does not know how to handle all that has been thrust upon her.

Police have also reported that several credible witnesses have come forward to state that they saw a man walking with a baby around midnight, the same night that Lisa Irwin disappeared. They have obtained some grainy video surveillance that seems to corroborate that, indeed, there was a man out at that time in the reported area, but it is too poor quality to tell if he is indeed holding a baby. Then there was the finding of a backpack with purportedly soiled diapers in them found near an abandoned house not far from the Bradley/Irwin residence. 

Sadly, until Lisa Irwin is found, dead or alive, we will not have any more answers than we have now. There is always the hope that she was taken by someone who desperately wanted a baby to love and raise. At least that way, there is hope that she may be returned to her family some day.

Tweet

The Death Penalty, Back in the News

by Holly Hughes

It’s been a busy week for the death penalty in American jurisprudence.  We seldom hear so much about it from simultaneous corners.  From Texas to Georgia to Connecticut, we have seen it take center stage this week. What I find fascinating are the varied reactions to each of these individuals cases.

Troy Davis was convicted nearly two decades ago for the murder of off-duty police officer Mark MacPhail.  In the ensuing twenty two years since that murder, Davis’ case has been heard by twenty eight different courts, including the Supreme Court of the United States.  His legal team sought clemency from the Georgia State Board of Pardons and Parole Board twice.  Thanks to the advent of social media Troy’s case generated enough attention to collect over 600,000 signatures calling for a stay.  There were protests staged at the Georgia State Capitol Building and the Georgia Diagnostic Classification Prison where Davis’ execution was carried out.  Former Presidents and Popes weighed in.  

A lot of the news coverage stated emphatically that there was no physical evidence.  Other media outlets briefly acknowledged that there was some, ie: the shell casings, which matched  casings from another shooting that Davis had been convicted of.  Much was made about the seven recantations, but little was mentioned about the fact that it took seventeen years for those recantations to occur.

I am not weighing in on the guilt or innocence of Troy Davis.  I have not read the transcripts, nor watched any interviews of witnesses.  I am simply commenting on the fact that most of the reporting on this particular case was inaccurate or incomplete at best.  However, it garnered a lot of attention and gave opponents of the death penalty a great deal of ammunition in their argument against the death penalty.

At the same time, in Texas, another man was scheduled to be, and ultimately was, executed.  We didn’t see this one widely reported.  In fact, it passed relatively unnoticed.  On the very same day that Georgia executed Troy Davis, the State of Texas put to death Lawrence Russell Brewer.  Brewer was convicted of the horrific murder of James Byrd, Jr. back in 1998.  Brewer, along with his two co-defendants in the case, committed unspeakable violence against Mr. Byrd simply because he was African-American.  It was a hate crime pure and simple.  But there was nothing pure or simple about the inhuman acts perpetrated against Mr. Byrd.  He was beaten unconsciousness, urinated on, tied by the ankles with a heavy chain and drug behind a truck until his arm and head were severed from his body.  

While Texas and Georgia were carrying out death sentences, Connecticut was seeking to have one handed down.  This brings us to the case of Joshua Komisarjevsky.  This is the monster who broke into the Petit family home, beat Dr. Petit unconscious and tied him up.  Once that was done, he then, along with his co-defendant, Stephen Hayes, sexually assaulted the Doctor’s wife and two daughters, the youngest of which was eleven years old.  When that was done, Komisarjevsky took Mrs. Petit to the bank and forced her to withdraw fifteen thousand dollars.  As if all of these abuses were not enough, when they returned to the house, these two monsters tied all the women to their beds and set the house on fire, burning them alive.

Prior to this case, the State of Connecticut was debating abolishing the death penalty.  These crimes put a quick stop to that.  In the face of such evil, the people decided  they needed the death penalty, they wanted the death penalty and they were going to seek the death penalty.  They got it.  Last year, co-defendant Stephen Hayes was sentenced to death.

So, the question that arises is: why did we not see 600,000 signatures calling for a stay for Lawrence Russell Brewer?  Why are there no protests outside the Connecticut courthouse where prosecutors are currently seeking the death penalty against Komisarjevsky? Now, the easy answer is “there was little to no evidence against Troy Davis.”  Well, who gets to make that decision?  A jury of his peers, yes, his peers.  Seven of the original twelve jurors were African-American.  

Twenty eight different courts reviewed this case and felt that the evidence was strong enough, even in light of the late-in-the-day recantations. From a purely pragmatic standpoint, allowing social media to dictate who gets executed and who doesn’t turns the justice system into nothing more than a version of Survivor (no pun intended).  No one should be voted off the island but people who weren’t even involved in the game.

Again, I cannot say whether or not Troy Davis was guilty.  I am simply asking the question, “what can we learn” from this past weeks’ multiple death cases.  If you believe the death penalty is wrong, then it’s wrong for everyone, including the monsters who commit unspeakable horrors against their fellow human beings, sometimes for no other reason than prejudice.

If the problem is with the application, then how do we fix it?  Lobby legislatures?  Call for one uniform application of the death penalty, which would be forced on all states by the federal government?  I don’t pretend to have the answers.  I will leave that to minds greater than my own.  But I find it an interesting dichotomy that the folks who oppose the unequal application of the death penalty are themselves unequal in their passion of whom they choose to rally for.

Tweet

The Gay Panic Defense... Here We Go Again

by Holly Hughes

As jurors begin their deliberations in the case of Brandon McInerney (photo left), a fourteen year old boy charged with first degree murder, my mind returns to the first case that introduced us all to the term gay panic defense.” For those unfamiliar with this case, a little background.

On February 12, 2008, fifteen year old Larry King was working in the computer lab of his middle school. At approximately 8:15 a.m. the defendant, classmate Brandon McInerney pulled out a 22 caliber revolver from his backpack and casually shot King in the back of the head. With the entire class looking on, McInerney calmly fired a second shot into his victim’s head, dropped the gun on the floor and walked out. He was picked up less than ten minutes later and just a few blocks from the school.

After numerous interviews and a thorough investigation it was revealed that McInerney had told one of King’s friends the day before, “say good-bye to Larry, ‘cause you’re never gonna see him again.” He also told several other people he was going to “shank” King. McInereney even attempted to recruit other classmates to kill King. It makes you wonder what King (photo right) could have possibly done to inspire such hate from his classmate. Well, wonder no more. His defense team laid it all out in their opening statement using what has sadly, become known as the gay panic defense. 

This insidious defense first came to prominence in the horrific murder of Matthew Shepard back in 1998. There, Matthew’s murderers claimed that he had “put the moves on them”, made come-ons and was flirting with them. This allegedly put them in such fear that they felt that they had to murder him. They asked a jury, through their attorneys, to excuse the brutal, fierce, inhumane beating they gave him before they tied him to a barbed wire fence and left him to die alone in a field. Why? All because Matthew supposedly made some unwanted sexual advances towards them. I find this offensive on so many levels, not the least of which is the obvious lack of correlation to the rest of the population. If an unwanted sexual advance or come-on was justification for murder, than the straight male population of this world would be cut by about two thirds. 

In the King case I take another exception. Gay Panic Defense? Doesn’t the very word panic infer that someone is out of control? That they are in immediate fear, they are experiencing an overwhelming terror? That’s not even close to what we have here. By all witness accounts there was no exchange, verbal or otherwise, between the two students that morning. There were threats indicative of planning and premeditation on the part of the defendant the day before. There were no allegations of physical touching by King. So what did cause this extreme reaction? This cold-blooded, calculating crime? 

Words. Yes, words. King had allegedly said to McInerney “I want you to be my valentine”. King was known to wear make-up and high heels to school, which is protected behavior under California’s anti-discrimination laws. There seems to be conflicting testimony as to whether King was sexually harassing other students by speaking to them like he did McInerney. The prosecution presented several witnesses that testified they never observed such behavior from King. The defense presented a teacher who said other students told her King “followed them into the bathroom.” Either way, there were no allegations of physical advances or touching. You can’t just shoot someone in the head twice because you don’t like what they say. 

Don’t get me wrong, I do feel some measure of sympathy for McInereny. He is, after all, a fourteen year old boy being tried in adult court. He is a boy with a troubled past. His mother had a criminal history and was addicted to methamphetamine. His father was a batterer who choked his wife almost unconscious after she accused him of stealing her eldest son’s ADHD medicine. This kid didn’t exactly have any role models. The police found white supremacist literature in his room. There are a whole host of reasons this kid turned out the way he did, but lets place the blame squarely where it lies and not on the victim. 

One of the problems with the gay panic defense is that, besides being patently offensive and not a legal justification, it vilifies an entire segment of the our population making them out to be freakish or abnormal. This is simply not acceptable, any more than it would be to victimize the mentally challenged, or people of other races or religions and then blame them for their own victimization, inferring that they were asking for it or deserved it. Boiled down to it’s simplest and ugliest terms it is nothing more than the “they’re different from me and I’m better” attitude. 

I understand the need the vigorously represent defendants in a court of law. I do. I get it. And this boy certainly needs defending, but to propound a defense that has no basis in law and is nothing more than a thinly disguised prejudice is irresponsible. 

This case is a tragedy on so many different levels. Two young lives have been ruined. One taken forever, another irreparably altered. 

As the jury continues to deliberate the fate of this young killer I am hopeful that while they will consider all of his issues they will flat out reject this blatant attempt to legalize prejudice.

photo: Angelina Cupcake

Tweet

Trials: Truth, Expectation and Reality

by Holly Hughes

As much of the country watches transfixed, the Casey Anthony trial lumbers on. For a host of reasons, this trial has caught the attention of viewers who wouldn’t normally take the time to get caught up in these very public high profile cases. As a legal commentator, I have been privileged to cover almost every day of this spectacle for one program or another. As I watch it unfold, I am struck once again by the reality that at the end of the day we will still not have the answers we seek.

I was a felony prosecutor for ten years in metropolitan Atlanta. Needless to say, we were a busy office. I handled homicides, hate crimes and high-profile cases. I have taken to trial and to task a host of serial rapists, spree killers, armed robbers and death penalty defendants. I am acutely aware of the old adage that “a trial is a search for the truth.” However, I think most of the public tends to forget the middle of that phrase, “a search.” Any good trial attorney will tell you that by the time the verdict comes in we have usually only uncovered a fraction of the truth, and it is usually the truth according to one side. Despite our best investigative efforts there are just some things we will never know.

So many court watchers have tuned in to this trial to get the answers. Answers to the questions we have all been asking for three years now. How can a loving mother not report her child missing? How can that same mother go out and party like a rock star while her little girl is missing? How can she continuously lie to the very people who are trying to help her find her missing child?

Since the blockbuster opening by defense attorney Jose Baez, we now have a whole host of other questions. If this was indeed an accident, why would you let your client rot in jail for three years? If this was indeed an accident, why would you let your client face the death penalty? If your client was so sexually abused as a child that she turned into a liar of epic proportions, why would you not welcome the opportunity to have the state’s psychiatrists examine her?

As I watch this tragedy progress through its next phase, I know that when it all comes to its sad conclusion we still will not have the answers we seek. I fear, however, that most of the general public is still watching with unrealistic expectations. They want to believe that there is a reasonable explanation for what happened to this precious little girl. They want to believe that there must be a reasonable explanation for how a family becomes this dysfunctional. Ultimately, we will see only what they want us to see. That’s a hard pill for most people to swallow. It is, however, the difference between expectation and reality when it comes to criminal trials. We want answers. It is the natural human curiosity when we encounter such inexplicable behavior as we have seen in this defendant and her family. Sadly, we will all be disappointed when the jury files out to deliberate and there is no more evidence to be entered.

I used to tell all of my victims at the beginning of the process, “I will fight like hell to get you justice but I won’t be able to get you answers to all of your questions.” Of course, the biggest question of all is, “Why?” I also told them no matter what answer was given to that question, it wouldn’t be good enough.

I have yet to come across an answer as to why human beings can murder, rape and rob each other that satisfies me. People used to ask me what I did for a living when I was a prosecutor and I would tell them “I wade around in the depths of human degradation all day long.” That was the most accurate and honest description I could come up with to explain spending my days looking at autopsy photos and asking little five year old children, “what did daddy do to you?”

The truth is that you didn’t meet me unless and until some terrible tragedy had been thrust upon you.

So, as we watch with a mixture of horrified curiosity and sad dread, we must all keep in mind that at the end of this all too real human drama we will have more questions than answers. We must not set our expectations too high or we will come away feeling cheated and deflated.

That is the sad difference between expectation and reality. That is the world of a criminal prosecutor. It is by far the best and most fulfilling job I ever held. And yet, it broke my heart every day like nothing else ever could.

Tweet

New High-Profile Contributors Join WCI

by Women in Crime Ink

 

We’re sure our readers have noticed over the last couple of months that our posts have been three days a week instead of five. Trust us,; we were just as bummed as you were, but the spring book and deadline season has been upon us and we've all been swamped. The good news is that beginning in May, we're going back to our five-day-a-week posts. We're also extremely excited to announce that three new contributors have joined our ranks. Not just any regular bloggers, these powerhouse women should be familiar to you. Each one has appeared on many television networks and in print for their areas of expertise, including; ABC, NBC, CBS, "The Today Show," "Tyra," CNN, HLN, and Fox as well as The New York Times and People magazine, to name a few. Here they are:

Dr. Michelle Golland

Dr. Michelle Golland (pictured right) is in private practice as a clinical psychologist in Los Angeles, California, with a focus on issues relating to couples and individuals. She is also an expert in multi-cultural and community psychology issues. Dr. Golland is a national media psychologist and has appeared on CNN's "Larry King Live," "Campbell Brown" and "The O’Reilly Factor" on FOX News.


The media turns to Dr. Golland when they need an expert's opinion on the psychological issues related to anything in popular media. She is an expert and contributing writer on Momlogic.com, a popular website for mothers. Dr. Golland earned her doctorate with honors in clinical psychology in 1998 from the California School of Professional Psychology in Los Angeles. She received her undergraduate degree from USC in 1993. Whether it's couples wanting a deeper connection, struggling with communication or issues of domestic violence, she has the insight, compassion and tenacity to help those in need.


Michelle views any challenge in our lives as a chance to expand our understanding of others and ourselves. The pain we experience today will only help us in the future if we listen to what that pain is trying to tell us. We must be willing to rise to life’s challenges and reach out to those who are willing to help us when we need personal clarity. We must ask ourselves what we are turning towards and what we are turning away from in our lives if we are to gain insight.The universe will keep sending us the messages of what we need to do and change in our lives but many of us are not willing to listen or simply don’t know how to listen.


Dr. Golland assists her clients in slowing down and listening to what the world is trying to tell us about our life and ourselves. She believes the key to personal growth and understanding comes from the ability to be vulnerable with ourselves and those closest to us. It is only through the opening of our heart and soul that we can truly heal our emotional pain and discover our amazing personal potential. Dr. Golland is currently working on two books. The first is her view on relationships titled The Marriage Matrix. Her second book is a memoir, The Glistening Web: A True Story of Living, Dying and Being.

Michelle Sigona
 
Michelle Sigona (pictured left) is a true-crime fighter extraordinaire. Over her career, Michelle has covered hundreds of breaking and historical news stories such as the tragedies of September 11, the anthrax attacks on our nation, the D.C. sniper murders, high-profile prison escapes, national missing children and adult cases from Stacy Peterson and Caylee Anthony, and the international search to find missing toddler Madeleine McCann. Michelle is not only an advocate for victims, but she works hard day and night to help keep America’s communities safe. Experts agree that Michelle is a trusted source for a variety of safety-related topics, including identity theft, Internet safety, child safety and domestic violence issues.

Crime is not the only thing Michelle battles. For more than a decade, Michelle has served her community as a volunteer firefighter—fighting fires and cutting people out of vehicles after serious accidents. She has also devoted many hours to keeping children drug-free as a guest speaker for her community's D.A.R.E. program, along with serving as a keynote and master of ceremonies for many high profile companies and non-profit organizations.

Michelle understands that devotion is the key to success, as she worked seven days a week, and often around the clock to achieve her dreams. Her journey began in 1999 as an intern for the prime-time network TV show, “America’s Most Wanted.” From the moment she stepped in the door, Michelle knew that one day she would be a national on-air correspondent making a difference in the lives of victims. After her internship, things really started gearing up.

She was not only offered a full-time position with AMW, but also a second position in the same building with the local FOX 5 WTTG affiliate in Washington, D.C. Michelle couldn’t turn down one or the other, so she did both, along with attending college courses full time, living in her sorority house, and volunteering any extra overnight hours at her fire department. As Michelle worked feverishly through both jobs at AMW and WTTG—on very little sleep—she made it her goal to learn every position in both news departments to include the assignment desk, field producing, writing for shows, segment producing, and traveling the country to work with victims of crime.

Michelle’s hard work and dedication paid off, landing an on-air reporting position in Baltimore, Maryland. It wasn’t long before Michelle was on the air in Washington, D.C. as the daily traffic-breaking news reporter for the morning show from the sky in a helicopter. She also completed many fire training courses through the Maryland Fire and Rescue Institute. In March 2006, Michelle met one of her life-long goals of becoming a national on-air correspondent for "America’s Most Wanted," where she worked in front of the camera to help cases for many years.I t was her responsibility to work hand-in-hand with investigators across the globe to increase captures. Michelle's dedication to this role helped to propel the AMW hotline to new levels.

You can often see Michelle reporting live on national programs, including NBC TODAY show, NBC Nightly News, MSNBC, CNN, Fox News, and "Inside Edition." Tune in as she takes you inside the cases in which she is personally involved with. Crime fighting is what she loves to do, and making a true difference in the lives of victims is a priority.


Holly Hughes

For the past decade, Holly Hughes (pictured right) has served as a senior assistant district attorney with the Fulton County District Attorney’s office in Atlanta, GA where she prosecuted some of the most high-profile cases in the United States, including working on the murder case against Ray Lewis, superstar with the Baltimore Ravens.

Holly was a triple threat prosecuting homicides, hate crimes and high-profile felony cases. Prior to making a name for herself as a tough big-city prosecutor, she also worked as an attorney specializing in discrimination and civil rights. Ms. Hughes has hosted the highly popular “Nancy Grace Show” on CNN Headline News Channel and continues to appear as a frequent guest on the program. She has also appeared on Court TV as a frequent commentator and legal analyst since 2003. Additionally, she appears regularly on Tru TV’s "In Session," HLN Prime News, as well as "The Levi Page Radio," "The Cop Doc Radio Show" and "The Susan Murphy Milano Show" as an expert in criminal law. With more than a hundred media appearances,


Holly has been qualified as an expert in high-profile litigation and criminal procedure with the Cold Case Research Institute of Georgia. She is also a frequent guest lecturer at local colleges and law schools. She has been honored in Madison Avenue’s Who’s Who of Young Professionals. After ten years with the DA’s Office, she is now in private practice in Atlanta, handling criminal defense and civil matters.

Please join us in welcoming these amazing women to Women in Crime Ink! Also starting in May, Women in Crime Ink is featuring its authors and their books, as well as lining up some exciting guest contributors.

Tweet