And the plot thickens.... I don't even know what to say.
I think Jon should find some new friends.
Samantha - your avatar! LOL!Ok, I have been following this since the beginning, but do we know that Jon was hanging out with the brother Jason too? I know there are those shots of Jon and Deanna sunbathing. Was Jason in that shot? Do we know?I agree Jon needs to find some new friends his own age. I just am not sure I would tar Deanna with her brother's crimes. There are already a bunch of reasons Deanna is not a good buddy for Jon! I would like to go on the record as saying I thought the brother was a LOSER before any of his criminal past was revealed.
Anya -I don't necessarily think Jon was "hangin" with Deanna's bro. My comment was more "guilty by association" sarcasm. ;-) I, too, have been following this thing. Honestly, it's all starting to give me a headache.
Jon picks some great people to associate with! Good grief!I agree the brother is a loser, but I have to put Jon in that category as well.
FYI, Deanna can not have a criminal past and hold a job as a teacher in PA. She had to pass a background check and fingerprinting. It's probably the same in every state. Just thought I'd throw that in there.
I agree the brother is a loser, but I have to put Jon in that category as well.I don't think I would put him in the same boat as a former drug dealer/hitman for hire! LOL
Well, if I were to call Jon a loser, I wouldn't put him in the same loser category as the brother. He's at a whole 'nother level, IMO. Jon has faults but he's not a criminal.I don't want to tar Deanna was the same brush but even the fact that she's been living with a brother who seems to have been mixed up in some pretty shady things would be enough for me to want to distance myself from her, if I were Jon (not that there aren't already ample reasons to do so).
This just adds to the whole "What the hell is Jon thinking?" mindset I've had since the first tabloid stories came out.I know there may be a certain tendency to stay in contact with people you grew up with in a small town when you still live there as an adult, despite what paths different people take, because geographically you're going to run into each other. I've seen people forgive a lot of bad behavior in old friends because they've known them since they were kids and they know enough of their history and character to be confident this person isn't going to hurt them in some way. Having said that, these particular associates of Jon's, Deanna and her brother, though locals, are 10 years younger and aren't people he would have that kind of history with. Maybe there's some peripheral friend-of-a-friend connection we're not aware of that brought Jon in contact with these people, but, I have to say, he doesn't appear to have *screened* these people in any way before he brought them into his inner social circle or his home where his kids are supposed to be safe.I'm not saying Deanna should be guilty by association. But since it wasn't necessary for Jon to even bring HER anywhere near his family in the first place, I still think Jon took an unnecessary risk with his kids' physical safety and emotional wellbeing. He basically opened the door to Trouble and said, "Please come in and pull up a chair!"
and people wonder why Kate has a bodyguard. :)
IndianPrincess, I thought the SAME thing. I agree that this does not necessarily reflect on Deanna, but she was living in the same house as her brother. Most likely she had at least met his friends... that is not at all a good environment to have Jon's kids in, if he is friends with her and they are involved in each others lives.
Oh, wow! What a find for the tabloids. I am wondering if Jon knew about this? Apparently, the brother even hid it from the tabloids in his first interview. I could see how he could hide this info from Jon. But, then why wouldn't the sister have mentioned it? Maybe she didn't want Jon to know? Just the guesses running through my mind.It's going to darken Jon's image even more. I hope things start to get better for the Gs.
O my heavens! Even if they weren't having an affair why does Jon think these are good people to be around?
Well, in Jon's defense, I would guess he didn't know about the brother's background.I'm still not sure what to think about the affair story but the brother's credibility, already shaky to begin with IMO, is pretty much in shreds now. If you'll drive the getaway car for a murder, lying to a tabloid seems like pretty penny-ante stuff (I'm thinking specifically of claims that the brother wouldn't lie because, "he could get sued!").
Um, oh my word
Why is anything negative about Jason Hummel true yet anything said about Jon & Kate is made up, vicious lies. What do we actually know about Jon & Kate's past and who they have associated with in the past. Deanna Hummel says nothing went on - how do we know that she is not lying? Just asking?
Say It Ain't So-- if there was physical proof of Jon making out with Deanna then yes, I would believe he had cheated at least in that way if not sexually. There is not. This is legal paperwork proving Jason lied. That is the difference to me-- it is in the proof. While people can speculate and believe whatever they wish, I feel it is best to look for proof and, when I find proof, base my opinions on what has been found.This is proof that Deanna's brother that she lives with is a liar and a not so savory guy. There is proof Jon made some bad choices, but not legal documentation or photographic evidence showing he was apparently at her house at some point. (If you read my other posts you will see I think Jon is, at the very least, guilty of being a doofus as far as all this is concerned. Anything more than that is questionable, though.)
I don't think this Deanna is much better. Seriously, to be out with a married man at 2:00 a.m. does not speak well for her character or sense of morals. I bet the two of them set Jon up and he took the bait. Doofus is not the word I would use to describe Jon. Sorry but he was out looking for a little something something and got more than he bargained for.
Well I gotta say--first off, let us remember that this is the brother of Deanna and not Deanna.Sadly--many people in this country have toxic relatives.Also--truthful or not of these allegations against Jon--honestly, credibility still means something in this country and a person with a shady past who was paid to validate an alleged affair to a tabloid...I'm not saying that Jon didn't have an affair, but that it is questionable whether or not that he did if the sole person to validate and say Yep--my sis' "did it" with that 'tup dad--kinda makes Jon look like a Saint who did nothing wrong.(Hope that makes sense--IOW this is why credibility comes into questeion in trials b/c if a witness is not credible it casts doubt on whether or not their testimony can be believed--they could be lying.)As for why is what is being said about him is true and what Jon is saying is a "vicious lie"--Well, I never said that.If there are court documents and arrest records, they kind of hold up more than hearsay which is what is used to "convict" Jon at this point.(photos at this point, though questionable--show no hanky panky)As for being out 2am--she isn't the first teacher nor the last to have a social life.If everything is as innocent as portrayed (note--we have pics up them leaving a club in a car, suprisingly no photos IN the club or with whom may have been out with them)--then her being a teacher doesn't mean she is subject to the school marm hours of the 1800s.And sadly there are teachers who unquestionably make poor choices and have affairs--I get to hear about it all the time as I know several teachers and sometimes--the proverbial poo hits the fan and by the time I see them after school...they are talking about it.The field of education is not full of Puritans.(not to defend Deanna if indeed she made a POOR choice--but we don't know that and 2am is not against the law to be out as a teacher.)
Why is anything negative about Jason Hummel true yet anything said about Jon & Kate is made up, vicious lies.COURT RECORDS.
Oh yeah. HE'S a credible source. Eyeroll.Why is anything negative about Jason Hummel true yet anything said about Jon & Kate is made up, vicious liesUmmmm. Documented proof?
Please provide a link to these court records. Proof please!
Say It Ain't So-- the link is in the article this entire thread is based on. It shows up as a PDF of the court papers.
Lizabeth: Thanks for pointing me to the link. I did not see it. Okay, the guy is a skank by all definitions but that does not necessarily mean his story does not have some truth to it. Apparently he is guilty of poor judgement, something that many are giving Jon a pass for. Again, what do we actually know about the Gosselins past other than the stories they tell in their books and show.
Some truth or whole truth?Has he stepped forward and reiterated that despite his past, what he says now is true 100%?I'd be more inclined to "accept his testimoney" if that were the case.
If this is not a wakeup call to their family, I do not know what is.
Post a Comment