Pleasant Grove Strikes Again

Megan Huntsman

After almost having gotten past the idea of having slept for several nights in a home that was within easy shouting distance of Martin MacNeill (of forcing his wife into cosmetic surgery, drugging her with the excessive medications he insisted on being prescribed to her, and then drowning her in the bathtub fame), it seems that the cosmopolitan city [note:sarcasm font] is once again in the news. This time, it is because one of Pleasant grove's residents has been arrested and charged with killing seven newborn babies. Megan Hunstman, 39 years old, allegedly gave birth to the babies, killed them, then kept them in her home in cardboard boxes. Hunstman supposedly lived with her three daughters, who are now between the ages of  eleven and eighteen.

I've read conflicting stories on her husband or husbands. One account has her being married at different times to seven different men. Another story says that her sole husband was away in prison during the interval in which the babies would have been born and killed.

Hunstman is a relatively common surname in Utah. the most prominent bearers of the surname would be Jon Hunstman, Jr, former governor of Utah.  No clarification regarding any familial relationship or lack thereof between the prominent Huntsmans and Megan Huntsman has been provided to date.

I spent a summer in an apartment roughly two blocks from where this all went down. the most recent murdered baby was allegedly murdered in the year 2006. It was in 2008 when I spent a month in that apartment. At least no baby was killed [of which the authorities are aware], but the lady and her daughters lived in the house during that first summer when I was in the apartment two blocks away. I'm pretty sure I walked by the house. It gives me the willies. I'm going to need pharmaceutical assistance in order to sleep tonight.

If the idea of eerie events happening near you  keeps you awake at night, you would do well to avoid Utah.  At the rate things are going, Utah will soon catch up to central Florida in terms of weird murders.

Jodi Arias Trial: Is It REALLY News: What Nancy Grace, Dr. Drew, and Their Mutualistically Symbiotic Talking Heads Wish for Us to Believe

A. J.  Hammer  on Showbiz Tonight to the Jodi Arias on Showbiz Tonight discussed ten reasons why our nation is obsessed with this case in particular.  I haven't paid attention to ratings, and furthermore, if self-reporting of viewing  and/or Nielsen ratings are the only gauges available as to just how obsessed America is with this case, I question their reliability and validity.   I'm not sure I believe that the American public is as engaged in this trials as are the talking heads of the media. Furthermore, a. J. Hammer hosts Showbiz Tonight. Neither Jodi Arias nor the man she killed were show business personalities prior to the murder. What is it about committing or being accused of having committed a murder that warrants qualifying a person to the distinction of "show business personality"?   It was bad enough when the media chose to try to pass off Kate Gosselin or any of the Kardashians to the rest of us as bona fide celebrities. But accused murderer Jodi Arias? What's next? Should she have a star on Hollywood's walk of fame?

The case and the trial are not without sensational elements. Anything that features much sex -- kinky sex in particular -- will inevitably attract an element of the public. Still, is this trial a water-cooler or copy machine conversation topic?  It seems a stretch to assume that it is. Even though I'm a bit out of the loop in what's happening in my classes since I'm skyping versus showing up in the flesh, the skype kicks in almost ten minutes before class starts each day. I hear other students as they talk, and they occasionally even include me in their conversations. The only reference whatsoever that  I've heard about this case  from my university peers is how tired they are of it and how they wish it was over already. They don't seem to care about the outcome. And they're not out of the loop. The dorms are provided  with free cable access.  The university students have as much opportunity to watch the coverage as anyone else, and they are tired of it. My suspicion is that they're not alone.

I admit to having  been obsessed with other true crime cases, from the Jonbenet Ramsey Casey to the Chandra Levy case  to the Lacy Peterson case to the Elizabeth Smart case to the Caylee Anthony case. Nothing about this case, however, intrigues me or piques my curiosity in the least.  If other regular members of the public feel differently about this, however, and are grateful for the extensive media coverage, such is their right to feel theway they do. If A.J. Hammer, Dr. Drew. Nancy Grace, Jane Velez-Mitchell, and others like them are truly catering to the interests of the American public, they are doing their jobs.

If, however, what they are doing is trying to inject themselves into the news itself - trying to make news of a topic that isn't really newsworthy -- trying to create news for the purpose of creating ratings for their programs, what they are doing is reprehensible.  Just because this apparently has been a slow news month doesn't mean the talking heads have any right  to attempt to make a story more newsworthy than it is simply by highlighting the titillating aspects of it.  Such is reprehensible.

And, as a final note, the semi-regular segment of Nancy Grace's  program where she is shown conversing with herself about the day's issue, framed in a totally blacked-out background with only her head visible,  looking at God knows what but certainly not at the camera,  is odd to the point of preternaturality.