pdlinda

Good point. I never thought of that and wonder how much the State pays for each foster child.

The show has lost all spontaneity and authenticity. I'm not sure I'll continue watching any more of this season. It seems like a waste of my time.

It is absolutely amazing to me when I observe the level of alcohol consumption on the show! How ANY adult can pursue an actual "relationship" with constant alcohol blurring and/or otherwise impacting his/her interactions with her/his spouse is astounding to me! Chris and Nicole are heading the list of "boozers" this season. I recall the season with Erik Lake (the pilot) and his wife, Virginia, where her continual reliance of alcohol to cope with every situation became an issue and they subsequently divorced (I saw on Instagram that he is now married to another). Sometimes I think the producers are aware of all the FLAWS in the "matches" they create so they rely on a steady, continuous free flow of alcohol to tamp down the dissatisfaction between the parties knowing full well that most, if not all the couples will decide to divorce either on Decision Day, or afterward (when no more pay checks are forthcoming).

I think that either the show paid for the trip (sure to be on one of next season's episodes) OR the trip was "comped" by Disney due to Tori's clout on social media.

Every time the camera pans over to Nicole's gigantic upper-arm tattoo (the content of which I can't discern) I avert my eyes because it is very distracting and unsightly (to me). I think I recall her having several tattoos. IMO, Nicole does not give a professional or refined appearance so that type of "look" might not be important to her. Considering her father's bombastic and super-critical remarks to Chris, her appearance seems counter-intuitive; however, I understand she is an adult and will tailor her appearance to her own standards. Both she and Chris have experienced a LOT of prior rejection in their dating lives so if either of them senses that he/she is being "validated" by a "caring" person, all bets may be off regarding seeing anything significantly negative in the other. I have been told by many men that the main feature of being attracted to a woman he chooses to marry is not her body type or physical features. Instead, it's whether she gives him a feeling of confidence and demonstrates that she places him in high esteem. On that basis, I think this couple, among all the rest of them, will have a lasting relationship.

Thank you for posting this as I, too, was scratching my head as to why they referred to the episode as "new"; however, I agree it might have been another true-crime show that featured the case. This was on top of a similar case (which WAS NEW) on Dateline where a seemingly upper-class, professional man was accused of murdering his wife by lodging a hatchet in her head while their 3 y.o. daughter was home and possibly saw the crime committed. The husband then went to work and left the little girl home alone to meander through the premises while her mother lay lifeless in the blood-spattered bedroom and upstairs hall. That "double-header" left me limp and stunned at the level of sociopathy displayed by 2 men with no criminal backgrounds and seemingly happy marriages. In both cases, there were financial benefits to killing the wives who both had life insurance that the surviving spouse cashed in after their death., I wonder if the insurance companies sought to retrieve the payout after each was convicted at trial of murdering the insured.

AGREED!!☺️

I would have voted not guilty if I were on that jury because, as you say, regardless of whether or not he did it, the State DID NOT meet their burden to prove it "beyond a reasonable doubt." I thought Jim's defense team did an excellent job of raising doubt in several areas. As a matter of fact, I leaned toward finding him guilty BEFORE the defense presented their case. Then I changed my mind. I was surprised they didn't interview the jury to see what the dynamics were among all the members to convict. In any event, I hope some circumstance arises where he can get a new trial. Last, I was surprised that the couple was in such precarious financial shape necessitating them receiving numerous collection notices, the inability to fix a washing machine and only having 1 car. If they didn't make such a "big deal" over Kathy "marrying up" into such a wealthy family, I might have felt otherwise; however, that there wouldn't have been some "family money"--a trust or a loan that would have supplemented his salary at Kodak (that apparently was not sufficient for them to live comfortably), was very surprising to me. I agree that Jim's panic over losing his job because he lied about receiving his PhD. and the financial stress the family was apparently experiencing, might have led him to "snap" and kill Kathy; however, I'm surprised that at least 1 juror didn't have a "reasonable doubt."

Despite what they say I believe there are VERY FEW recruits left in whichever city they stage the show in who want to be part of a traditional "marriage" that the show was predicated on presenting. After YEARS of potential participants seeing the drama, the lack of privacy and the contrived situations the producers create, only those who are "older" and less apt to be socially successful choose to subject themselves to joining the cast. Also, the lure of financial gain through becoming "influencers" on social media regardless of their success on the show seems to be a huge enticement. Many of the people in the last few years appeared to be marginally employed (if at all) and sought the limelight as a means of professional advancement. I think the season with Chris and Paige started the imminent downfall of the show.

Well, all I can say is: "Good for him." He seemed like a delightful guy who was a great husband and dad so however his talent and skill coincide with his ability to make a decent living is proof that Orthodox Jewish men don't have to conform to a stereotype. I definitely can see how his "act" would be a great success on the event circuit!

I agree that there probably is an Orthodox Jewish Community within the bounds of the house they bought and got a big "kick" out of his career (not sure why but found it interesting)! I'm sure his new friends/neighbors will be intrigued with his profession, as well! I thought the kids were so cute and delightful and the family as a whole seemed very compatible and caring toward each other. The house they bought seemed perfect for their needs and, hopefully, they will design other features to make it perfect for the long term.

No, I've never logged in. I guess I better take care of that...thanks for the heads-up🤭 Looks like I AM LOGGED IN and for some reason the edit choice now appears on the ellipsis. Thanks again!

Agreed. On another note, may I ask how you edited your post? I read the rules and "how to edit your post" but what they suggested with going to the ellipsis on the top right of the post didn't work. I only got the choice to "share." Thanks!!

It's impossible for me to believe that Andrea Canning doesn't know that her wardrobe choices are totally inappropriate for a professional news person doing interviews with people involved in ghastly crimes!! Apparently she isn't being told how her tacky appearance detracts from her professional duties or she has been told and doesn't care how she is perceived. Maybe her contract specifies that she can dress however she chooses. I thought the bright coral shirtwaist "dress" (looked like satin material) she wore with the side slit up to her waist) when she was interviewing Connie's immediate family members was the nadir of her image problem. Andrea seems to consider herself a "celebrity" instead of a serious news professional. Maybe her talents could be better utilized elsewhere.

My impression was that the dynamic between the adult child and her parents were quite entrenched and them propping her up financially would endure now and for the foreseeable future. I have family members who fall into that category.

I noted that the first jury voted 8-4 to CONVICT. The second jury voted 8-4 to ACQUIT. Having worked in criminal defense for MANY years, I can say that from my experience, the State will likely revamp their presentation in the 3rd trial and try not to continue the slide from guilty to not guilty on the next jury's part. I will also add, that from my experience, if AJ is acquitted after a 3rd trial, I wouldn't expect the State to commence an all-out investigation into who killed A.J.'s parents. Sad but true.....

I thought the most compelling evidence the prosecution presented was AJ's phone usage that showed no usage during the commission of the crime and a black screen during the commission of the crime that they said acted as a flashlight for AJ to navigate the dark upstairs where his parents were sleeping. I also learned in the brief snippet at the end that the prosecutor repeated all the privileges and rewards AJ's parents deprived him of due to poor grades and other negative behaviors, like drug use, prior to the crime just prior to the crimes. That included his car! AJ seemed like a good kid who couldn't possibly have committed such a heinous crime. HOWEVER, he was only 16 and such aberrant behavior, under the circumstances of his seemingly deteriorating lifestyle situation, might have caused his adolescent brain to act in this horrendous way. I am curious regarding AJ's financial situation after the death of his parents as that might explain who's paying for his presumably high-priced lawyers who have provided him with such an exemplary defense in what will be 3 trials!!

Not necessarily in that order🤭

He's a "slug"....absolutely, positively, little to no possibility of him ever earning a living on a steady, reliable and continuing basis

Add me to the club. I can't see any reasonable scenario where the Roloff's would have any additional story lines interesting enough to share with an audience on national TV. I also believe that ZiT's kids would be FAR better off not having producers and cameras around to create dramatic story lines that essentially distort their reality. The 3 kids would surely benefit from living a spontaneous life with their parents and extended family without constant judging and commenting from the TV public. Tori would still retain her "influencer" status on social media that would generate some cash, and, hopefully they have investments and other savings to sustain them financially until their children are much older.

The thing that stuck out at me about him was that I couldn't understand much of what he said because he spoke so fast....AND....both of them made reference to her "bossy" ways and that he "couldn't get a word in edgewise." Going into a home purchase together screams out the words "WARNING: TROUBLE AHEAD!!"

I was thinking that exact same thing when I saw an Instagram post from her this morning asking Lilah to say the name of some disney character whose night shirt she was wearing. Lilah grunted some unintelligible sound that Tori immediately chimed in to say without the slightest hesitation, seemingly oblivious to the fact that the child has a MAJOR speech problem that needs IMMEDIATE ATTENTION!!!

Who did she wind of marrying? I recall she made a big "play" for her assigned "husband" (believe his name was Will???) on the show but no matter what she did to entice him, he wasn't interested.

On that note, I wonder what Matt and the rest of the family (as well as Chris and Caryn) make per episode for the show? I'm sure their contracts have sweetened considerably through the numerous years of production, It occurred to me that the show is probably their main source of income and I'm sure savvy financial advisors invested part of their income into investments. Over the years (some better than others) those investments likely have produced a substantial nest egg that they may draw from irrespective of their real estate. My belief is that "pumpkin season" doesn't produce a lot of profit for the family. Over all, I think Matt and Amy, in particular, are well off financially for now and into the future. However, as with many people, there are those that, regardless of how many others may think their finances are adequate for retirement, they are always looking over the financial horizon with insecurity.

RIGHT! And....let's not forget he's been paid to do that "job" for about 20 years, so, presumably all that $$$ has been invested wisely throughout the years. Tori has also been paid (along with the kids, I believe) for about 10 yrs so that's her main source of income, although she must have significant additional income from her "side hustle" on Instagram. Zach does his DIY projects on his pseudo "farm" (like that bridge he completed) and, from what I see of their dynamics, he considers himself "gainfully employed" and the financial "superior" of Tori. I noticed that where once she kept Zach tied to her "apron strings" and "ran the domestic show" with the actuality of raising their 3 dwarf children, Tori has succumbed to a sort of emotional state of "malaise". I don't think either of them contemplated what raising their children (so close in age and special needs) would do to their marriage; however, with Tori shilling merchandise and posting on Instagram constantly plus filming, the apparent lack of household help is noteworthy. I do not see Zach changing in any significant way and that would include loosening up his "tightness with the dollar" and denying Tori his "OK" to get the household help they need.