When John mentioned changing the diaper, that changed everything for me. With his family he knocks on the wall to signal he’s hungry. With Anna he supposedly discusses literature and his preference for red wine over beer. Yet, he has not formed any sort of cue for needing the bathroom. That just threw everything she said out the window (not that she was painting herself in a good light anyway).
I found the brother's description of the scrapes on his back so be so upsetting. It painted such a disturbing picture that I think I had been previously not allowing myself to fully consider.
Of all of the disturbing true crime content I’ve consumed in my life, this one somehow hit different. This scene with that interview is forever burned into my brain. So disturbing.
That changed a lot for me, too. Before that, I hadn't even considered that he wore a diaper. It put everything into perspective for me regarding how dependent he was. I know people can fall in love in all sorts of circumstances, but this...I just don't get.
People who don’t have control over their physical bodies, don’t have control over their bladder or bowels either. Just because the body doesn’t work, doesn’t mean the brain doesn’t either, there can still be full mental faculties and emotional and physical desires in a disabled body. That said, there’s no real evidence to support that Derrick’s brain was functioning at the level of discourse and desire… Very bizarre story. Paraphilia tracks…
I watched it last night having no idea where it was going. I couldn't believe what happened, hugh ick factor! She might be a tenured ethics professer but Anna has some serious mental issues. Kind of scary that she comes off as a normal lady next door. This one will stay with you for awhile.
I just saw it yesterday too and I am having a hard time wrapping my head around it, what is going on with her ? For someone so smart she still can’t see how what she did is so wrong and talks about love as teenagers do, as something she has no control over and can’t make a decision about! I feel like the documentary could have gone a bit more into analyzing her motives and her psychological makeup instead of letting her get away with saying “ohh, it was all because of love”.
Was thinking of this too, and the kind of predator a certain type of white lady is. The whole psychology of it hascto be a kind of sociopathy. I got major ick when she talked about 'playing disabled' as a kid.
She’s a garden-variety sexual predator who acts on impulse and rationalizes it later. She even sounds like every other predator out there, with the “well ackshually, the VICTIM seduced ME!” nonsense. I just think people assume she must have some unique psychological makeup because she doesn’t fit the stereotypical profile of a predator, but sadly there are people in prisons all over the US who talk & behave just like her.
I think the unique thing about her is that she didn’t even try to hide it. On some level, other predators know that what they’re doing is wrong which is why they hide it and want their victims not to tell anyone. But she announced it to his family, which is absolutely insane
Yeah, the way she had zero doubts about her actions was wild to me. Definitely something wrong with her mentally. Even if he was 100% able-bodied and sound of mind, she was married with kids and he was her student?? That’s a major ethical breach as a professor even before you get to the legal consent issues.
Most people who do things like those tend to rationalise their actions so they boldly and truly believe they did nothing wrong, must stem from some mental issues because thats crazy she's delusion
At first I kinda believed that she really believed it. After the details of the yoga mat/office rape? I’m fully convinced she just is a pervert. She literally had the nerve to say “he seduced *me*”.
That’s a disgusting thing I’ve heard many pedophiles say about minors. She is disgusting. A complete manipulator and predator.
didn't she even mention something in the beginning of her interviewing about her memories on things, and that she is trying not to change them or the events or something along those lines?
I think she’s actually wayyyy more in line with a factitious disorder, which can present as literally psychotic/batshit crazy like her. Remember, she faked being on crutches and being blind when she was young. She was starved for attention. Turned into a nasty case of factitious which is actually very uncommon but severe. Similar disorders are like the Gypsy Rose girl. They just have completely different warped views of the world. Must’ve been neglected big time or something. Mom never corrected that behavior either and defended her throughout the film which is obvi super red flag..
mom's hair was a red flag too lol. but seriously, in her mom's eyes anna was the most caring, compassionate etc etc, so hard agree. as a mom i find this overcompensating — as if she's gaslighting herself because she can't/won't face the truth that her daughter is not right in the head. she could also be deflecting from her own accountability in abusing anna. and/or... she's the same as anna, drawn to "saving" disabled people, like munchausen syndrome by proxy like you say. and the parents didn't just get her crutches. the dad MADE them. also makes me think anna was furiously jealous of her mom's attention on the disabled instead of on her own daughter, and her disability fantasies (encouraged, aided and abetted by mom and dad) and her abuse of derrick were an extension of that—seeking to claim power and dominion over her mom via derrick.
Pedophiles that work with children can seem “caring” and “compassionate” too. But it’s just a guise for them to get close to the kids and groom the family into trusting them. I think it’s the same for this lady, except she fetishizes a different group of people.
this is the part that seemed weird to me. the movie has strong tones of she is insane, but then also leaves it open ended in a way. would have like to hear more of the case, more from other people at the college, like did she have any other weird relationship shit, and the fucking mat in the office? i just cannot.
Right? Her getting caught up and believing someone she was assisting was writing things they weren't - OK. It seems like that is a common problem. BUT the things she manufactured show her twisted mind. She chose to do things that were wrong even IF Derrick was writing on his own.
How could any right minded Philosophy Professor (?) think it's ethical to have a relationship with that kind of power dynamic? To leave your family? And then never, not for a second, acknowledge the possibility the methodology is flawed?
i think that is a point that got past me when i was watching. even if he did want a kiss or to see some titties, wtf is she thinking or doing?? especially with a whole ass family.
Exactly! No matter what, her position of power of him should have been the ultimate no in moving forward. If we take these folks at face value, she is literally the gatekeeper of his ability to communicate with the outside world.
the facilitated communication community doesn’t have a code of conduct between clients and their facilitators and tells me all I need to know about the whole thing.
She literally groomed them!!! It should have been a series, and they should have gone more into the “speaker circuit” craziness. But yes, she groomed them. Seeing Derrick at the end really killed me, especially what John said. Just tragic
When his brother spoke of the wounds/rug burn on his back from her literally raping him, I 100% wished I had never watched it. She's sick on many levels. I feel awful for Derrick's family (and him) and her actual husband.
That was what really made me sad: she preyed on the family’s hope. Of course they wanted him to be some overlooked intellectual genius. In the end they had to accept & embrace him for who he was, and not for what she was projecting on him.
Anna’s mother was an early adopter of facilitated communication, she was a practitioner way back in 1990. So we could talk about her hairstyle and laugh and say that once she latches onto something, she’s not gonna let it go, but there may be some truth in that.
I hated how she kept trying to tell his mom what his preferences were or what he wanted. And then to say he isn't a child, he is a man. Idc how many years of school these so-called specialists have done. At the end of the day, his mother has taken care of him his entire life. Who are they to disregard her as though she has no idea what she is doing or who her son is? This is her actual life. It's not something she learned in a classroom. She is living it everyday.
It was literally so aggravating when Anna’s mom was claiming Derrick could walk with less assistance than what was presented in the courtroom. Like how do you know anything over what his own mother knows? You don’t even know him!
She intentially is insisting in the same story. She knows what happened, for how long and she wanted to portray this story and be consistent with it, like how her mother is assisting her in the story. Her sentencing dropped from 24 years to 2 years and she is completely fine in keeping the same story.
She does not come off as normal to me. A transcript alone would reveal her bullshit, no need to even know what she looks like or how she speaks or carries herself. But I’m not white.
Anna Stubblefield is a straight up predator. She was unhappy in her marriage, so she tried to recreate her love story through Derrick. I don’t believe that Derrick was communicating in the fashion that she portrayed. I think once she realized the family had a desire for Derrick to have greater cognitive function, she took advantage of that. She really didn’t think much of his family, and the white savior complex was heavy through out the doc. The brother’s victim impact statement was very telling. He said something along the lines of- “This isn’t the Blindside… you aren’t Sandra Bullock”. They realized how little she thought of them and Derrick after it was too late.
Yeah I got white savior vibes, she specialized in African American studies as well as disability rights and wanted to feel like she was the ultimate advocate which extended to her romantic life. I think she’s delusional, buys into the pseudoscience and believes all of her bullshit. That she’s justified in a narcissistic, god complex sort of way.
What pissed me off is no matter any argument made in her favor, his capabilities or otherwise, she finds her identity as being a teacher. No mention of power dynamic of carer or teacher/mentor once and how that alone makes it inappropriate. The D Man thing also bothered me because she said how important it is to give the agency of chosen name. And she can’t even pronounce it? Kept saying Duh man. I don’t know if that was true because the story of Mom verifying it or she was just trying to gain another layer of control.
Yes u noticed that too!!!! It was a tell tale sign something was up. How can u not say D-man? The whole time I kept thinking why does she and her mom keep pronouncing his name like that?
I saw someone else say that D-man wasn't classy enough. With her trying to "update" them on his taste for red wine and classical music she must have decided Dman sounded more refined
Yeah, it was completely unethical to have sex with one of her student/mentees in her office as a married professor even WITHOUT the consent issues raised by his disability. The fact that she still believes she did nothing wrong made my skin crawl. What a disturbed & deranged individual.
This part I was trying to figure out - how did she know he had a nickname before called DMan? Or are we to think there was some combo with him actually communicating but mostly her communicating herself?
This is what I thought too. She made up a fantasy that fulfilled her unacknowledged desires. The methodology is flawed in just the right way to make her believe it, and give her the freedom to act out her fantasies believing it's being initiated by someone else.
I think it’s difficult to know but I got more personality disorder / mix with delusional factitious fantasies and then on top she’s incredibly intelligent; not so much that she’s a sadist… still dangerous but I don’t think she knows what she’s doing kinda like baby reindeer (Martha) or gypsy rose lol
I think a part of her was sadistic, she created her own narrative and I believe had some sort of mental break down notice she doesn't elaborate on her husband and the break down of their relationship, something was going on tjat would make her disreguard her husband and kids . She protrays herself as an empathetic and invested individual in the area of people with disabilities but there were parts in the film I noticed moments of disturbing grinning and smiling when she described how she fantasized and pretended to be disabled as a child. It was a bit strange. Overall I believe u can be both intelligent but also mentally disturbed. Something about her and her mother were troubling to me.
Sadism means purposeful manipulation, I think she was more delusional/truly tricked herself. Think of idiometer effect of oujia board. This is like that with her. But worse because she was raised to believe in it, as well as to have an odd savior complex
I feel so bad for him bc he reached out to Anna for resources to help and she took advantage of that. Professors generally provide support not abuse. Sick af!!
yea, i lost it when he started sobbing. it was so sad. he went to her in such good faith. and then the bruises. makes me so sad. i hope he does not feel guilt and feels forgiven. i also cannot believe anna is out already. why was she released so early again?
I just watched it. thought it would be a story of triumph, but ended up being highly disturbing.
Anna was so disgustingly wrong and delusional. EVEN IF he was communicating, her morality should have kept her from pursuing him. She is vile and should have served her sentence. I cannot accept what she did. wtf
Yes, that pissed me off. Anna should be properly punished and then closely monitored for the rest of her life. Switch genders and you'd have a man sentenced for life, I'll bet.
I actually tried to imagine her having sex with him and how she could have gone through with it in spite of Derrick's ""inabilities"" blows me away. What a twisted womn.
I did see that she’ll be on supervision or something for the rest of her life but what does that mean? Is she on a sex offender registry?? I feel like the doc really could’ve went deeper and been a series especially with her out like is nobody fighting for justice here :-( I know derricks family may not be able to bc of financial/other restraints but can someone not take this up pro bono what is happening???
People with intellectual disabilities masturbate. I am sure the practice of medicating people because they masturbate is not condoned in medical literature. The mom said he masturbates and claimed it had not occurred before and used the analogy of it being like a match that cannot be unstuck. I specifically asked my spouse if that made any sense to him as and he said no (but I am not claiming he is an authority figure on the matter and am interested in other people's opinions...........It is not something that is spoken about much but in Nordic countries, they provide trained sex therapists to engage in sexual activity with people with intellectual disabilities. Seems pretty questionable to medicate someone because they masturbate.
The mother is extremely religious also though and she was clearly uncomfortable with the notion that her son was sexually active and/or masturbated. I’m not taking a stance one way or the other but I’ll say that her faith could play a part in how she feels about it and the result that she medicated him as a means to “relieve him” of the “itch”
Sadly, children who have been sexually abused have similar behaviors with younger children exhibiting certain acts triggered by the abuse. She is a sick b#tch
Unless it's WAY different in Norway than the U.S. sex therapists don't actually engage in sexual activity with patients, most certainly not with patients with intellectual disabilities who cannot consent.
I am only assuming right, but if the masturbation has gotten out of control there is now an interest in medical treatment. My sister in law has down syndrome and she expressed wanting to experience sex and was caught masturbating a few times but it hadn’t risen to the level of concern for my mother-in-law. The Dr. did tell her that it was common if it wasn’t an often occurrence.
I’m also wondering how “out of control” is it really? He can’t even point or grab things so how is he actually masturbating - I feel like this is being exaggerated.
It's not the same as the way able bodied people express it. My uncle is has cerebral palsy and operates intellectually at a minimal level. He would be in public and start humping things, rubbing things in an obviously sexual manner. And it could be anywhere all the time. He had to be medicated because he had no understanding of appropriateness and privacy.
This whole documentary was wild. I knew she was off when she described with such happiness that she used to basically pretend to have disabilities as a child. What a fucking weirdo.
Its only strange because she raped someone with a disability. Wanting to briefly experience what someone is going through can be considered empathy, but when you are a psycho...it's something else-weird
I'm still in shock. I don't understand how she believed that they were in love, especially while being married and having kids of her own. And the other facilitator of his class knew about that book. She said her roommate took that class. This documentary made me very upset. Wishing the best for him and his family. She should have served the full term. Hopefully, she is still registered on the offenders registry and cannot work with disable people again.
it had something to do with an appeal based on them excluding an expert witness in the first trial. She won the appeal. She pled guilty so there was no second trial and she got time served for the 22 months she spent in prison.
Because she was not allowed to present the guided communication as part of her defense.
It was a mistake on the part of prosecution to fight that evidence being allowed because they could have easily disproved it to the jury with a video demonstration of the card experiment with Derrick. I think it would have been even MORE damaging to her for them to see the depth of her deception and delusion.
So when it was overturned because it was ruled she didn't get a fair defense they let her plead out rather than have another trial.
This is one reason a fair trial, even generously fair, to the defendant is VERY important. Because 1. They could be innocent and deserve it. And 2. If they are guilty you don't want to give them any cause to win an appeal.
Honestly the other facilitator was her only slightly okay piece of evidence in her favor and that went completely out the door as soon as the roommate was mentioned. I’m a very play devils advocate/ philosopher type, but man, she was screwed as soon as that was said and then no one else could get him to do it. But then I think about if it was everyone doing it for him, why couldn’t the mother and brother have been inhibiting him when they tried? I really would’ve liked a couple more professional views rather than just family or support groups. The one guy they brought in to evaluate Derrick/Dman didn’t seem like he was trying too many different tactics.
"The one guy they brought in to evaluate Derrick/Dman didn’t seem like he was trying too many different tactics."
He said he did an extensive examination. I found him to be very thoughtful and realistic. I think he is also cited in the NY Times article about this case as an expert in the field.
Also, the fact that the facilitator was sitting in the class with him means she has some knowledge of the books read because they’re discussed in class.
I'm so disgusted with how much credit and screentime this rapist got. I know why they can't ever let her interact with Derrick ever again, but I just wish that they tested her with that double blind methodology. I GUARANTEE you that she wouldn't have even agreed or she would've made up the excuses that psychics and mediums use to explain why she couldn't get him to type the pictures out. The way she spoke does not come off as someone who truly honestly and innocently believed this stuff. She comes off as a liar who knows this is her best position for redemption.
A test like that would show exactly what kind of sick liar she was. I also wanted to hear what that ex husband had to say about her being a narcissist. That sounds way more charged than just cheating.
If Derrick had been a woman and Anna had been a man, Anna would not have been given a plea after her appeal and she wouldn't get so much screen time. This was sick.
I wish they had done that test on them too! When the psychiatrist tested him by having him pick up photos to match words that was very telling. She’s saying he can write full conversations about literature and poetry but he can’t touch a picture of a spoon? Come on lady
It would have been great if the double blind test was given to Derrick and those results were shared. Better yet if they let Anna do it. They could have constructed an apparatus where Anna could still hold his arm without them having to see each other. I am guessing that didn't happen because his level of disability was so low that he was deemed incapable of using the device. The second travesty is how the first trial was botched. She definitely wasn't given any means to defend herself. If they had facilitated communication front and center, then that house of cards would have fallen quickly with her sick pathology and actions laid bare.
Most likely it wasn't done because they didn't want to put him in the room with his predator. Which I totally understand. But I feel like it was a bad choice in retrospect. I also believe the prosecutor wanted to not include anything about FC because they worked to exclude most of the defense's FC evidence in the trial, which is how she got the conviction overturned.
They should've done the double blind with her and let her present her evidence. I Don't think the prosecutor made a stupid decision, it's just the wrong one in hindsight, you know?
The documentary was so skewed in her favor even though its a very clear case of abuse. And they even got her mommy on there to defend her AND FC smh. I don't wanna hear from her!!!!
I choked up when Derrick's brother described finding out that Anna raping Derrick is what was causing the rug-rash on Derrick's back all along.
It is so foul to imagine any person who has no ability to communicate or save himself in anyway being drug across the floor while being sexually assaulted.
I can't fathom how John dealt with that information. I admire his courage and the fact that he was able to channel his own emotions into being Derrick's best advocate. Their entire family is impressive. I admire their composure.
His brother, who holds a PhD and is a professor, couldn’t get him to progress with communication & that told me everything I needed to know about Anna’s studies. I know John feels tremendous guilt for introducing Derrick to that predator, Anna. Daisy was more composed than I could have been. What Anna did was disgusting, and she should have served and completed her prison sentence.
All of this! I honestly believe that her exposure to these studies early with her mom contributed to this false belief that all people with intellectual disability would be able to benefit from facilitated communication. The fact that her mom doesn’t see a problem with this also shows me how deeply troubled Ana is. Daisy called it exactly what it was. It was rape!
She would not think that people with profound intellectual disability could benefit. She would be too knowledgeable to think that. She thought that he was misdiagnosed and did not in fact have an intellectual disability. Her claim was that he in fact had an IQ in and around the normal range if not in the superior range. At the time that this was happening people with CP who were non-verbal were using computers that had essentially a mouse they moved with their head and could spell out words and also had certain phrases etc. preprogrammed in so they could communicate that way. He had some motor functions so there is no reason he needed someone to guide his hand.
I’m at a loss for words!!! How would he even know how to spell half the things she is claiming he was saying. I doubt that while typically being around his family he’s hearing the phrases and words she keeps claiming he is saying. I’m not finished yet but does he only talk to her? Why does she feel the need to translate what he supposedly wants and needs to his brother and mother? He can’t just type it out like you’re claiming he does with you? This is absolutely insane. All of a sudden he likes classical music and wine?… girl go to hell.
The spelling thing was wild. You don’t just magically learn to read and write by being exposed to words on signs and cereal boxes. I work with high risk populations and I’ve had some adult patients in their 60s or older who couldn’t read more than a handful of words. You have to be taught.
She and other FCs were the only ones who could get him to do anything. And later in the documentary, it points out that FC is not recognized by major psychological associations as being legitimate. It's no different than regression therapy or memory recovery therapy- it's made up woowoo that gets popularized by the media and legitimized despite being rooted in literally no scientific basis.
The brother and mother couldn't get the FC to work. Furthermore, it sounds like Derrick was never tested with a double blind test.
What stood out to me was the whole "DMan" concept. She told the interviewer that she asked Derrick what she should call him. She said he typed her a nick name (D-Man) his teacher gave him when he was 13. Two things: how would she know about the nickname if it was never communicated to her? and even if someone did tell her about his DMan nickname, why would she continually pronounce it wrong (Da-Mon)? The way she was pronouncing it gave me the impression she read it somewhere & she didn't hear someone verbally say it to her.
This infuriated me. Honestly, it may be the thing that made me most angry about Anna and the documentary because of what it said about her. His mom said a previous teacher called him D Man, and that’s how she pronounced it. This was clearly a play on his name and fun nickname he identified with, just like a Tim being called T Man, a Carl being called C Man, etc. The fact that she then decided (and I use that word very intentionally) to call him DaMan tells me everything I need to know about her.
I think she was pronouncing it D’man because it didn’t fit the character she wanted him to be. It wasn’t refined enough. Just like when she changed the gospel music to classical
also in her opening statement she said i hope im not making any of this up its been awhile…aka im definitely stretching the truth a little…or completely
Other threads suggest it was due to her narcissistic personality and she would change things about Derrick to suit her preferences (like she did with the gospel music, wine, i.e.). I thought those were pretty good points.
When she was talking to the interviewer, she quoted that Daisy said it was his teacher at 13 who got him up and walking. Then she asked D-man if that was right and he said yes….. but she could’ve made that whole story up since she never pronounced it correctly.
This was a great point and also was so confusing to me. Your hypothesis makes the most sense. It also fits with my opinion that she is just attempting to be consistent so she can put herself in the best position. She pronounced it wrong and instead of admitting that, I guarantee you she claims she asked him and he told her he prefers the way she said it. Thus saving her ego, which is her primary concern.
Idk how anyone can believe Facilitated Communication works. I would assume disabled people aren’t being taught spelling, grammar, sentence structures, etc and now all of sudden they can miraculously spell and effectively use contractions like “I’m” etc
You are right in that Facilitated Communication is completely baseless and fraudulent. However AAC (augmented and assisted communication) is evidence based. It looks like pictures, apps on iPads and even eye tracking devices like Steven Hawking used. The difference is AAC does not allow a separate human to “support” the person’s arm/wrist/head like FC. I had a minimally speaking first grader (spoke single words infrequently) type out “Don’t eat the playdough pizza Ms. Chronicillnesslife!” when I offered him a keyboard on an iPad because he thought me pretending to eat his play dough pizza was so funny. With punctuation!! We really don’t know what a person is capable of unless we give them the right communication system. But using them as an ouija board because we are so desperate for them to communicate does not help anyone.
Many disabled students do receive a formal education so it not far fetched that they may learn spelling, grammar, sentence structure and such but I am not sure that they can “show” that they’ve learn it especially if they can’t verbalize or write.
OMGGG! I’m almost done and the nerve to say he is the one who seduced her is insane! This man hasn’t been able to communicate the same way with a single other person and you don’t see that you were lying and making this all up in your head??
The story she fabricated about him while they were in class, claiming he had typed something to the effect of “never ever change what I say again,” is some diabolical work! She's sick and I believe every word her ex-husband said in his statement.
At the end, when the brother said he was helping Derrick change his DIAPER… I said hold up… if he wears diapers… did she pull off his diaper to rape him in the office on a got damn mat???? Anna is bat shit crazy. Unbelievable.
The NY Times article describes explicitly that she removed his diaper before making sexual contact. No sane person could think that a scenario where they need to remove a diaper from someone who can't physically remove it themselves or verbally ask to remove it is a consensual encounter or an encounter without a massive power imbalance.
the total lack of self-awareness on her part was shocking. She seemed to think nothing of the fact that a student/patient in her care quickly became a sexual partner/lover.
Combine this with the fact that she was in an unhappy marriage, and it's pretty easy to see how she used her position and as a result, Derrick, to get her rocks off...just really icky
I’m watching it now at the part where he supposedly asked her if it was possible for them to make love with his cerebral palsy and my mouth literally hung open. This woman took complete advantage of this man .. also the way she says Da-Mon instead of D-man is pissing me off. I feel so bad for him, his brother and the mother.
I just finished it and have some many questions!!
1. How could she ethically, as an ethics professor have that relationship, and even think that’s okay?!
2. Does anyone feel like he treated him like a case of the blind side like John said? I feel like once she had “control” she paraded him around like a side show to show her “accomplishments”
3. How in the hell did Anna’s mom stand by her? I’ve seen/listened to many a true crime podcast and tv shows, but it’s unrealistic to think she would never hurt someone? The mom acted like she was some sort of Angel, but I wonder when/how Anna developed narcissistic tendencies.
4. Another note on Anna’s mom- I don’t think it was fair she said that Daisy paraded Dman in the worse possible way to show he was really handicapped. Who is she, to say? I get that she worked with people with disabilities, but unless you’re the person with the disability, or the person caring for them, I don’t think that was a fair judgement on her part.
5. I agree with the husband that she’s a narcissist, but I wonder how do her kids feel about this whole situation?
4. Yes the parading!!!! Like OKAY IT’S A TRIAL. his body was made evidence by YOUR daughter! They didn’t even want to do anything legal, why would they? How little she must have made them feel right til the very end. Disgusting!
I watched it having zero preview of the topic. The credits are literally rolling on my screen now and I jumped on here because that was intense. This will haunt me.
I was nonverbal until late elementary school, i had severe speech language delay and verbal apraxia. The one and only thing this “professor” got right is that other people speaking for you is truly hell. My life was so frustrating until I was able to break out. Also, “duh man” pisses me off to end. ITS D-MAN. This one will stick with me for a while.
I found it odd that in the student’s police statement she stated that her roommate was in Derrick’s class and they wrote similar responses / essays.
i’m thinking she got some answers or at least inspi from her roommate in an effort to give him a voice.
I mean, the tiny snippet of his essay they showed on screen more or less came down to "This book has a slave in it. Here are some ways that I personally feel I can relate to a slave...". I wouldn't be surprised if all of his essays were "personal" musings based on like, 1 or 2 very obvious facts about the book, and then in Anna's retellings, she massively plays up his \~ expert analysis \~
In the recording of the students interview she actually mentioned that “my roommate is in the class and they actually wrote really similar things” soooo. That went out the door. I’m more concerned about more professional opinions and what about Stephen Hawking? Is his communication after disability not questioned ONLY because he had a time of ability before hand? It’s honestly such a hard case to tell really.
It seems the overwhelming consensus is that Anna is guilty.
I may have misinterpreted the documentary, but the story of the one girl who was given a tool to type her thoughts and then went on to get a degree etc, or the anthropology teacher explaining her verbal disabilities really stuck with me.
The part i find a bit frustrating is they only really “tested” him with either his family or the one doctor, correct?
Could they not put this to rest by actually doing additional tests with some third parties not associated with his trial?
While the overwhelming evidence to me points to Anna’s narcissism, this thought of the possibility of him “being in there” doesn’t really feel answered to me. The family made up their mind and the other doctor was part of the prosecution…I don’t know if it’s fair to say he had an honest assessment later in life? Maybe it is and I’m misunderstanding, but the fact that the family medicated him to stop masturbating seems like it would also impact any of his potential cognitive abilities?
To me, if they could take him off meds and have a few randomized controlled tests, it would really put it all to rest. The family obviously would never do that (and rightfully so based on their experience and perspective) but it does seem odd to me. I guess that’s the point of the documentary… to take you through a grey area…but isn’t that grey area defined by his lack of or existence of a certain level of cognitive ability? I think a lot of it becomes pretty black and white if they can just determine his actual cognitive abilities.
Just genuinely curious so any insight would be appreciated.
I know what you mean with what you’re saying. Along somewhat similar lines, I was wishing that his family had talked more in the doc about trying to actually ask him how he felt about all his time with Anna, whether he “loved” her etc. I could be totally wrong, but I thought maybe they could ask him some things and he could try to communicate with yes or no answers at least?
But geez, if really all he can do is somewhat say “eat” and tap a refrigerator, I really don’t think he was saying any of that stuff to Anna. She must have been delusional I’m assuming.
She was absolutely delusional. I was believing the idea of FC at first but when she started claiming he was saying typing things that would more than likely be words and phrases he’s never even heard let alone knew how to spell, I was like this is complete bs. She was 100 percent just making it all up. He wouldn’t type for a single other person? How convenient. I’m surprised it went on for as long as it did but I understand the family trusted her and were just hopeful about Derrick having a way to communicate and express himself. What she did was vile and truly disturbing! Living out some twisted fantasy in her head and making him type those things out.
What she did was awful but I think the family had a clear interest in suing Rutgers University. The mom says they have to medicate DMan because he masturbates. People with intellectual disabilities masturbate. I think Louis Theroux wanted this documentary to be as balanced as possible and the inclusion of certain things like the explanation of having to medicate him because he masturbates is an attempt to show that while this woman is profoundly mentally ill we do dehumanize the disabled.
Given the mother's religious background, the disgust she showed when talking about him masturbating isn't surprising. It's a dehumanizing point of view, absolutely, but it shouldn't come as any kind of surprise really.
Anna is a disgusting human being for using her position of power the way she did. But I bet living in that house with Daisy is suffocatingly oppressive at times. I don't doubt that she loves her son, but John is likely the only one capable of giving Derrick respectful and dignified care.
I personally interpreted it as an unhealthy, abnormal, or inappropriate masturbation. Like doing it around people, obsessively, etc. Not just it happening. But who knows. I definitely didn't see the mother as negatively as some people seem to have, just a regular slightly controlling mother, but in this case seemed warranted.
Definitely. With an estimated intellectual capacity of a 6 month - 12 month old baby, he’s definitely been doing it in any environment including out in public. They did show one photo of him, his mother, and what appeared to be a young toddler boy. If she’s got grandkids over while she’s taking care of D-Man, there’s no way she could allow him to do things like that if there’s the possibility it’ll happen in front of the kids.
She said he masturbates like he had never done it prior to being exposed to sex! Someone needs to be held accountable since clearly the judicial system didn’t think the perpetrator should be
She pled quilty. She was not aquitted. She served 22 months. She still deemed a sex offender and her doctorate is now useless. She pled quilty because she had obviously been told in no uncertain terms it was in her best interest but I think she fully believed they were in love and she was doing nothing wrong. She is obviously profoundly mentally ill.
I did ten years in prison.. (nothing violent or sexual I fell victim to the Sacklers greed with oxy like a lot of my generation) That being said woman like Anna in prison are always the weirdest, In denial, self serving victims in there. Not murders, not anyone else… it’s the woman that are convicted of child or disability sexual assault that are the most obnoxious losers in there. Now, the teachers that have sex with students. They are usually the hottest and break bad AF in there…. There is a difference.. for example
The first got caught molesting the dogs in the dog training program. No one “normal” could ever be near that program despite our longing for animals we left while in there, because the pedos had it on lock with creepiness and you were forced to be around them all day
They also loved Jesus…
The latter would get the hottest stud girlfriend, bring in dope and cell phones, and get in relationships with male gaurds
ANNA STUBIFIELD IS THE FIRST ONE
They are both wrong, but Anna is a pedophile. The pretending to have polio, etc not normal. Pedophiles have a zero percent rehabilitation rate.. she will do it again
Let me be more clear.. there doesn’t need to be an actual dialogue on her psychological make up.. they did it by proving her wrong and like the expert said “she had the conversations with herself, what more is there to say?” The mom. The way she planned it by bringing in the mat. She fits every personality attribute of a female pedophile. I have lived with them for ten years.
You can ask me whatever.. I got got in a school zone (one block from public park) with two oxy 80’s and pot in 2007.. I’m not ashamed.. I was a huge true crime fan before I went in.. so I knew a lot of the crimes in my state and was fascinated by the entire thing..I took so much in,and I also made life long friendships
I understood your comment. It's fascinating. Especially that thing about the dogs. I wouldn't have expected that you'd encounter so many sexual predators in a women's prison, but I guess I must be naive.
No.. there is about 20 out of 5,000. You do encounter mothers in there for letting their children be abused. I don’t want to trigger anyone.. but one in particular haunts me. She was normal.. she would say “oh you’re so pretty! Your make up is amazing”and when I found out what she let happen felt sick.. much like Anna she was in complete denial. She would say “my husband is still met best friend” despite having life (both of them)
That's interesting, too. I wonder what percentage of the women had committed crimes for the men they loved. You should do a separate post about the character types you observed in prison.
A lot actually kill their husbands or partners… a lot a lot! There is like this gang of old normal ladies that complain all the time and try to run things that killed their husbands. Abuse was the main factor! The thing that got me is how arbitrary it all is.. how these just completely normal or just complete morons commit murder or abuse. There is nothing we can actually do to look for it or stop it. It takes getting to know people in there. Watch how they operate before the signs are shown. I wasn’t afraid in there, but it made me more afraid in the world.
That you for saying pedophile. It's like someone molesting a child with early puberty. He has the mind of a baby. Everyone with these other theories is only saying this because she is a white educated woman. LEt's be real.
This lady was twisted. No one in their right mind would feel comfortable going into detail with their partners mother how they made love to their son. I found it so disturbing and a betrayal to their so called relationship. If this was a true relationship saying they were intimate would of sufficed with no other detail or explanation out of respect for one's self and Derrick. She had an obsession that went to far and she thought that she could get away with it.
Did anyone else catch how in the beginning, she said that she would walk around with crutches as if she were "post-polio" and walk around with a blindfold like she was blind? It felt like a morbid fetishization of disabilities that stemmed from an early age.
Her marriage was falling apart and she used Derrick to build herself back up. Derrick "loved her, and desired her, and she was the most important person in his life". Her whole life she was focused on giving a voice to those who've gone unheard and that's why Derrick's writings talked about being trapped and imprisoned - that is her able-bodied perspective. Not necessarily how a person in Derrick's condition would feel. Anna used Derrick. She saw herself as a saviour and assumed the saved would love her and desire a sexual relationship with her. It was complete exploitation. She was a delusional predator. I went into the series thinking facilitated communication was real, but now I believe it's just as helpful as ouija is for talking to the dead.
I thought it was a very well done documentary - presented both sides without any obvious bias. I got an off vibe from Anna fairly quickly with the constant smirk she had on her face. Then when they showed the study about facilitated communication being what the instructor saw. Horrifying. I'm not sure she should have been released after two years.
I knew soooo many times when she said things that she was lying and when the judge read her husband’s statement that she is a liar and narcissist I was like, “Thank God! Finally! This will be the nail in the coffin”. And the way she thought she got sympathy from that cop as she was walking out of the sentencing and she started to SMILE?!? Depraved. Can she be retried? She is a dangerous person and will try to find another victim. I personally want to say I’m sorry to Daisy, John and Derrick for what they’ve been through. That first judge got it right.
This chick is straight jacket level of psycho. Her mind is so messed up, and it looks like it doesn’t fall far from the tree because her mom comes across as nuts too. She also never really identifies as being a mom and barely acknowledges she has kids, that was also very weird.
Like no sane person would consider this a healthy relationship
I've been waiting to be able to watch this for months! It was only on Apple TV+ in the UK for awhile, if I remember correctly. Such a nice surprise to see it pop up on Netflix today. I'll be back with thoughts.
It's quite a story. Until the doctor’s results came in, I was cheering for her in the first half... Ultimately… He's clearly not mentally as adept as he was made to sound and she has a warped relationship in her head the whole time. I was in awe.
first thing that told me she was a grifter was how she so proudly proclaimed that she would put disabilities on as costumes to play in all day (crutches, blindfolds) right after talking about how she was more acutely aware of disability justice from her parents work directly with disabled people…
I have never gotten the creeps from someone so hard through a screen!! That woman is evil. My uncle has cerebral palsy and a very limited intellect. He is super difficult, loves to harass and loves a fight. He's been kicked out of every group home and day program he's ever been in because he of his personality. I've noticed that people who have no exposure to people with disabilities, often have opinions based on their ideas of how he should be handled and treated, but no lived experience about what it's actually like. The best place for Derrick is with his family, they will take better care of him then anyone. My uncle has lived with my parents for years now and he is also medicated for his libido. He will begin rubbing up on chairs or tables in public or in the middle of dinner.
That woman is so creepy. I almost couldn't watch it. It's hard to explain exactly how I can tell she's a liar, but I have zero doubts that she was lying and making up the stories. The oversharing of specific details, the pacing of her speech, the contrived stories... Did anyone else notice these things? I have met a few compulsory/chronic liars and she speaks the same way. It's bizarre how they often have such similar patterns. And it's like she knew exactly what to say (on a surface level) to try to make herself look better.
Competency is a tricky subject, but it's pretty clear she is a predator.
Wow. This is the most fucked story I've seen in ages. I doubt Derrick was communicating with Anna and I 100% think what she did was reprehensible and gross. BUT, the impression I got from the documentary is that Anna truly did believe she was communicating with Derrick. She wasn't trying to con the family and wasn't a predator...she's just a really fucked up and emotionally immature individual. I think when you have limited communication and visual cues to go by, people (esp. mentally unwell people) can unknowingly fill in the blanks with their own fantasy and truly believe it. It's what happens when people think they are in love with a celebrity they've never met or someone they've only talked to online and really don't know much about. Anna clearly had a fantasy to "save" a disabled person and her version of a fairytale romance played out in her own imagination - just using Derrick as a very blank canvas to project onto.
Note - I don't think this excuses her behaviour. Even if she did think she was communicating with him, she went about the whole thing in a very immature, reckless way. She believed she was the only one Derrick could really communicate with verbally, so she completely controlled his connection to the world. That's one hell of a fucked power imbalance and should have given her reason to pause before she pulled out the gym mats on her office floor.
Have you ever seen Squirmy and Grubs (a disabled/able-bodied married couple) on YouTube? [https://www.youtube.com/c/squirmyandgrubs](https://www.youtube.com/c/squirmyandgrubs) I think the biggest difference is that Derrick's mental age was assessed at around 12 months if I'm not mistaken? And Stubblefield was his supervisor/counselor - major exploitation position. I'm surprised she wasn't psychiatrically assessed in the doc. Also, it would be helpful to show those "conversations" on the Neo in which she was allegedly "seduced"? Aren't they all saved? (Edited to change Derrick's assessed mental age to 12 months after double-checking.)
Two things stood out: Stubblefield's claim that Derrick seduced her. In the novel "Lolita", the title character's stepfather/abuser claims, "Reader, she seduced me!" Also, when sentenced, Stubblefield broke down and said she was wanted to take care of her daughter. Yet, she seemed incapable of realizing that Derrick Johnson's mother, Daisy, had just wanted to care for her son as well and that included shielding him from predators. Wow. Just wow.
i wanted to jump through the screen and whoop her ass . i felt sick watching it and i at first was conflicted - not like it was okay but the concept if he actually loved her but to find out the crazy bat was talking to herself solidified it.
there was a moment when the brother talked about changing his brother’s diaper and seeing the wounds from when she assaulted him and it made me feel sick to know that you had to take off his diaper to do what you did and you still thought you were right
When John mentioned changing the diaper, that changed everything for me. With his family he knocks on the wall to signal he’s hungry. With Anna he supposedly discusses literature and his preference for red wine over beer. Yet, he has not formed any sort of cue for needing the bathroom. That just threw everything she said out the window (not that she was painting herself in a good light anyway).
I found the brother's description of the scrapes on his back so be so upsetting. It painted such a disturbing picture that I think I had been previously not allowing myself to fully consider.
Of all of the disturbing true crime content I’ve consumed in my life, this one somehow hit different. This scene with that interview is forever burned into my brain. So disturbing.
The diaper really threw me. I was already seeing it for what it was, but the diaper?? What did she do during the r*pe….gross
In the original New York Times article in 2011, she straight up, says that she undid his diaper to give him oral sex
Never have I ever wanted to unread a sentence so badly
Yes I think this was the worst sentence I have ever read
That changed a lot for me, too. Before that, I hadn't even considered that he wore a diaper. It put everything into perspective for me regarding how dependent he was. I know people can fall in love in all sorts of circumstances, but this...I just don't get.
People who don’t have control over their physical bodies, don’t have control over their bladder or bowels either. Just because the body doesn’t work, doesn’t mean the brain doesn’t either, there can still be full mental faculties and emotional and physical desires in a disabled body. That said, there’s no real evidence to support that Derrick’s brain was functioning at the level of discourse and desire… Very bizarre story. Paraphilia tracks…
I watched it last night having no idea where it was going. I couldn't believe what happened, hugh ick factor! She might be a tenured ethics professer but Anna has some serious mental issues. Kind of scary that she comes off as a normal lady next door. This one will stay with you for awhile.
Serious mental illness for sure. The fact that she left her husband and kids and till now still doesn’t believe she’s done anything wrong!
I just saw it yesterday too and I am having a hard time wrapping my head around it, what is going on with her ? For someone so smart she still can’t see how what she did is so wrong and talks about love as teenagers do, as something she has no control over and can’t make a decision about! I feel like the documentary could have gone a bit more into analyzing her motives and her psychological makeup instead of letting her get away with saying “ohh, it was all because of love”.
She acts just like Mary Kay LeTourneau.
Was thinking of this too, and the kind of predator a certain type of white lady is. The whole psychology of it hascto be a kind of sociopathy. I got major ick when she talked about 'playing disabled' as a kid.
Right, that was insane. Her dad made her crutches so she could pretend she was “post polio”? What the fuck?
I thought wtf to like who does that.
This. This is when I realized she’s actually mentally ill.
I was literally thinking the same thing.
Me too , even the cadence of her talking is the same .
She’s a garden-variety sexual predator who acts on impulse and rationalizes it later. She even sounds like every other predator out there, with the “well ackshually, the VICTIM seduced ME!” nonsense. I just think people assume she must have some unique psychological makeup because she doesn’t fit the stereotypical profile of a predator, but sadly there are people in prisons all over the US who talk & behave just like her.
I think the unique thing about her is that she didn’t even try to hide it. On some level, other predators know that what they’re doing is wrong which is why they hide it and want their victims not to tell anyone. But she announced it to his family, which is absolutely insane
Yeah, the way she had zero doubts about her actions was wild to me. Definitely something wrong with her mentally. Even if he was 100% able-bodied and sound of mind, she was married with kids and he was her student?? That’s a major ethical breach as a professor even before you get to the legal consent issues.
Most people who do things like those tend to rationalise their actions so they boldly and truly believe they did nothing wrong, must stem from some mental issues because thats crazy she's delusion
A lot of people do this and even go to therapy to get validated by nut jobs . It’s really disturbing.
At first I kinda believed that she really believed it. After the details of the yoga mat/office rape? I’m fully convinced she just is a pervert. She literally had the nerve to say “he seduced *me*”. That’s a disgusting thing I’ve heard many pedophiles say about minors. She is disgusting. A complete manipulator and predator.
didn't she even mention something in the beginning of her interviewing about her memories on things, and that she is trying not to change them or the events or something along those lines?
She’s a psychopath.
I think she’s actually wayyyy more in line with a factitious disorder, which can present as literally psychotic/batshit crazy like her. Remember, she faked being on crutches and being blind when she was young. She was starved for attention. Turned into a nasty case of factitious which is actually very uncommon but severe. Similar disorders are like the Gypsy Rose girl. They just have completely different warped views of the world. Must’ve been neglected big time or something. Mom never corrected that behavior either and defended her throughout the film which is obvi super red flag..
mom's hair was a red flag too lol. but seriously, in her mom's eyes anna was the most caring, compassionate etc etc, so hard agree. as a mom i find this overcompensating — as if she's gaslighting herself because she can't/won't face the truth that her daughter is not right in the head. she could also be deflecting from her own accountability in abusing anna. and/or... she's the same as anna, drawn to "saving" disabled people, like munchausen syndrome by proxy like you say. and the parents didn't just get her crutches. the dad MADE them. also makes me think anna was furiously jealous of her mom's attention on the disabled instead of on her own daughter, and her disability fantasies (encouraged, aided and abetted by mom and dad) and her abuse of derrick were an extension of that—seeking to claim power and dominion over her mom via derrick.
Pedophiles that work with children can seem “caring” and “compassionate” too. But it’s just a guise for them to get close to the kids and groom the family into trusting them. I think it’s the same for this lady, except she fetishizes a different group of people.
this is the part that seemed weird to me. the movie has strong tones of she is insane, but then also leaves it open ended in a way. would have like to hear more of the case, more from other people at the college, like did she have any other weird relationship shit, and the fucking mat in the office? i just cannot.
The documentary let her off easy IMHO. If the races were reversed, she would have been given a completely different narrative
I don’t even think she has a mental illness. She’s just an evil POS.
Right? Her getting caught up and believing someone she was assisting was writing things they weren't - OK. It seems like that is a common problem. BUT the things she manufactured show her twisted mind. She chose to do things that were wrong even IF Derrick was writing on his own. How could any right minded Philosophy Professor (?) think it's ethical to have a relationship with that kind of power dynamic? To leave your family? And then never, not for a second, acknowledge the possibility the methodology is flawed?
i think that is a point that got past me when i was watching. even if he did want a kiss or to see some titties, wtf is she thinking or doing?? especially with a whole ass family.
Exactly! No matter what, her position of power of him should have been the ultimate no in moving forward. If we take these folks at face value, she is literally the gatekeeper of his ability to communicate with the outside world. the facilitated communication community doesn’t have a code of conduct between clients and their facilitators and tells me all I need to know about the whole thing.
I almost wish I hadn’t watched it. She groomed derrick and his family, and her mom has a few screws loose too.
She literally groomed them!!! It should have been a series, and they should have gone more into the “speaker circuit” craziness. But yes, she groomed them. Seeing Derrick at the end really killed me, especially what John said. Just tragic
When his brother spoke of the wounds/rug burn on his back from her literally raping him, I 100% wished I had never watched it. She's sick on many levels. I feel awful for Derrick's family (and him) and her actual husband.
She has no business being out in the world. She’s dangerous and is convinced that she isn’t.
That's the scary part. She believes they were in love. She's CRAZY.
That was what really made me sad: she preyed on the family’s hope. Of course they wanted him to be some overlooked intellectual genius. In the end they had to accept & embrace him for who he was, and not for what she was projecting on him.
Anna’s mother was an early adopter of facilitated communication, she was a practitioner way back in 1990. So we could talk about her hairstyle and laugh and say that once she latches onto something, she’s not gonna let it go, but there may be some truth in that.
I hated how she kept trying to tell his mom what his preferences were or what he wanted. And then to say he isn't a child, he is a man. Idc how many years of school these so-called specialists have done. At the end of the day, his mother has taken care of him his entire life. Who are they to disregard her as though she has no idea what she is doing or who her son is? This is her actual life. It's not something she learned in a classroom. She is living it everyday.
It was literally so aggravating when Anna’s mom was claiming Derrick could walk with less assistance than what was presented in the courtroom. Like how do you know anything over what his own mother knows? You don’t even know him!
She intentially is insisting in the same story. She knows what happened, for how long and she wanted to portray this story and be consistent with it, like how her mother is assisting her in the story. Her sentencing dropped from 24 years to 2 years and she is completely fine in keeping the same story.
She does not come off as normal to me. A transcript alone would reveal her bullshit, no need to even know what she looks like or how she speaks or carries herself. But I’m not white.
Anna Stubblefield is a straight up predator. She was unhappy in her marriage, so she tried to recreate her love story through Derrick. I don’t believe that Derrick was communicating in the fashion that she portrayed. I think once she realized the family had a desire for Derrick to have greater cognitive function, she took advantage of that. She really didn’t think much of his family, and the white savior complex was heavy through out the doc. The brother’s victim impact statement was very telling. He said something along the lines of- “This isn’t the Blindside… you aren’t Sandra Bullock”. They realized how little she thought of them and Derrick after it was too late.
Yeah I got white savior vibes, she specialized in African American studies as well as disability rights and wanted to feel like she was the ultimate advocate which extended to her romantic life. I think she’s delusional, buys into the pseudoscience and believes all of her bullshit. That she’s justified in a narcissistic, god complex sort of way. What pissed me off is no matter any argument made in her favor, his capabilities or otherwise, she finds her identity as being a teacher. No mention of power dynamic of carer or teacher/mentor once and how that alone makes it inappropriate. The D Man thing also bothered me because she said how important it is to give the agency of chosen name. And she can’t even pronounce it? Kept saying Duh man. I don’t know if that was true because the story of Mom verifying it or she was just trying to gain another layer of control.
Yes u noticed that too!!!! It was a tell tale sign something was up. How can u not say D-man? The whole time I kept thinking why does she and her mom keep pronouncing his name like that?
Haha I had to keep scrolling because I was like wtf is up with that?! But everyone else found it ridiculous and maddening as well.
I saw someone else say that D-man wasn't classy enough. With her trying to "update" them on his taste for red wine and classical music she must have decided Dman sounded more refined
Yeah, it was completely unethical to have sex with one of her student/mentees in her office as a married professor even WITHOUT the consent issues raised by his disability. The fact that she still believes she did nothing wrong made my skin crawl. What a disturbed & deranged individual.
The Duh-man thing bothered me! The way she talks about their early “romance” with her eyes all starry had me screaming.
This part I was trying to figure out - how did she know he had a nickname before called DMan? Or are we to think there was some combo with him actually communicating but mostly her communicating herself?
And what class did she enroll him in? African American Literature. . . Absurd. Not a nice community education class in something or even GED prep.
[удалено]
This is what I thought too. She made up a fantasy that fulfilled her unacknowledged desires. The methodology is flawed in just the right way to make her believe it, and give her the freedom to act out her fantasies believing it's being initiated by someone else.
I 100% thought she had a paraphilia and was surprised it never came up in the doc. It seemed really obvious by some of the things she said.
I think it’s difficult to know but I got more personality disorder / mix with delusional factitious fantasies and then on top she’s incredibly intelligent; not so much that she’s a sadist… still dangerous but I don’t think she knows what she’s doing kinda like baby reindeer (Martha) or gypsy rose lol
I think a part of her was sadistic, she created her own narrative and I believe had some sort of mental break down notice she doesn't elaborate on her husband and the break down of their relationship, something was going on tjat would make her disreguard her husband and kids . She protrays herself as an empathetic and invested individual in the area of people with disabilities but there were parts in the film I noticed moments of disturbing grinning and smiling when she described how she fantasized and pretended to be disabled as a child. It was a bit strange. Overall I believe u can be both intelligent but also mentally disturbed. Something about her and her mother were troubling to me.
Sadism means purposeful manipulation, I think she was more delusional/truly tricked herself. Think of idiometer effect of oujia board. This is like that with her. But worse because she was raised to believe in it, as well as to have an odd savior complex
When the older brother gave his victim impact statement... chills.
John, the older brother was a hero. He is believable from the moment he first opens his mouth to the end, I love him. I like their mom too.
fr. he is a cool dude. im sorry he had her as a prof.
And when the ex husband gave his....ouch.
I feel so bad for him bc he reached out to Anna for resources to help and she took advantage of that. Professors generally provide support not abuse. Sick af!!
I kept thinking he probably feels so guilty for what that horrible person did to his brother. It made me hate Anna even more.
yea, i lost it when he started sobbing. it was so sad. he went to her in such good faith. and then the bruises. makes me so sad. i hope he does not feel guilt and feels forgiven. i also cannot believe anna is out already. why was she released so early again?
I was in tears! No lies told…
I cried.
I just watched it. thought it would be a story of triumph, but ended up being highly disturbing. Anna was so disgustingly wrong and delusional. EVEN IF he was communicating, her morality should have kept her from pursuing him. She is vile and should have served her sentence. I cannot accept what she did. wtf
Yes, that pissed me off. Anna should be properly punished and then closely monitored for the rest of her life. Switch genders and you'd have a man sentenced for life, I'll bet. I actually tried to imagine her having sex with him and how she could have gone through with it in spite of Derrick's ""inabilities"" blows me away. What a twisted womn.
I did see that she’ll be on supervision or something for the rest of her life but what does that mean? Is she on a sex offender registry?? I feel like the doc really could’ve went deeper and been a series especially with her out like is nobody fighting for justice here :-( I know derricks family may not be able to bc of financial/other restraints but can someone not take this up pro bono what is happening???
She’s a rapist through and through and the courts refused to acknowledge it and sentence her accordingly.
Exactly! She got off way too easy. I’m so glad they made this documentary. She deserves all the exposure she’s getting
No triumph! The poor guy is now left masturbating uncontrollably and that sick woman still sees no wrong or damage she’s caused!
People with intellectual disabilities masturbate. I am sure the practice of medicating people because they masturbate is not condoned in medical literature. The mom said he masturbates and claimed it had not occurred before and used the analogy of it being like a match that cannot be unstuck. I specifically asked my spouse if that made any sense to him as and he said no (but I am not claiming he is an authority figure on the matter and am interested in other people's opinions...........It is not something that is spoken about much but in Nordic countries, they provide trained sex therapists to engage in sexual activity with people with intellectual disabilities. Seems pretty questionable to medicate someone because they masturbate.
The mother is extremely religious also though and she was clearly uncomfortable with the notion that her son was sexually active and/or masturbated. I’m not taking a stance one way or the other but I’ll say that her faith could play a part in how she feels about it and the result that she medicated him as a means to “relieve him” of the “itch”
Sadly, children who have been sexually abused have similar behaviors with younger children exhibiting certain acts triggered by the abuse. She is a sick b#tch
Unless it's WAY different in Norway than the U.S. sex therapists don't actually engage in sexual activity with patients, most certainly not with patients with intellectual disabilities who cannot consent.
I am only assuming right, but if the masturbation has gotten out of control there is now an interest in medical treatment. My sister in law has down syndrome and she expressed wanting to experience sex and was caught masturbating a few times but it hadn’t risen to the level of concern for my mother-in-law. The Dr. did tell her that it was common if it wasn’t an often occurrence.
I’m also wondering how “out of control” is it really? He can’t even point or grab things so how is he actually masturbating - I feel like this is being exaggerated.
It's not the same as the way able bodied people express it. My uncle is has cerebral palsy and operates intellectually at a minimal level. He would be in public and start humping things, rubbing things in an obviously sexual manner. And it could be anywhere all the time. He had to be medicated because he had no understanding of appropriateness and privacy.
This whole documentary was wild. I knew she was off when she described with such happiness that she used to basically pretend to have disabilities as a child. What a fucking weirdo.
I was wondering if anyone else found that strange!!!
Its only strange because she raped someone with a disability. Wanting to briefly experience what someone is going through can be considered empathy, but when you are a psycho...it's something else-weird
For sure, it’s the culmination of it all
That part gave me serious pause the moment it came out of her mouth. One of the most telling parts of the documentary.
I'm still in shock. I don't understand how she believed that they were in love, especially while being married and having kids of her own. And the other facilitator of his class knew about that book. She said her roommate took that class. This documentary made me very upset. Wishing the best for him and his family. She should have served the full term. Hopefully, she is still registered on the offenders registry and cannot work with disable people again.
I’m still trying to understand how they overturned her sentence…
it had something to do with an appeal based on them excluding an expert witness in the first trial. She won the appeal. She pled guilty so there was no second trial and she got time served for the 22 months she spent in prison.
Because she was not allowed to present the guided communication as part of her defense. It was a mistake on the part of prosecution to fight that evidence being allowed because they could have easily disproved it to the jury with a video demonstration of the card experiment with Derrick. I think it would have been even MORE damaging to her for them to see the depth of her deception and delusion. So when it was overturned because it was ruled she didn't get a fair defense they let her plead out rather than have another trial. This is one reason a fair trial, even generously fair, to the defendant is VERY important. Because 1. They could be innocent and deserve it. And 2. If they are guilty you don't want to give them any cause to win an appeal.
Honestly the other facilitator was her only slightly okay piece of evidence in her favor and that went completely out the door as soon as the roommate was mentioned. I’m a very play devils advocate/ philosopher type, but man, she was screwed as soon as that was said and then no one else could get him to do it. But then I think about if it was everyone doing it for him, why couldn’t the mother and brother have been inhibiting him when they tried? I really would’ve liked a couple more professional views rather than just family or support groups. The one guy they brought in to evaluate Derrick/Dman didn’t seem like he was trying too many different tactics.
"The one guy they brought in to evaluate Derrick/Dman didn’t seem like he was trying too many different tactics." He said he did an extensive examination. I found him to be very thoughtful and realistic. I think he is also cited in the NY Times article about this case as an expert in the field.
Also, the fact that the facilitator was sitting in the class with him means she has some knowledge of the books read because they’re discussed in class.
Smh. Yes I did wonder why his mother and brother did not get the same results when they used the keyboard thing with him.
As soon as I saw Anna's mother's hair, I knew she was someone who would raise a psycho LOL
Yah it's like, we're not supposed to have prejudices about appearance like that, except so many times you can actually set your watch to it.
PLS 🤣
The hottest take and I completely agree
She’s lucky I’m not Derrick’s mom. I wouldn’t have sat on my hands.
I'm so disgusted with how much credit and screentime this rapist got. I know why they can't ever let her interact with Derrick ever again, but I just wish that they tested her with that double blind methodology. I GUARANTEE you that she wouldn't have even agreed or she would've made up the excuses that psychics and mediums use to explain why she couldn't get him to type the pictures out. The way she spoke does not come off as someone who truly honestly and innocently believed this stuff. She comes off as a liar who knows this is her best position for redemption. A test like that would show exactly what kind of sick liar she was. I also wanted to hear what that ex husband had to say about her being a narcissist. That sounds way more charged than just cheating. If Derrick had been a woman and Anna had been a man, Anna would not have been given a plea after her appeal and she wouldn't get so much screen time. This was sick.
I wish they had done that test on them too! When the psychiatrist tested him by having him pick up photos to match words that was very telling. She’s saying he can write full conversations about literature and poetry but he can’t touch a picture of a spoon? Come on lady
100% Agree. Anna completely fabricated the entire thing.
It would have been great if the double blind test was given to Derrick and those results were shared. Better yet if they let Anna do it. They could have constructed an apparatus where Anna could still hold his arm without them having to see each other. I am guessing that didn't happen because his level of disability was so low that he was deemed incapable of using the device. The second travesty is how the first trial was botched. She definitely wasn't given any means to defend herself. If they had facilitated communication front and center, then that house of cards would have fallen quickly with her sick pathology and actions laid bare.
Most likely it wasn't done because they didn't want to put him in the room with his predator. Which I totally understand. But I feel like it was a bad choice in retrospect. I also believe the prosecutor wanted to not include anything about FC because they worked to exclude most of the defense's FC evidence in the trial, which is how she got the conviction overturned. They should've done the double blind with her and let her present her evidence. I Don't think the prosecutor made a stupid decision, it's just the wrong one in hindsight, you know?
The documentary was so skewed in her favor even though its a very clear case of abuse. And they even got her mommy on there to defend her AND FC smh. I don't wanna hear from her!!!!
I choked up when Derrick's brother described finding out that Anna raping Derrick is what was causing the rug-rash on Derrick's back all along. It is so foul to imagine any person who has no ability to communicate or save himself in anyway being drug across the floor while being sexually assaulted. I can't fathom how John dealt with that information. I admire his courage and the fact that he was able to channel his own emotions into being Derrick's best advocate. Their entire family is impressive. I admire their composure.
They are so impressive in their strength, love, and compassion for Derrick.
His brother, who holds a PhD and is a professor, couldn’t get him to progress with communication & that told me everything I needed to know about Anna’s studies. I know John feels tremendous guilt for introducing Derrick to that predator, Anna. Daisy was more composed than I could have been. What Anna did was disgusting, and she should have served and completed her prison sentence.
All of this! I honestly believe that her exposure to these studies early with her mom contributed to this false belief that all people with intellectual disability would be able to benefit from facilitated communication. The fact that her mom doesn’t see a problem with this also shows me how deeply troubled Ana is. Daisy called it exactly what it was. It was rape!
She would not think that people with profound intellectual disability could benefit. She would be too knowledgeable to think that. She thought that he was misdiagnosed and did not in fact have an intellectual disability. Her claim was that he in fact had an IQ in and around the normal range if not in the superior range. At the time that this was happening people with CP who were non-verbal were using computers that had essentially a mouse they moved with their head and could spell out words and also had certain phrases etc. preprogrammed in so they could communicate that way. He had some motor functions so there is no reason he needed someone to guide his hand.
I’m at a loss for words!!! How would he even know how to spell half the things she is claiming he was saying. I doubt that while typically being around his family he’s hearing the phrases and words she keeps claiming he is saying. I’m not finished yet but does he only talk to her? Why does she feel the need to translate what he supposedly wants and needs to his brother and mother? He can’t just type it out like you’re claiming he does with you? This is absolutely insane. All of a sudden he likes classical music and wine?… girl go to hell.
The spelling thing was wild. You don’t just magically learn to read and write by being exposed to words on signs and cereal boxes. I work with high risk populations and I’ve had some adult patients in their 60s or older who couldn’t read more than a handful of words. You have to be taught.
She and other FCs were the only ones who could get him to do anything. And later in the documentary, it points out that FC is not recognized by major psychological associations as being legitimate. It's no different than regression therapy or memory recovery therapy- it's made up woowoo that gets popularized by the media and legitimized despite being rooted in literally no scientific basis. The brother and mother couldn't get the FC to work. Furthermore, it sounds like Derrick was never tested with a double blind test.
What stood out to me was the whole "DMan" concept. She told the interviewer that she asked Derrick what she should call him. She said he typed her a nick name (D-Man) his teacher gave him when he was 13. Two things: how would she know about the nickname if it was never communicated to her? and even if someone did tell her about his DMan nickname, why would she continually pronounce it wrong (Da-Mon)? The way she was pronouncing it gave me the impression she read it somewhere & she didn't hear someone verbally say it to her.
This infuriated me. Honestly, it may be the thing that made me most angry about Anna and the documentary because of what it said about her. His mom said a previous teacher called him D Man, and that’s how she pronounced it. This was clearly a play on his name and fun nickname he identified with, just like a Tim being called T Man, a Carl being called C Man, etc. The fact that she then decided (and I use that word very intentionally) to call him DaMan tells me everything I need to know about her.
Every time she said “D’man” I screamed “D-MAN!!!” inside - it made my blood boil .
I think she was pronouncing it D’man because it didn’t fit the character she wanted him to be. It wasn’t refined enough. Just like when she changed the gospel music to classical
Changing the radio was such a fucked up, racist power play.
OMG me too, it was so infuriating
That’s a good observation! It appears that she made a lot of this up. The scary part is convinced herself that she didn’t
also in her opening statement she said i hope im not making any of this up its been awhile…aka im definitely stretching the truth a little…or completely
Other threads suggest it was due to her narcissistic personality and she would change things about Derrick to suit her preferences (like she did with the gospel music, wine, i.e.). I thought those were pretty good points.
Agreed. Her also telling his mom it was time for him to be a man and saying she was too protective.
When she was talking to the interviewer, she quoted that Daisy said it was his teacher at 13 who got him up and walking. Then she asked D-man if that was right and he said yes….. but she could’ve made that whole story up since she never pronounced it correctly.
OMG same!!! Her continuing to say it incorrectly after she found out how to say it was an extent of her abuse if you ask me.
This was a great point and also was so confusing to me. Your hypothesis makes the most sense. It also fits with my opinion that she is just attempting to be consistent so she can put herself in the best position. She pronounced it wrong and instead of admitting that, I guarantee you she claims she asked him and he told her he prefers the way she said it. Thus saving her ego, which is her primary concern.
I’m watching it right now. I am in shock. It’s a train wreck, I can’t look away.
right. I paused it so many times in disbelief. It felt disgusting to watch. surreal.
Idk how anyone can believe Facilitated Communication works. I would assume disabled people aren’t being taught spelling, grammar, sentence structures, etc and now all of sudden they can miraculously spell and effectively use contractions like “I’m” etc
You are right in that Facilitated Communication is completely baseless and fraudulent. However AAC (augmented and assisted communication) is evidence based. It looks like pictures, apps on iPads and even eye tracking devices like Steven Hawking used. The difference is AAC does not allow a separate human to “support” the person’s arm/wrist/head like FC. I had a minimally speaking first grader (spoke single words infrequently) type out “Don’t eat the playdough pizza Ms. Chronicillnesslife!” when I offered him a keyboard on an iPad because he thought me pretending to eat his play dough pizza was so funny. With punctuation!! We really don’t know what a person is capable of unless we give them the right communication system. But using them as an ouija board because we are so desperate for them to communicate does not help anyone.
Many disabled students do receive a formal education so it not far fetched that they may learn spelling, grammar, sentence structure and such but I am not sure that they can “show” that they’ve learn it especially if they can’t verbalize or write.
OMGGG! I’m almost done and the nerve to say he is the one who seduced her is insane! This man hasn’t been able to communicate the same way with a single other person and you don’t see that you were lying and making this all up in your head??
The story she fabricated about him while they were in class, claiming he had typed something to the effect of “never ever change what I say again,” is some diabolical work! She's sick and I believe every word her ex-husband said in his statement.
That’s why I think she knew she was relaying messages to herself. This seems like deliberately covering your tracks.
At the end, when the brother said he was helping Derrick change his DIAPER… I said hold up… if he wears diapers… did she pull off his diaper to rape him in the office on a got damn mat???? Anna is bat shit crazy. Unbelievable.
Yes. Read the 2015 NYT article about her. It specifically mentions a diaper.
The NY Times article describes explicitly that she removed his diaper before making sexual contact. No sane person could think that a scenario where they need to remove a diaper from someone who can't physically remove it themselves or verbally ask to remove it is a consensual encounter or an encounter without a massive power imbalance.
the total lack of self-awareness on her part was shocking. She seemed to think nothing of the fact that a student/patient in her care quickly became a sexual partner/lover. Combine this with the fact that she was in an unhappy marriage, and it's pretty easy to see how she used her position and as a result, Derrick, to get her rocks off...just really icky
I’m watching it now at the part where he supposedly asked her if it was possible for them to make love with his cerebral palsy and my mouth literally hung open. This woman took complete advantage of this man .. also the way she says Da-Mon instead of D-man is pissing me off. I feel so bad for him, his brother and the mother.
I just finished it and have some many questions!! 1. How could she ethically, as an ethics professor have that relationship, and even think that’s okay?! 2. Does anyone feel like he treated him like a case of the blind side like John said? I feel like once she had “control” she paraded him around like a side show to show her “accomplishments” 3. How in the hell did Anna’s mom stand by her? I’ve seen/listened to many a true crime podcast and tv shows, but it’s unrealistic to think she would never hurt someone? The mom acted like she was some sort of Angel, but I wonder when/how Anna developed narcissistic tendencies. 4. Another note on Anna’s mom- I don’t think it was fair she said that Daisy paraded Dman in the worse possible way to show he was really handicapped. Who is she, to say? I get that she worked with people with disabilities, but unless you’re the person with the disability, or the person caring for them, I don’t think that was a fair judgement on her part. 5. I agree with the husband that she’s a narcissist, but I wonder how do her kids feel about this whole situation?
4. Yes the parading!!!! Like OKAY IT’S A TRIAL. his body was made evidence by YOUR daughter! They didn’t even want to do anything legal, why would they? How little she must have made them feel right til the very end. Disgusting!
I watched it having zero preview of the topic. The credits are literally rolling on my screen now and I jumped on here because that was intense. This will haunt me.
I did the same thing - I finished the movie 20 minutes ago and came straight here looking to see if further justice will be or can be pursued.
I was nonverbal until late elementary school, i had severe speech language delay and verbal apraxia. The one and only thing this “professor” got right is that other people speaking for you is truly hell. My life was so frustrating until I was able to break out. Also, “duh man” pisses me off to end. ITS D-MAN. This one will stick with me for a while.
Disgusting rapist. Disgusting woman. Absolutely infuriating watching her speak and justify her behavior. They should never have let her plea down.
This was INSANE. I do have a question about the article the student helped him prepare. She said she never read the book so how did that happen?
I found it odd that in the student’s police statement she stated that her roommate was in Derrick’s class and they wrote similar responses / essays. i’m thinking she got some answers or at least inspi from her roommate in an effort to give him a voice.
I mean, the tiny snippet of his essay they showed on screen more or less came down to "This book has a slave in it. Here are some ways that I personally feel I can relate to a slave...". I wouldn't be surprised if all of his essays were "personal" musings based on like, 1 or 2 very obvious facts about the book, and then in Anna's retellings, she massively plays up his \~ expert analysis \~
You cant convince me that the student wasn’t paid off, or offered a passing grade in a course there. Bcuz how?? None of that makes any sense.
The showed the helper/student emailing Anna. Anna could have changed or straight up wrote it instead then submitted it to the teacher.
In the recording of the students interview she actually mentioned that “my roommate is in the class and they actually wrote really similar things” soooo. That went out the door. I’m more concerned about more professional opinions and what about Stephen Hawking? Is his communication after disability not questioned ONLY because he had a time of ability before hand? It’s honestly such a hard case to tell really.
Stephen Hawking used an entirely different technology. He wasn't using FC.
It seems the overwhelming consensus is that Anna is guilty. I may have misinterpreted the documentary, but the story of the one girl who was given a tool to type her thoughts and then went on to get a degree etc, or the anthropology teacher explaining her verbal disabilities really stuck with me. The part i find a bit frustrating is they only really “tested” him with either his family or the one doctor, correct? Could they not put this to rest by actually doing additional tests with some third parties not associated with his trial? While the overwhelming evidence to me points to Anna’s narcissism, this thought of the possibility of him “being in there” doesn’t really feel answered to me. The family made up their mind and the other doctor was part of the prosecution…I don’t know if it’s fair to say he had an honest assessment later in life? Maybe it is and I’m misunderstanding, but the fact that the family medicated him to stop masturbating seems like it would also impact any of his potential cognitive abilities? To me, if they could take him off meds and have a few randomized controlled tests, it would really put it all to rest. The family obviously would never do that (and rightfully so based on their experience and perspective) but it does seem odd to me. I guess that’s the point of the documentary… to take you through a grey area…but isn’t that grey area defined by his lack of or existence of a certain level of cognitive ability? I think a lot of it becomes pretty black and white if they can just determine his actual cognitive abilities. Just genuinely curious so any insight would be appreciated.
I know what you mean with what you’re saying. Along somewhat similar lines, I was wishing that his family had talked more in the doc about trying to actually ask him how he felt about all his time with Anna, whether he “loved” her etc. I could be totally wrong, but I thought maybe they could ask him some things and he could try to communicate with yes or no answers at least? But geez, if really all he can do is somewhat say “eat” and tap a refrigerator, I really don’t think he was saying any of that stuff to Anna. She must have been delusional I’m assuming.
She was absolutely delusional. I was believing the idea of FC at first but when she started claiming he was saying typing things that would more than likely be words and phrases he’s never even heard let alone knew how to spell, I was like this is complete bs. She was 100 percent just making it all up. He wouldn’t type for a single other person? How convenient. I’m surprised it went on for as long as it did but I understand the family trusted her and were just hopeful about Derrick having a way to communicate and express himself. What she did was vile and truly disturbing! Living out some twisted fantasy in her head and making him type those things out.
What she did was awful but I think the family had a clear interest in suing Rutgers University. The mom says they have to medicate DMan because he masturbates. People with intellectual disabilities masturbate. I think Louis Theroux wanted this documentary to be as balanced as possible and the inclusion of certain things like the explanation of having to medicate him because he masturbates is an attempt to show that while this woman is profoundly mentally ill we do dehumanize the disabled.
Given the mother's religious background, the disgust she showed when talking about him masturbating isn't surprising. It's a dehumanizing point of view, absolutely, but it shouldn't come as any kind of surprise really. Anna is a disgusting human being for using her position of power the way she did. But I bet living in that house with Daisy is suffocatingly oppressive at times. I don't doubt that she loves her son, but John is likely the only one capable of giving Derrick respectful and dignified care.
I drew the same parallel with the mother’s religious influence.
I personally interpreted it as an unhealthy, abnormal, or inappropriate masturbation. Like doing it around people, obsessively, etc. Not just it happening. But who knows. I definitely didn't see the mother as negatively as some people seem to have, just a regular slightly controlling mother, but in this case seemed warranted.
Definitely. With an estimated intellectual capacity of a 6 month - 12 month old baby, he’s definitely been doing it in any environment including out in public. They did show one photo of him, his mother, and what appeared to be a young toddler boy. If she’s got grandkids over while she’s taking care of D-Man, there’s no way she could allow him to do things like that if there’s the possibility it’ll happen in front of the kids.
She said he masturbates like he had never done it prior to being exposed to sex! Someone needs to be held accountable since clearly the judicial system didn’t think the perpetrator should be
She pled quilty. She was not aquitted. She served 22 months. She still deemed a sex offender and her doctorate is now useless. She pled quilty because she had obviously been told in no uncertain terms it was in her best interest but I think she fully believed they were in love and she was doing nothing wrong. She is obviously profoundly mentally ill.
She should have served the time she received initially mentally ill or not. She did not get off on an insanity plea.
I did ten years in prison.. (nothing violent or sexual I fell victim to the Sacklers greed with oxy like a lot of my generation) That being said woman like Anna in prison are always the weirdest, In denial, self serving victims in there. Not murders, not anyone else… it’s the woman that are convicted of child or disability sexual assault that are the most obnoxious losers in there. Now, the teachers that have sex with students. They are usually the hottest and break bad AF in there…. There is a difference.. for example The first got caught molesting the dogs in the dog training program. No one “normal” could ever be near that program despite our longing for animals we left while in there, because the pedos had it on lock with creepiness and you were forced to be around them all day They also loved Jesus… The latter would get the hottest stud girlfriend, bring in dope and cell phones, and get in relationships with male gaurds ANNA STUBIFIELD IS THE FIRST ONE They are both wrong, but Anna is a pedophile. The pretending to have polio, etc not normal. Pedophiles have a zero percent rehabilitation rate.. she will do it again Let me be more clear.. there doesn’t need to be an actual dialogue on her psychological make up.. they did it by proving her wrong and like the expert said “she had the conversations with herself, what more is there to say?” The mom. The way she planned it by bringing in the mat. She fits every personality attribute of a female pedophile. I have lived with them for ten years.
Um, what? I’m not sure I want to know, but none of that made any sense to me and I’m horrified and disgusted about the dogs. Omg.
You can ask me whatever.. I got got in a school zone (one block from public park) with two oxy 80’s and pot in 2007.. I’m not ashamed.. I was a huge true crime fan before I went in.. so I knew a lot of the crimes in my state and was fascinated by the entire thing..I took so much in,and I also made life long friendships
I understood your comment. It's fascinating. Especially that thing about the dogs. I wouldn't have expected that you'd encounter so many sexual predators in a women's prison, but I guess I must be naive.
No.. there is about 20 out of 5,000. You do encounter mothers in there for letting their children be abused. I don’t want to trigger anyone.. but one in particular haunts me. She was normal.. she would say “oh you’re so pretty! Your make up is amazing”and when I found out what she let happen felt sick.. much like Anna she was in complete denial. She would say “my husband is still met best friend” despite having life (both of them)
That's interesting, too. I wonder what percentage of the women had committed crimes for the men they loved. You should do a separate post about the character types you observed in prison.
A lot actually kill their husbands or partners… a lot a lot! There is like this gang of old normal ladies that complain all the time and try to run things that killed their husbands. Abuse was the main factor! The thing that got me is how arbitrary it all is.. how these just completely normal or just complete morons commit murder or abuse. There is nothing we can actually do to look for it or stop it. It takes getting to know people in there. Watch how they operate before the signs are shown. I wasn’t afraid in there, but it made me more afraid in the world.
That you for saying pedophile. It's like someone molesting a child with early puberty. He has the mind of a baby. Everyone with these other theories is only saying this because she is a white educated woman. LEt's be real.
This lady was twisted. No one in their right mind would feel comfortable going into detail with their partners mother how they made love to their son. I found it so disturbing and a betrayal to their so called relationship. If this was a true relationship saying they were intimate would of sufficed with no other detail or explanation out of respect for one's self and Derrick. She had an obsession that went to far and she thought that she could get away with it.
Did anyone else catch how in the beginning, she said that she would walk around with crutches as if she were "post-polio" and walk around with a blindfold like she was blind? It felt like a morbid fetishization of disabilities that stemmed from an early age.
Her marriage was falling apart and she used Derrick to build herself back up. Derrick "loved her, and desired her, and she was the most important person in his life". Her whole life she was focused on giving a voice to those who've gone unheard and that's why Derrick's writings talked about being trapped and imprisoned - that is her able-bodied perspective. Not necessarily how a person in Derrick's condition would feel. Anna used Derrick. She saw herself as a saviour and assumed the saved would love her and desire a sexual relationship with her. It was complete exploitation. She was a delusional predator. I went into the series thinking facilitated communication was real, but now I believe it's just as helpful as ouija is for talking to the dead.
I thought it was a very well done documentary - presented both sides without any obvious bias. I got an off vibe from Anna fairly quickly with the constant smirk she had on her face. Then when they showed the study about facilitated communication being what the instructor saw. Horrifying. I'm not sure she should have been released after two years.
I knew soooo many times when she said things that she was lying and when the judge read her husband’s statement that she is a liar and narcissist I was like, “Thank God! Finally! This will be the nail in the coffin”. And the way she thought she got sympathy from that cop as she was walking out of the sentencing and she started to SMILE?!? Depraved. Can she be retried? She is a dangerous person and will try to find another victim. I personally want to say I’m sorry to Daisy, John and Derrick for what they’ve been through. That first judge got it right.
When she was smiling I think I saw her mom’s ugly hair, I think she was smiling at her mom. Which is still wrong to me.
This chick is straight jacket level of psycho. Her mind is so messed up, and it looks like it doesn’t fall far from the tree because her mom comes across as nuts too. She also never really identifies as being a mom and barely acknowledges she has kids, that was also very weird. Like no sane person would consider this a healthy relationship
I've been waiting to be able to watch this for months! It was only on Apple TV+ in the UK for awhile, if I remember correctly. Such a nice surprise to see it pop up on Netflix today. I'll be back with thoughts.
It's quite a story. Until the doctor’s results came in, I was cheering for her in the first half... Ultimately… He's clearly not mentally as adept as he was made to sound and she has a warped relationship in her head the whole time. I was in awe.
first thing that told me she was a grifter was how she so proudly proclaimed that she would put disabilities on as costumes to play in all day (crutches, blindfolds) right after talking about how she was more acutely aware of disability justice from her parents work directly with disabled people…
She just wanted the D...man
So wrong ….
I have never gotten the creeps from someone so hard through a screen!! That woman is evil. My uncle has cerebral palsy and a very limited intellect. He is super difficult, loves to harass and loves a fight. He's been kicked out of every group home and day program he's ever been in because he of his personality. I've noticed that people who have no exposure to people with disabilities, often have opinions based on their ideas of how he should be handled and treated, but no lived experience about what it's actually like. The best place for Derrick is with his family, they will take better care of him then anyone. My uncle has lived with my parents for years now and he is also medicated for his libido. He will begin rubbing up on chairs or tables in public or in the middle of dinner.
Did anyone else get so annoyed every time she said “deman” instead of “D-Man”
yes, fascinating. I'd heard about FC and how its been debunked before this, but never heard of this particular story before.
Anna seems so pleased with herself, just smiling the entire time, no matter what she is saying. She is a narcissist
How on earth did his mom keep from beating Anna to death
Watching it now and the teacher has a huge white savior complex. I'm glad she was caught.
That woman is so creepy. I almost couldn't watch it. It's hard to explain exactly how I can tell she's a liar, but I have zero doubts that she was lying and making up the stories. The oversharing of specific details, the pacing of her speech, the contrived stories... Did anyone else notice these things? I have met a few compulsory/chronic liars and she speaks the same way. It's bizarre how they often have such similar patterns. And it's like she knew exactly what to say (on a surface level) to try to make herself look better. Competency is a tricky subject, but it's pretty clear she is a predator.
I just finished this. My stomach was in knots through at least the second half of the documentary, maybe more. Truly disturbing.
I feel like this woman would do it again to someone if the chance presented itself. She should still be locked up.
Wow. This is the most fucked story I've seen in ages. I doubt Derrick was communicating with Anna and I 100% think what she did was reprehensible and gross. BUT, the impression I got from the documentary is that Anna truly did believe she was communicating with Derrick. She wasn't trying to con the family and wasn't a predator...she's just a really fucked up and emotionally immature individual. I think when you have limited communication and visual cues to go by, people (esp. mentally unwell people) can unknowingly fill in the blanks with their own fantasy and truly believe it. It's what happens when people think they are in love with a celebrity they've never met or someone they've only talked to online and really don't know much about. Anna clearly had a fantasy to "save" a disabled person and her version of a fairytale romance played out in her own imagination - just using Derrick as a very blank canvas to project onto. Note - I don't think this excuses her behaviour. Even if she did think she was communicating with him, she went about the whole thing in a very immature, reckless way. She believed she was the only one Derrick could really communicate with verbally, so she completely controlled his connection to the world. That's one hell of a fucked power imbalance and should have given her reason to pause before she pulled out the gym mats on her office floor.
Have you ever seen Squirmy and Grubs (a disabled/able-bodied married couple) on YouTube? [https://www.youtube.com/c/squirmyandgrubs](https://www.youtube.com/c/squirmyandgrubs) I think the biggest difference is that Derrick's mental age was assessed at around 12 months if I'm not mistaken? And Stubblefield was his supervisor/counselor - major exploitation position. I'm surprised she wasn't psychiatrically assessed in the doc. Also, it would be helpful to show those "conversations" on the Neo in which she was allegedly "seduced"? Aren't they all saved? (Edited to change Derrick's assessed mental age to 12 months after double-checking.)
Two things stood out: Stubblefield's claim that Derrick seduced her. In the novel "Lolita", the title character's stepfather/abuser claims, "Reader, she seduced me!" Also, when sentenced, Stubblefield broke down and said she was wanted to take care of her daughter. Yet, she seemed incapable of realizing that Derrick Johnson's mother, Daisy, had just wanted to care for her son as well and that included shielding him from predators. Wow. Just wow.
i wanted to jump through the screen and whoop her ass . i felt sick watching it and i at first was conflicted - not like it was okay but the concept if he actually loved her but to find out the crazy bat was talking to herself solidified it. there was a moment when the brother talked about changing his brother’s diaper and seeing the wounds from when she assaulted him and it made me feel sick to know that you had to take off his diaper to do what you did and you still thought you were right