My Discovery Update

[Deleted]

I wanted to say thanks for the support on my Discovery Channel BS.

I have now spoken with/emailed with all three Sheriff's officers involved in the show who were at my house that day, and everyone is equally as appalled at the footage of "me" shown.   Additionally, the officer who is shown saying "everything is confidential" is equally as pissed-off that they showed that on TV completely out of the context of the conversation we actually had and made it appear like you can contact the sheriff with your concerns but it might end up on TV....

The local atty I contacted quoted me $250 an hour to fight them, with an understanding that what they did is actionable and I could likely recover monetary damages from Discovery Communications over this.  However, since I can't swing that, and no other atty returned my inquiries, I settled for the second best option. 

I found out from the sheriff that most all of the footage was "photo-shopped" together to look like one grow but really they are shots of one person's property, another person's weed, and yet other people's stuff as well.  The "cartel grow" supposedly informed on by me was FAKE!  Apparently the aerial footage is in another county, and the "grow" was actually someone's personal garden that the law cut down.  I have been assured that no one is after me for that, because it was FABRICATED!

Our local sheriff says that the show told them they were going to do investigative reporting on the cartel grows in the wilderness, but in reality the show ended up being, in their words; "stupid law enforcement who needs citizens to flag them down and inform on them because they are too dumb to do their own investigations, and are only interested in removing medication from children and sick people in need."  They also said that they do not care one iota about people legally growing medical weed, they wanted footage of the damage done in our National Forest lands.  (Which is a HUGE problem here and dangerous for anyone using the forest for recreation who comes across a grow site!)

Since I am unable to sue them, and now know no one is hunting me, I sent the following message to EVERYONE I can find with an e-mail address at Discovery Channel and Discovery Communications - including their CEO/President, all of their leadership team, all of their board members, and anyone else with a e-mail or Facebook account I could find.  The local Sheriff has also submitted a request via their connection to the show, for a formal apology for me and action to be taken against the lying producer.  They are also taking a new look at whether or not they will be allowed back next summer in our county.

____________

Until 3/14/2013 I was a complete supporter of your networks.  It was on that day that "Weed Country: Armed and Dangerous" aired.  That episode shows many shots of a large blue Blazer driven by me.  I stopped that day to ask if the guys were lost and came upon one of Bill Pruitt's film crews and my local Siskiyou County Sheriff's detectives. 

I am now labeled a drug informant, which is apparently what you get when you decide to be helpful with your network's film crew!  You should be ashamed of the complete and utter BS produced on your networks.

The FIRST thing I told Bill Pruitt was NOT to film me.  Not to film my child who was with me.  And, not to film my vehicle.  I explained to him that as a single mother living 30 miles from town, it is not safe to talk to the cops or film crews, especially when all your neighbors are pot farmers!  I was assured that they were only filming the officers and not me or my vehicle.  Apparently that was a total lie.

The footage is on your networks website.  At 20 minutes in and again at 30 minutes before a large "Mexican cartel grow bust of 2000 plants" I am again shown as the informant and more complete and utter bullshit is dubbed over my real voice.  The only thing authentic I said was "Hello!"  Seriously.  Listen to that crap, it is obvious it isn't me!

Your network made me out to be a DRUG INFORMANT!  How dare you.  How dare Bill Pruitt. 

Perhaps you can all dig down deep and find that thing called integrity.  Apparently it is completely missing at your company.  If no one has ever said it, then it clearly needs to be said - stop making stuff up and ruining people's lives for ratings!

Who cares if Discovery Channel labels me as a snitch for a Mexican drug cartel.  Sure, that just carries a death sentence.

Again, you should be ashamed and you should be sued! 

What happened to me was WRONG and I deserve an apology from your company.  In the least.... perhaps a bit of review of Mr. Pruitt's ability to produce quality, truthful content should also be reviewed.

[milee]

Shasta,

I'm very glad you and your family are safe since the deal you "informed" on was fake.  It's also good that the sheriff's office is now aware that this producer and show are not trustworthy and shouldn't be allowed to return.

If you'd like some constructive feedback on how to get results from corporations, Boards and C-level execs, read on.  Otherwise, no worries, good wishes and I'm glad you're OK.

Your letter was helpful to you because it allowed you to vent some anger, but will probably be perceived as coming from a person who is emotional and unhinged.  Use exclamation points judiciously.  Stick to the facts, even if they're dry - he said this; I said this; my truck was here.  Inflammatory language and insults don't help, they only reflect poorly on you.  If you can describe the situation calmly and in detail, Discovery would probably be horrified at your situation.  As it is, they may not believe what you're writing is truthful because you sound so outraged that you may not be accurate in your recitation.  It also looks odd when you use different fonts and gives the impression that you are cutting and pasting from different places, which again makes it look less like an accurate rendition.  And last, never, ever use foul language in a letter to a business or executive; they are much less likely to believe or relate to someone who does.  In summary, calmly describe the situation and facts and then politely state what you would like to happen.

[Deleted]

I have to agree with milee. That's not the e-mail I would have sent either. Actually, in this situation I probably would have sent actual letters through the mail rather than chance that the "important" people don't open random e-mails. But that's just me, and the means of communication may not matter all that much.

The e-mail sounds more like a vent than a valid issue to be taken seriously. First impressions matter and they can be difficult to overcome if the first impression is a bad one.

[hoops902]

I agree with milee on the tone.  It's hard to have a matter-of-fact tone when you're outraged, but it generally does come across to the recipient as "raving lunatic".  It's taking "you filmed me without my permission" to "You just gave me a death sentence".  When you clearly exaggerate wildly in one claim, it probably tends to make people reading it think everything you've written is likely to be exaggerated. 

On the other hand, if you work for Discovery secretly, I think you've piqued my interest to make me want to go see the footage to see just how poorly they portrayed you. 

[milee]

Mar 20, 2013 11:22:34 GMT -5 hoops902 said:

On the other hand, if you work for Discovery secretly, I think you've piqued my interest to make me want to go see the footage to see just how poorly they portrayed you. 

Hoops, I watched the footage.  If what Shasta claims is true (that it is not her voice coming from the Blue Bronco SUV and that she didn't actually give Discovery any information), then it's pretty nasty how the show edited the footage to make it look like she is an informant.

[Deleted]

The only issue I have with Shasta is that she claims that the show lied in it's broadcast. I cannot beleive that my TV would ever lie to me, especially a reality show.

[Tennesseer]

Mar 20, 2013 11:19:17 GMT -5 @pinkcshmere said:

I have to agree with milee. That's not the e-mail I would have sent either. Actually, in this situation I probably would have sent actual letters through the mail rather than chance that the "important" people don't open random e-mails. But that's just me, and the means of communication may not matter all that much.

The e-mail sounds more like a vent than a valid issue to be taken seriously. First impressions matter and they can be difficult to overcome if the first impression is a bad one.

It's not too late to send letters by registered mail or via FedEx for proof of delivery.

[milee]

During the original thread on this, there was a link to the TV show.  My husband walked in on me watching the show and wondered why I was watching it.  When I told him Shasta's story and how badly I thought Discovery had handled the situation and put her in danger, he had a different reaction.  His theory was that she had talked to Discovery and was just angry because they told her that the footage of her informing wouldn't be shown and that Discovery had covered their butts by disguising her voice and not showing her face.  He also thought that she might have offered to inform to the sheriffs in exchange for a reward and then changed her mind later.  I disagreed and asked why she'd misstate something like this on a message board.

But this part makes me think there is at least more to the story (even though I don't have a guess what that "more" might be):

 "That episode shows many shots of a large blue Blazer driven by me. I stopped that day to ask if the guys were lost and came upon one of Bill Pruitt's film crews and my local Siskiyou County Sheriff's detectives.

I am now labeled a drug informant, which is apparently what you get when you decide to be helpful with your network's film crew! You should be ashamed of the complete and utter BS produced on your networks."

It's odd that the font changes and that could be due to cutting parts of the letter out.  The sentences don't flow together and I'm guessing there was more of an explanation here - such as explaining that she did talk to the producers but that they're misquoting her or that she did inform but was told it would be confidential?  Same question with the last two paragraphs where the font changes.  Odd. 

IMHO, there is more to this story.  Could be immaterial, but I think DH is right in that this isn't the whole story.

[hoops902]

She also stated originally she came home to find them in her yard and crawling out of the bushes...then in the letter it's "I saw them and stopped to see if they were lost and this is how my good deed gets punished". 

[Deleted]

The good news is that the show is awful and will be canceled shortly.

[The Captain]

Yep her story has changed.  In addition she admitted to throwing a neighbour under the bus...

www.notmsnmoney.proboards.com/post/1245487/thread

"I don't know. I just hate that I came home and they are all over the property uninvited and fishing. They could probably bust half my neighbors for outstanding warrants and I think that would be a MUCH better use of their time. (We pointed them to the tweaker's house with a suggestion that would be a good place to visit...)"

This also the same thread where Shasta freely admitted to committing fraud to keep her weed. 

Not quite the innocent victim she claims to be so I'm not so sure everything else she claims holds water.

[Opti]

I'm going to agree with the rest of them that your tone basically deep-sixed your ability
to get help. I learned from some people who were good at dealing with customers that even
if you knew they were at fault you needed to write your communications instead asking for clarification and assuming the best intent. Anything else backs people into a corner which is only effective if you have the ability to fire them or something similar.

Your network made me out to be a DRUG INFORMANT!  How dare you.  How dare Bill Pruitt. 

Perhaps you can all dig down deep and find that thing called integrity.  Apparently it is completely missing at your company.  If no one has ever said it, then it clearly needs to be said - stop making stuff up and ruining people's lives for ratings!

Who cares if Discovery Channel labels me as a snitch for a Mexican drug cartel.  Sure, that just carries a death sentence.

Again, you should be ashamed and you should be sued! 

I bolded the sentence that basically informed the executives you are a non-issue.
You are venting and will not be bringing legal action against them. If you had been
polite and not used judging words you had a shot at the execs looking into the program
and your issue.

I really wanted you to get some satisfaction out of this and perhaps you did. I hope you
are not a target. If there is a next time, wait until your anger and fear is under control before writing. I really would have enjoyed you reporting they had issued a retraction.

[hoops902]

Thanks for hte link captain, I looked but forgot about the name change thing.

Very different story indeed.  Less "I stopped because I thought they were lost", more "I tried to throw them off of my own illegal drugs by throwing the neighbor under the bus". 

Also plenty of "I'd be happy to talk to them if I can remain anonymous", which would explain why they would dub her voice and not show her face on camera.

[milee]

Reading the link the Captain provided, one sentence in the OP jumps out:

"While I would be happy to talk to the Discovery channel for their new documentary, I prefer anonymity due to where I live and the fact that things seem to live forever these days online on on film."

So is that what really happened?  If you did talk to Discovery and they agreed to not show your face or play your voice, then they haven't done anything wrong here.  The fact that the voice is dubbed isn't them being dishonest, it's them holding up their agreement to not use yours.

It's one thing if you pulled over, talked about the weather and nothing else, then drove away and they dubbed in someone else talking about things you didn't say.  (Which is what you are stating here and implying in the oddly disjointed letter to Discovery.)

It's another thing if the things they dubbed in were things you actually said and you're angry because you think they didn't do enough to protect your identity.

[zibazinski]

But you also grow and smoke weed so why are you angry about this? Yes, you bought a prescription so you're covered but its still illegal and still wrong. Do I agree that it should be illegal? No, but it is. Lots of laws I don't agree with. Change them or abide by them.

[midjd]

Mar 20, 2013 15:27:37 GMT -5 zibazinski said:

But you also grow and smoke weed so why are you angry about this? Yes, you bought a prescription so you're covered but its still illegal and still wrong. Do I agree that it should be illegal? No, but it is. Lots of laws I don't agree with. Change them or abide by them.

So if you were speeding and were pulled over and cited by a police officer, and later saw dash-cam footage on Cops in which you appeared to be throwing up gang signs, you should just get over it... because after all, you had been breaking the law?

Breaking the law doesn't give a production company the rights to doctor footage, if indeed that is what happened. The marijuana issue is separate from the Discovery Channel issue.

[hoops902]

I feel like this whole thing just reeks of what seems to always happen with the reality tv formula:

1.  Do something you aren't supposed to.  (Grow weed)
2.  Do something else you aren't supposed to.  (Smoke weed)
3.  Get caught.  (Show and sheriffs show up)
4.  Deflect.  (Throw neighbor under the bus)
5.  Give interview. 
6.  Realize the interview is a mistake.
7.  Claim you were set up by the show.

[nogooddeed]

Mar 20, 2013 12:16:26 GMT -5 ArchietheDragon said:

The good news is that the show is awful and will be canceled shortly.

I read they only plan on 6 episodes.

[justme]

Mar 20, 2013 12:31:41 GMT -5 Opti said:

I'm going to agree with the rest of them that your tone basically deep-sixed your ability
to get help. I learned from some people who were good at dealing with customers that even
if you knew they were at fault you needed to write your communications instead asking for clarification and assuming the best intent. Anything else backs people into a corner which is only effective if you have the ability to fire them or something similar.

Your network made me out to be a DRUG INFORMANT!  How dare you.  How dare Bill Pruitt. 

Perhaps you can all dig down deep and find that thing called integrity.  Apparently it is completely missing at your company.  If no one has ever said it, then it clearly needs to be said - stop making stuff up and ruining people's lives for ratings!

Who cares if Discovery Channel labels me as a snitch for a Mexican drug cartel.  Sure, that just carries a death sentence.

Again, you should be ashamed and you should be sued! 

I bolded the sentence that basically informed the executives you are a non-issue.
You are venting and will not be bringing legal action against them. If you had been
polite and not used judging words you had a shot at the execs looking into the program
and your issue.

I really wanted you to get some satisfaction out of this and perhaps you did. I hope you
are not a target. If there is a next time, wait until your anger and fear is under control before writing. I really would have enjoyed you reporting they had issued a retraction.

 I've been able to get things easily fixed/correct (even after running into brick walls at customer service) after writing a letter than calmly stated the facts, explained why I was upset, and stated specifically what I wanted from them to make it right. Depending on the situation I may throw in a "I used to recommend your company, but after this experience I can no longer do that and will have to tell my friends to chose another company, unless this is fixed". A polite version of "I will not be silenced you meanies!"

[Deleted]

*I've removed the headers from these emails.  Just too much information. - mmhmm, Administrator*


Honestly, I don't care if you don't believe me.  This will be my last post.


Here is the message received by me from the Siskiyou County Sheriff (name removed):

From (name removed) Tue Mar 19 11:43:47 2013

 

I will contact Bill Pruet and ask him to respond to your concern. I didn’t think any images could be conveyed on the air unless some type of release was signed.

 

We did not take any action at that site and most of the people associated with the activities there left.

 

Thanks for the kind words and support!

 

(name removed)

------------------------------------------------------

From (name removed) Tue Mar 19 10:48:58 2013

 

Just got back from medical leave think we need to talk about this, would it be possible for you to come by the Sheriff’s office and discuss sometime, I was surprised they had your contact with us shown agree your info had nothing to do with either of the operations. Curious if you signed any type of releases with the crew, understand your concerns will discuss this with the Sheriff.

 

(name removed)  

[resolution]

Shasta, You should probably cut out the headers from your emails.

[hoops902]

I was just going to suggest that a mod or someone cut out the headers.  1.  It's annoying.  2.  More importantly she's already given a lot of identifying information (like about where she lives), now she's listed her name, her email, etc.  For someone so worried about privacy, I can only imagine if someone wanted to find her it would be super simple at this point.

[Deleted]

It seems she already de-activated her account. Isn't this like the 50th time she is doing this? She seems to delete her account when somebody calls her out on something or says something she doesn't like. I am sure she will come back, she always does.
Maybe one of the mods can edit her post to remove names and such from the emails she pasted.

[hoops902]

Mar 20, 2013 16:54:37 GMT -5 @bunnysmom said:

It seems she already de-activated her account. Isn't this like the 50th time she is doing this? She seems to delete her account when somebody calls her out on something or says something she doesn't like. I am sure she will come back, she always does.
Maybe one of the mods can edit her post to remove names and such from the emails she pasted.

Yes, and i'm sure someone will start a thread about how emotionally fragile she is and how we can't call her out on her lies because it's so mean.  She's continually shown to be here to be a martyr and garner sympathy, anything else and she deactivates and comes back a week later looking for more with a sob story.

[Queen of Interesting Nuts]

Come on guys there is no need for that. I really dislike it when someone leaves and then we talk about them and their issues. I have de-activated my account and I come back because in my opinion there is so much good info from all different types of people and personalities that you can't beat it. I try to grow a thicker skin each time though. I don't delete my account to garner attention it is simply for me anyway one step easier to not post and get back in the game if I have to go through signing up again.

It is not always about getting attention. When I was not active I still read the message board occasionally and still see people I liked posting and wanted to weigh in on their posts but as I wasn't signed up it was a little easier to move on.

I didn't get anything hinky about her posts, I guess some did but really no need to be mean and question someone's motive ALL THE TIME. I don't know if the board owners want any new blood but I have directed a few pals over here and they see some very mean spirited things that put them off. If no new blood is wanted then hey keep it up I suppose.

[Jaguar]

Well this went over really well, geez

[Deleted]

Naggie,

I hear what you're saying but Shasta can also post some pretty mean stuff herself. My feeling is if you can't take it don't put it out either.

Over the years I've received a couple of nasty little comments, most of which I can blow off but every once in a while I have to step back and examine why a couple of them hurt. More than once it's because there's a grain of truth in it or a way of viewing a situation I hadn't thought of.

[mmhmm]

It appears Shasta has left the boards for now, so let's just let this go.  No real sense in getting into a feeding frenzy over someone who's not around to support or defend.  There are plenty of other things to talk about.

[Rocky Mtn Saver]

... like cat fur!

[zibazinski]

Some people simply leave or they take a break. Others make a big toodoo over it and some posters get on board with the pity party. I love how someone on the dole, who makes no bones about feeling entitled to it, comments along with the other dole taker, how America should spend more on them and less on other countries. I agree with other countries but to pay off our debt, not to support freeloaders. But always has money to buy prescriptions for illegal drugs.