Kim Kardashian Did NOT Speak To Psychic Jayne Wallace After Recent Drama, Despite Report

Kim Kardashian Psychic Jayne Wallace

(Getty Images)

Kim Kardashian did NOT consult with psychic Jayne Wallace after the Paris robbery or during the current situation with Kanye West, despite the woman stating she talked to the reality star. Meanwhile, a number of unreliable outlets did not even bother to fact-check Wallace’s account before publishing her untrue claim. Gossip Cop, however, investigated and we’re exclusively told Kardashian and Wallace “did not speak.”

According to HollywoodLife, “Psychic Jayne Wallace admitted that Kim Kardashian has been turning to her amidst all of the drama in her life right now.” After noting how Kardashian has had a “stressful year,” having been robbed in Paris and West “being hospitalized for a mental breakdown,” the unreliable site claims Kardashian has been dealing by “turning to psychic Jayne Wallace.” The disreputable outlet notes that Wallace, founder of Psychic Sisters, “spoke on [the British TV show] ‘Loose Women’ about the time she has spent with the reality TV star.”

The webloid relates that Wallace called Kardashian “very down to earth,” and that the two women “talked about marriage, babies, family.” What’s more, writes HollywoodLies, Wallace described Kardashian’s family as warm and welcoming, and points out that the psychic has been to the reality star’s “home in Calabasas many times.” After reiterating that “Kim turned to her after her robbery in France,” the repeatedly disproven site editorializes, “Wow, we really don’t blame Kim for trying everything under the sun. If we were going through half the amount of stuff she’s going through right now, we would be turning to psychics, too!”

Maybe if HollywoodLife and the other outlets that reported about Kardashian relying on Wallace had turned to fact-checking, they all wouldn’t look like a bunch of lazy and discredited journalists. Gossip Cop looked into the psychic’s claims, and they’re entirely untrue. A rep for Kardashian exclusively tells Gossip Cop that Wallace and the reality star “did not speak.

Kim Kardashian Psychic Jayne Wallace


Kim Kardashian spoke to psychic Jayne Wallace after the recent drama in Paris and with Kanye West.

Friday, November 25, 2016

Continue Reading

Steven Avery Of ‘Making A Murder’: I Wouldn’t Be In Prison If Lawyers Did ‘Job’ Right

steven avery with police, via ABC screengrab

Convicted murderer Steven Avery has not only hired a new attorney, he’s blasting his old ones in a handwritten letter to inTouch Weekly.

“Dean and Jerry didn’t do no investigation on this case, if they did I would not be in prison, They would have the Suspect if they did there Job!” he wrote. (misspellings his)

He was convicted in 2007 for the murder of photojournalist Teresa Halbach. In the trial, his lawyers Dean Strang and Jerry Buting claimed that investigators at the Manitowoc County Sheriff’s Department framed Avery in retaliation over a lawsuit.

Avery now claims Strang and Buting botched his original trial by failing to challenge the prosecution’s claims. For example, he says, they apparently could’ve called forensic experts to examine the lack of blood spatter at his home, and the processing of Halbach’s burnt body. Avery also claims his old attorneys failed to prove investigators planted Halbach’s car key in his home.

“Lawyers sould [sic] loose [sic] there [sic] license when they don’t investigate they [sic] case to proof there [sic] clients and they violating the Ethics, the State sould [sic] take there [sic] license for good,” he wrote.

His legal team is now led by Illinois-area attorney Kathleen Zellner.

The Avery case was played out in the 2015 Netflix documentary series Making a Murderer. A new season has been announced.

Follow Alberto Luperon on Twitter (@Alberto Luperon)

Continue Reading

Celebrity DNC Speakers NOT “Random” Or “Odd”

Celebrity DNC Speakers

(Getty Images)

The celebrity speakers for this week’s Democratic National Convention are not “random” or “odd,” despite a mean-spirited and uninformed story from Slate. Gossip Cop can take it down piece by piece.

The article, which came out last week, is currently headlined, “Demi Lovato, Chloe Grace Moretz, and Eva Longoria Are Odd Choices of DNC Speakers.” It was further tweeted with the teaser, “Why Debra Messing, Demi Lovato and Chloe Moretz are disappointing DNC speaker choices.”

Arguably, there’s no reason for any stars to speak at political conventions, but it’s become the norm over the last three decades, and the celebs mentioned here are perfectly good choices to represent the Democratic party. And yet, the accompanying story begins, “Is speaking at a national political convention a prestigious gig? Because the list of the celebrities who will appear at the Democratic National Convention next week has started to trickle out and… there are a lot of randos on it!” It’s said that Debra Messing, Eva Longoria, Demi Lovato and Chloe Grace Moretz are a “step up” from celebrity Republican National Convention speakers Scott Baio, Antonio Sabato Jr., and Kimberlin Brown, “but they’re still decidedly B-list.” Slate asks, “Wouldn’t you just as soon expect that group to do a reality show as endorse our president?”

Giving a “quick rundown of why these four are such odd choices,” it’s said Messing, though a “big-time Democrat,” is “not at the top of her game lately” because “‘Will & Grace’ was a while ago, she was not the best part of ‘Smash,’ and ‘Mysteries of Laura’ was canceled.” Gossip Cop wasn’t aware having a series canceled just a few months ago after two seasons made someone unqualified to speak at the DNC.

But it’s similarly said about Longoria, “Eva Longoria, like Messing, was in a big TV show a few years ago and more recently has been on some canceled ones.” It’s noted that the actress has done “surprisingly legit” “political work,” but since she previously spoke at the 2012 convention, it’s said, “Give someone else a chance to orate, Eva.” So a qualified actress, who also happens to be a minority, should be prevented from speaking simply because she’s appeared in the past?

It gets worse. For Lovato, the author writes, “Some of her songs are great. I also know that she recently broke up with Wilmer Valderrama. Not exactly the makings of a political leader.” Why should Lovato’s political worthiness be measured by her love life and whether her music is liked? Similarly, for Moretz, it’s noted how she’s “dating Brooklyn Beckham, son of Posh and Becks,” as if that should have any bearing on her speaking capabilities.

It’s further said of Moretz, “There’s nothing wrong with her exactly, other than the vague air of desperation that encircles her. Is she someone teens find inspiring? Seems doubtful.” But it’s never once mentioned how Lovato and Moretz have spent time campaigning for Hillary Clinton long before they were announced as DNC speakers. In fact, Gossip Cop reported more than a year ago that Moretz was one of the first celebrities to show support for Clinton when she launched her campaign.

And after stumping in Iowa in January, Lovato explained why she’s voting for Clinton, even noting, “Her being a woman is just a bonus.” Longoria and Messing, too, have both demonstrated that they are politically-minded. All that makes them neither “random” nor “odd,” and Longoria and Lovato should hardly be consisted “B-list.”

But because Slate absurdly believes these stars aren’t up to par, alternative suggestions are given, such as, “Instead of Demi Lovato, how about an Ariana Grande or a Kendrick Lamar?” Yes, Ariana Grande who was caught on camera saying “I hate America.” The article concludes, “Pander to us, Democrats, show us how shiny and popular you are! Instead, you’re just showing us how desperate to be loved Chloe Grace Moretz is.”

But it’s not Moretz who comes off as desperate here. It would’ve taken such little research to discover truly relevant information about the selected speakers. Instead, Slate chose to publish a complete misrepresentation of the chosen stars. To be clear, this has nothing to do with supporting or not supporting Clinton. It has nothing to do with whether people should vote for her.

It has everything to do with a baseless and cruel attack on celebrities who are admirably attempting to be politically active. Again, it’s reasonable to say that there’s no need for TV actors or pop stars to be part of political conventions. But if some had to be chosen, this cross-section of women, Latinas and young people are a fair representation for the Democratic party.

Continue Reading