I will update this with a response to the McMartin Preschool case being discussed in another red-hot thread so as not to derail its worthy efforts.
Ed Opperman presented himself as the sole outlet to platform Eugene Donald Michael (a geologist who performed supplementary survey work of the McMartin property) and therefore, the sole outlet to investigate and confirm the presence of hidden tunnels/rooms and other structures which would seem to confirm the children's accounts of abuse at the site. During an investigation of Opperman himself, a sponsor of his show (former sponsor, they have since ceased all contact with him although he still plays their ads in spite of no longer receiving any money from them and having been asked to remove the ads) confirmed that they had first-person connections with people investigating MPS at the time it was breaking open and that the children's reports of the underground structures where abuse would take place were CONFIRMED during the initial phases of the case. Their quote regarding Fast Eddy himself? "Ed Opperman is a liar." We have already firmly established this, but its nice to get further confirmation.
This opens the topic to a broader questioning of how such operators can attempt to effect both public opinion and awareness of such cases as well as potentially impact the outcome of actual legal actions. We have already established that Ed Opperman continuously inserts himself into both high and low profile child abuse cases, with a track record of convenient failure... so with this in mind, I would like to challenge readers here to examine just how serious and dangerous the "limited hangout" operators/operations are.
Limited Hangouts can distract, disseminate false info and accusations, discredit legit sources and in general muddy the waters... all while seeming to present an inside track. They cause dissension among the ranks of those involved/investigating various matters and division along the lines of who-supports-who in regards to cases/situations/phenomenon which deserve serious scrutiny. There are limited hangout operators which are smoother/more proficient than others while some are easier to see through. Among other reasons, primary motivations for their activity can range from pushing narratives/agendas/etc. in service of others to attempting actions with the intent of taking the heat off of their own personal involvement.
Since we convene on this site which is dedicated to cutting through the fog surrounding so many of the issues which are so important to us, Id like to use Slopperman as prime example of just how deceiving looks can be and how dangerous the limited hangout-crowd are. On the surface and to hear him tell it, Fast Eddie is a dedicated champion of child abuse victims and their supporters. Yet his results expose the complete opposite... a limited hangout operator who, as previously mentioned, conveniently fails at his task to defend and advocate for these victims.
This site has the word "vigilant" in its domain name for a reason, lets try and remain so in regards to not only the easy-peasy, shooting fish in a barrel instances of exposing whats wrong and highlighting whats correct... lets keep that sharp eye out for those operators and operations with the ability and intent to act as limited hangout actors.