No Way, José Ep 11 A.C. Pt 4 The Media Outlet He Allegedly Tried To Buy

For all of the recipes in the episode and others. Check and join our SubStack

If the information you are looking for is not there, check back as it will be coming soon!

In this installment of our five-part investigation into Anthony Christopher Rocko, we return to the central question running through this entire miniseries:

How thoroughly did Javier Leiva vet one of the people he relied upon in PRETEND’s Who’s Afraid of LaDonna Humphrey?

By the time Javier produced that series, he had made an editorial choice to interview people who had grievances, accusations, and conflicts involving LaDonna Humphrey.

Those conflicts did not automatically disqualify them as sources.

But they did make motive, credibility, and bias important parts of the story.

That is why what we found about Anthony Christopher matters.

A publisher makes his own allegation

Dennis McCaslin, publisher of Today in Fort Smith, publicly alleged that Anthony Christopher approached his publication in 2021 and offered a substantial amount of money to help him “bury” LaDonna Humphrey.

McCaslin says telephone and text communications existed surrounding that approach.

That allegation is significant because it goes directly to motive.

It is not simply an old disagreement.

It is an allegation from another media publisher that Anthony had previously attempted to involve a media organization in an effort against the same woman he would later discuss with PRETEND.

If true, that is information an audience could reasonably consider when evaluating Anthony Christopher as a source.

Why motive matters

Investigative journalists routinely ask questions about the people bringing them accusations.

Why is this person talking?

What relationship do they have with the subject?

What do they want?

What have they previously done in pursuit of that objective?

Those questions become even more important when the source has a documented history of conflict with the person being investigated.

PRETEND repeatedly examined LaDonna Humphrey through the accounts of people who had disputes with her.

So why wasn’t Anthony Christopher examined through the same lens?

The Jennifer Powers lawsuit

McCaslin’s allegation does not exist in isolation.

As we examined in an earlier episode, Jennifer Powers filed a verified lawsuit in Washington County Circuit Court against Anthony Christopher, also known as Anthony Rocko.

Powers alleged that Anthony persuaded her to invest in a business venture and represented that he was contributing equally to their partnership.

She later alleged that Anthony accepted $8,000 from her toward a supposed Cave Springs real-estate purchase.

According to Powers, when she investigated the property herself, she discovered that it had not been purchased, was not for sale, and that its owners had never discussed selling it to Anthony Christopher.

Her complaint included a cause of action titled:

“COUNT IV – TORT OF DECEIT.”

Powers alleged that Anthony made false representations, intended for her to rely upon them, and caused her financial harm.

She also brought claims involving fiduciary duties, breach of contract, and unjust enrichment.

Those were allegations contained in a verified civil complaint.

They were not findings by this show.

But they were part of Anthony Christopher’s documented history before PRETEND presented him to its audience.

The Eureka Live litigation

Then came another Arkansas lawsuit.

Anthony Christopher was named as a defendant in litigation involving Eureka Live.

The plaintiffs alleged that Anthony Christopher and Walter Burrell discussed Christopher gaining control of the business before its existing operators were removed.

Claims involving Anthony included allegations of:

Interference with contractual relationships

Conversion

and

Civil conspiracy

Exhibits attached to the court filing also showed promotional material identifying Anthony Christopher as Eureka Live’s “new owner.”

Again, a complaint is not proof that every allegation contained within it is true.

But complaints, prior disputes, and documented litigation can be highly relevant when evaluating a source whose credibility is being used to attack someone else’s.

Now put the pieces together

At this point, PRETEND’s audience could have been told that Anthony Christopher had a history that included:

A verified lawsuit accusing him of tort of deceit.

Another lawsuit accusing him of conduct connected to interference with contracts, conversion, and civil conspiracy.

And a public allegation from another publisher that Anthony offered money to help “bury” LaDonna Humphrey.

None of those things automatically proves that anything Anthony later said about LaDonna was false.

That is not the argument.

The argument is much simpler:

This information could affect how a reasonable listener evaluates Anthony Christopher’s credibility, motives, and possible bias.

And that makes it relevant to source vetting.

What did Javier know?

That leads to a series of factual questions for Javier Leiva.

Did Javier know about the Jennifer Powers lawsuit?

Did he know that Powers specifically accused Anthony Christopher of tort of deceit?

Did he know about the $8,000 real-estate allegation?

Did he know about the Eureka Live litigation?

Did he know Anthony had been accused of interference with contractual relationships, conversion, and civil conspiracy?

Did he know about Dennis McCaslin’s allegation that Anthony offered money to help “bury” LaDonna Humphrey?

Did Javier ever ask Anthony about any of these matters?

And if he did, why weren’t those answers presented to the audience alongside Anthony’s allegations about LaDonna?

Two very different possibilities

It would be irresponsible to assume that Javier deliberately withheld this information without evidence establishing that.

There are at least two possibilities.

He knew about these matters and chose not to include them.

Or he never discovered them.

Those are different scenarios.

But either one raises questions.

If Javier knew, listeners deserve to understand why the information was omitted.

If he did not know, then listeners deserve to ask how deeply one of PRETEND’s sources was vetted before his allegations were broadcast.

The result for the audience was the same:

They were given Anthony Christopher’s allegations about LaDonna Humphrey without being given substantial information that could have affected how they evaluated Anthony Christopher himself.

Credibility cannot be a one-way investigation

PRETEND spent considerable time examining LaDonna Humphrey’s past.

Relationships.

Disputes.

Allegations.

Conflicts.

People who said they had negative experiences with her.

That history was presented because PRETEND apparently believed it helped listeners evaluate her credibility.

Then the same principle must apply to the sources making accusations against her.

Dennis McCaslin had allegations involving Anthony Christopher.

Jennifer Powers had allegations involving Anthony Christopher.

Cordale Moore had allegations involving Anthony Christopher.

Those voices existed too.

Some of those allegations were contained in Arkansas court records long before PRETEND released Who’s Afraid of LaDonna Humphrey?

Source vetting cannot mean investigating only the history of the person your source wants the audience to distrust.

If Anthony Christopher’s allegations about LaDonna Humphrey were relevant enough for PRETEND, then information bearing directly on Anthony Christopher’s own credibility and possible motive was relevant enough for listeners to know.

Javier told his audience a great deal about the woman Anthony Christopher wanted them to distrust.

This episode examines what they were not told about the man asking them to distrust her.

And No Way, José is opening those records now.