Tuesday, April 28, 2009

A former Children's Show host and registered sex offender.....A toilet brush....and a suckling dog.

Some of you probably recall my post and mugshot of Uncle Ed Muscare. A reader was kind enough to send a link to Uncle Ed's YouTube videos. These aren't videos of the old Uncle Ed's Treehouse Lane children's show. No, these are much finer, they aren't clips from any of his television work either. No boys and girls, what we have here are videos made after he became a registered sex offender. He has a ton of crazy videos on his YouTube page. Give em a look and be afraid, be very afraid.


  1. My God.

    So much for local celebrity.

    Still, his viewcount isn't horrible.

  2. he has 2K+ subscribers. who are these people.

  3. Sick. I don't want to see more videos. The name "Uncle Ed" seems to ring a bell, but I can't place him. I'm from the "Whizzo" era. Don't you DARE tell me HE was some sort of pervert. Please.

  4. I have a new definition in my mind for the cliche "Can't look and can't look away" ... I threw up a little in my mouth ... Is there no such thing any more as fading away into shame and obscurity? Gawd ...

  5. Ummm..what the hell? I don't know what freaked me out more, that sucking dog (!!??!!) or the guy's teeth. All I could think was that the guy probably has the dog suckle somewhere wlse when not on camera. (Or maybe on other videos.)EWWWW. I have to go throw away my toilet brush now. I can't bare to look at it.

  6. I'm not even going to play the video after reading the above comments. Sick bastard.

  7. words escape me.

    I should have followed JOOLS example and not played the video because you just can't unsee that shit.

  8. Ok, that was just nasty. That's all. Just nasty.

  9. Based on the input of other respected bloggers here, I'm gonna make a call on this one:

    Some things I don't need to see.

  10. Pap
    you really need to see it for yourself.

  11. Growed Up In Indep MOTuesday, April 28, 2009

    I remember this guy on Channel 41 when I was a kid in Independence. (Yes, Independence.) His show opened with the chant "I promise every night at eleven". And I recall the news item that he was a molester, too. Wow. Wonder where he is living now? I watched "edarem - drinking from the faucet - chow time". Did you see that interior? Is it some trashy Independence rental?? What appalling squalor!

    I so hate how technology has empowered anyone to record and post the banal and pointless trivialities of their pathetic lives. This serves as another example of same.

  12. I am a huge fan of your writing but I must tell you that I hate you for making me waste the last hour of my life watching Uncle Ed - err edarem. The videos are like a train wreck from which you want to avert your gaze, but you just can't.

    Thanks for the link.


  13. I've come away with a sense that Uncle Ed is incredibly lonely. Whether such loneliness is deserved or not is another question. But it is almost heartbreaking to witness.

    Todd Epp
    Kansas Watch http://www.kansaswatch.net

  14. Well it looks like you ruined his life on the interwebz.

  15. I wish that dog would move up a foot or so and rip the bastard's throat out.

  16. Hell, lets just kill everybody who we don't like who did anything to piss us off. Hell, lets kill all the excon's we had to support in prison, the bastards! Hell, lets kill their families too! Hell, lets just get some jonestown coolaid and lets all just die~! DIE DIE! Yeah right...
    Howabout God forgives our sins and we should forgive also..I too was molested and I have no wish to see Ed suffer any more because of it. His YouTube is way more interesting than this one.

  17. The Elimination of Constitutional Rights
    Prosecutors and the child saving industry have convinced the legislature that merely creating hysteria is not enough to insure conviction for those accused. In addition, rights originally created in our constitution to protect the criminal defendants must be eliminated.

    The Rules to Have Changed to Secure Convictions
    All across our nation, state legislatures have supported child advocacy special interest groups. The following illustrates how constitutional rights have been taken away in child sexual assault trials:

    No Right to Confront Your Accuser:
    Criminal law codes have been rewritten to where in many cases, the child accuser does not have to appear in court and face the accused. Instead, the state can offer the child’s testimony through a video tape made by agents of the prosecution.

    “Hearsay Evidence”:
    Hearsay is defined as “a statement, other than one made by the declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” (Tex. Rules. Evid. 803 (2)). In Layman’s terms, “Hearsay” evidence is when a witness testifies about something they do not personally know, but were told by someone else. Hearsay is considered unreliable and is normally inadmissible as evidence against an accused. In child abuse cases however, hearsay evidence is admitted as evidence of guilt. A so called “outcry” witness can testify as to what a child supposedly said to them regarding the alleged abuse.

    “Syndrome Evidence” Is Admissible Against the Accused:
    In most states, the prosecution can have an expert witness testify that the child is suffering from “Child Sexual Abuse Accommodation Syndrome”(CSAAS). This psychological “mumble jumble” is an unscientific theory of supposed traits of abused children. The psychologist who came up with this syndrome many years ago has since indicated that this theory is not reliable evidence in a court of law. Prosecutors do not care! This junk science makes its appearance in courtrooms across the country daily.

    With Syndrome Evidence, the State Replaces Its Lack of Real Proof with Speculation.
    CSAAS theorizes that because an alleged victim is supposedly demonstrating certain behavioral patterns that he/she must have actually been abused. Unfortunately, a big problem with this and other syndromes is that the character traits offered to show abuse are also common for non-abused children. If the child has been crying, he/she must have been abused. If the child has nightmares, he/she must have been abused. If the child is withdrawn, he/she must have been abused. If the child is outgoing, he/she must have been abused. If the child is happy around the accused, its because the child enjoyed the abuse. The list of factors goes on forever. But to a jury, when an expert witness is connecting typical childhood behavior with indicators of abuse, the testimony is extremely damaging to the falsely accused.

  18. Convictions Without Physical Evidence:
    Our prisons are full of persons who have been convicted of child molestation without any physical evidence ever introduced against them at trial. In other words, the typical evidence in which the state offers to convict a defendant, such as body fluids, blood, semen, hair, DNA, are not introduced at trial to link the accused to a crime.

    Medical nurses and employees whose livelihoods depend upon their contracts with child advocacy centers will give opinions that a child was abused. Failure to give the right opinion will mean the contract is not renewed. These opinions from medical “experts” will say the findings are “consistent with” sexual abuse. Of course, “consistent with” is not a true medical diagnosis. This testimony, as demonstrated by a competent defense attorney will reveal the findings given as “consistent with abuse” are just as “inconsistent with abuse”.

    Prosecutors Secure Convictions by Manipulating the Juries’ Fear of

    Releasing a Child Molester Back Into the Community.

    Instead of physical and medical evidence, the falsely accused are convicted upon theories, inferences, and speculation. Prosecutors secure convictions by manipulating the juries fear of releasing a child molester back into the community. This fear will be combined with hearsay, expert witness “syndrome evidence”, misleading medical testimony, and the biased opinions of child advocacy investigators.

    To support this speculation, a biased child protective services caseworker will produce a video taped interview of the child. This biased interviewer will use leading, suggestive, and coached questions to easily obtain an “admission” from a child. Many times the child does not make a statement that abuse occurred, but merely agrees with the adult authority figure who informs the child of the abuse.

    After an outcry, it is easy to find witnesses who can place the accused in circumstances in which he was alone with the alleged victim.