Exclusive | Harrowing footage shows ‘Lilo & Stitch’ actress Daveigh Chase skin and bones living on Skid Row months before her death 74%

By Ross O'Keefe0% Brad Appleton0%

6/17/2026, 2:05:17 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 26 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Ambiguity (Equivocation), and Burden of Proof, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 38.6% saturation with 239 hits. Analysis detected 1,332 faulty-reasoning hits from 619 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 66.2% and a BS Rank of 74% (5,721 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 73.90% of the article peer group.

“Lilo & Stitch” star Daveigh Chase was living a tortured existence months before her death as her friends and loved ones tried desperately to save her life, her manager told The California Post. 
John Ryan, Chase's manager of more than a decade, said he and Chase's stepsister Gaia Brown had enlisted the help of a private investigator about a year ago to track her down and get her some help. 
Ryan said at the end of 2025 he was alerted to a video which allegedly showed Chase shockingly skinny and struggling on Skid Row. 
The video, posted and later pulled from social media, showed a very thin Chase, barely conscious on the floor of what looked like a tent or trailer. 
Ryan said he was able to get on the phone with Chase to rescue her for treatment shortly after the video surfaced, but she had “disappeared” by the time he got down to Skid Row . 
Ryan and Chase's stepsister had planned to get the actress into a rehab facility in Costa Rica owned by a friend he knew after nursing her back to health in Los Angeles. 
“We were so close to finding her,” he told The Post, “Daveigh was the sweetest and brightest light in Hollywood. 
I can't believe this is real. 
Her legacy and work will live on forever.” 
Ryan was also working on a documentary detailing the search for the Hollywood actress called “Finding Lilo,” he said, adding major studios were interested in the film. 
To add insult to injury in Chase's death, Ryan has called out what he believes to be an improper GoFundMe set up by her alleged boyfriend. 
“Apparently, a man claiming to be her ‘boyfriend’ that none of us friends or her family has heard of has set up a GoFundMe on ‘her and her families behalf’ that he set her up as the organizer. 
I can confirm Daveigh has a trust account set up at SAG to cover all costs,” he told The Post. 
The GoFundMe has raised about $1,400 of its $5,500 goal. 
The organizer, her boyfriend Roy Hernandez, did not specify where the money would go. 
Hernandez eulogized his girlfriend in the GoFundMe. 
“After a difficult childhood and a painful falling out with her family, Daveigh was bullied and struggled to find safety and happiness in downtown LA. 
When we met, I promised to protect her and give her the love and comfort she deserved. 
Together, we found moments of happiness and hope. 
“All she ever wanted was a place where we could live together, feel safe, and be happy. 
Now, more than ever, I want to give her that sense of home and peace in her final days. 
“I understand we all go through things, but if you can help, I will be really grateful for anything. 
And if you can only give a prayer, I will take that too. 
Thank you for considering helping us during this difficult time.” 
Chase garnered considerable fame for her role as Lilo in the 2002 animated movie and earned even more acclaim as “The Ring” villain Samara Morgan. 
However, the last decade of her life was marred by periods of addiction and homelessness. 
Chase died June 17 from meningitis and an infection in her blood, TMZ reported. 
She was admitted to the hospital for severe malnourishment, the outlet added. 
At the time of her death, Chase hadn't appeared in a film or on television for about a decade. 
Her final starring roles were in the horror film “Jack Goes Home” and the thriller “American Romance” in 2016. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 9.5%Ross O'Keefe: 3.7%California Post: 4.1%Confirmation Bias9.5%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 1.5%California Post: 1.4%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 3.9%Ross O'Keefe: 3.4%California Post: 4.2%Availability Heuristic3.9%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.9%California Post: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 1.5%California Post: 0.8%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 7.6%Ross O'Keefe: 1.3%California Post: 2.2%Overconfidence Bias7.6%This article: 3.6%Ross O'Keefe: 11.8%California Post: 10.3%Framing Effect3.6%This article: 3.1%Ross O'Keefe: 0.4%California Post: 0.9%Loss Aversion3.1%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.5%California Post: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.0%California Post: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 9.9%Ross O'Keefe: 1.8%California Post: 2.5%Optimism Bias9.9%This article: 1.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.7%California Post: 1.5%Pessimism Bias1.0%This article: 38.6%Ross O'Keefe: 15.0%California Post: 16.0%Negativity Bias38.6%This article: 2.7%Ross O'Keefe: 2.3%California Post: 2.4%Self-Serving Bias2.7%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 2.0%California Post: 1.5%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.1%California Post: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 6.1%Ross O'Keefe: 2.4%California Post: 1.6%In-Group Bias6.1%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.9%California Post: 1.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 10.0%Ross O'Keefe: 4.3%California Post: 3.1%Halo Effect10.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.3%California Post: 0.6%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.1%California Post: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 4.4%Ross O'Keefe: 1.4%California Post: 1.6%Recency Bias4.4%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.5%California Post: 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.0%California Post: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 3.9%Ross O'Keefe: 1.3%California Post: 2.6%Ad Hominem3.9%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.4%California Post: 0.5%Straw Man0.0%This article: 11.8%Ross O'Keefe: 5.2%California Post: 4.2%Appeal to Authority11.8%This article: 2.1%Ross O'Keefe: 1.6%California Post: 1.5%False Dilemma2.1%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.4%California Post: 0.9%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.0%California Post: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 2.3%Ross O'Keefe: 4.3%California Post: 5.5%Hasty Generalization2.3%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.9%California Post: 0.7%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 1.3%California Post: 1.4%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 25.7%Ross O'Keefe: 10.4%California Post: 8.9%Appeal to Emotion25.7%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 1.1%California Post: 1.1%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 5.8%Ross O'Keefe: 3.1%California Post: 2.7%Post Hoc (False Cause)5.8%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.1%California Post: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 12.6%Ross O'Keefe: 1.1%California Post: 0.8%Burden of Proof12.6%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.0%California Post: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.4%California Post: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 9.4%Ross O'Keefe: 2.8%California Post: 3.6%Anecdotal9.4%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.1%California Post: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 14.4%Ross O'Keefe: 3.4%California Post: 2.0%Ambiguity (Equivocation)14.4%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.0%California Post: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.0%California Post: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 1.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.1%California Post: 0.1%Personal Incredulity1.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.1%California Post: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.2%California Post: 0.4%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 7.6%Ross O'Keefe: 4.6%California Post: 3.2%Unattributed Quote7.6%This article: 3.6%Ross O'Keefe: 2.4%California Post: 2.1%Quote-first Misdirection3.6%This article: 10.2%Ross O'Keefe: 11.0%California Post: 13.1%Biased Writer Voice10.2%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.6%California Post: 1.4%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 0.2%California Post: 0.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Ross O'Keefe: 1.9%California Post: 3.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 4.7%Ross O'Keefe: 1.4%California Post: 6.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…4.7%

619 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers66%attributed speech210writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 22 words • 100.0% coverageJohn Ryan • 33 words • 100.0% coverageJohn Ryan • 37 words • 0.0% coverageJohn Ryan • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageJohn Ryan • 36 words • 0.0% coverageJohn Ryan • 32 words • 0.0% coverageJohn Ryan • 20 words • 0.0% coverageJohn Ryan • 6 words • 0.0% coverageJohn Ryan • 8 words • 0.0% coverageJohn Ryan • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 100.0% coverageJohn Ryan • 38 words • 0.0% coverageJohn Ryan • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageRoy Hernandez • 25 words • 0.0% coverageRoy Hernandez • 17 words • 0.0% coverageRoy Hernandez • 8 words • 0.0% coverageRoy Hernandez • 17 words • 0.0% coverageRoy Hernandez • 19 words • 0.0% coverageRoy Hernandez • 19 words • 100.0% coverageRoy Hernandez • 13 words • 0.0% coverageRoy Hernandez • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Roy Hernandez

100%flagged-word coverage
128 attributed words31% of attributed speech74% writer coverage
0%15.0%30.0%Biased Writer Voice-30.0 ptsWriter: 30.0%Roy Hernandez: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product +22.7 ptsWriter: 0.0%Roy Hernandez: 22.7%22.7%Quote-first Misdirection-10.5 ptsWriter: 10.5%Roy Hernandez: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-6.7 ptsWriter: 6.7%Roy Hernandez: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.