The controversy surrounding Good Good’s “tone-deaf” Callaway advertisement continues to escalate, as The Golf Channel has officially decided to cancel the anticipated reality TV show that was set to premiere soon.

In the wake of the incident, both Good Good and Callaway have extended heartfelt apologies for a now-deleted social media video. The clip featured Garrett Clark pushing a female golfer to the ground and then aggressively shouting at her while she lay there.

The response from the public was quick and unforgiving, resulting in a series of setbacks for Good Good. They have not only lost their sponsorship deal with Callaway but also seen their association with an upcoming PGA Tour tournament stripped away.

Adding to their troubles, The Golf Channel announced the cancellation of the forthcoming ‘Good Good x Big Break.’ This decision was made just a day after the network initially said they would delay the show’s release by a week.

Initially, the release was postponed following a request from an unnamed sponsor, speculated to be Golf Magic, who wanted its branding removed. However, The Golf Channel ultimately opted to scrap the show entirely.

In a statement, a spokesperson for The Golf Channel said: ‘Following recent developments involving Good Good, and including the fact that the intended outcome of this series can no longer be fulfilled, Golf Channel will not be able to complete this season of Big Break as planned.

‘While we are disappointed for the 12 competitors, our production team that worked tirelessly on the season, and the show’s passionate fans, we look forward to Big Break’s return to Golf Channel in 2027’.

Big Break is golf’s version of a reality TV show, pitting 12 aspiring golfers against each other in a series of unusual challenges, with players eliminated each week until only one winner remains.

It ran for 23 seasons from 2003 to 2015 before being canceled, but was set to make its big return this year in a partnership with Good Good. The show was due to be hosted by professional golfer and model Blair O’Neal and TV host Wells Adam.

The winner of the 2026 reboot was due to receive an exemption into the PGA Tour’s Good Good Championship in November – but the Good Good branding has now been pulled from that event. 

On the PGA Tour’s website, the event is now titled the Austin Championship, with no sign of Good Good as the tour evaluates its ongoing partnership with the YouTubers.

The full-60 second ad – for the Good Good-branded Callaway Quantum driver – was supposed to be a spoof of the popular horror movie ‘Obsession.’

But the opening of the advertisement shows Clark rushing over and body-checking Good Good member Alexis Miestowski as she reached for the golf club.

As Miestowski lay flat on her back on the ground, Clark is seen standing over before angrily saying: ‘Do not touch my new driver.’

The rest of the ad shows other members of the content team somehow becoming possessed by the golf club before the video ends.

In a video released following the backlash, Clark apologized and even called the commercial the ‘worst ad known to man’ – despite being the person at the center of the controversy.

‘I wanted to first start by saying, I personally want to apologize for playing the role in this skit, in this ad, at the magnitude that I did, and then on Good Good’s behalf and Good Good marketing team’s behalf, I wanted to say an apology as well because this is not at all what we stand for,’ he began.

‘Once again, I want everyone to know that I do not support DV [domestic violence] abuse or any of that, of any kind. So that’s the first thing I want to say, and I also wanted to offer you guys some clarity on the situation, if you guys are willing to hear.’

Clark added that the ad was supposed to draw inspiration from the popular horror movie but clearly missed the mark.

‘Looking back, super dumb ad concept,’ he admitted. ‘Terrible ad in general, not the greatest idea.’

He was also keen to drive home the point that it was a ‘complete skit’ and ‘I didn’t actually tackle a woman’, adding: ‘I never would, and I didn’t.’  

Expressing intense perspectives about the Massachusetts mother accused of taking her three children’s lives could get you fired without any legal repercussions, according to a noted employment law expert monitoring the case.

Lindsay Clancy, 36, faces charges for allegedly strangling her children—Cora, 5; Dawson, 3; and Callan, 8 months—and attempting suicide by leaping from a second-floor window. This incident reportedly occurred after she sent her husband out for takeout and a pharmacy errand, as stated by the Plymouth County District Attorney’s Office.

The case has sparked widespread attention across the country, drawing supporters to the courthouse and sparking heated debates online about culpability, especially after her defense claimed she was not guilty due to insanity or mental impairment.

“If you’re fired for engaging in fiery conversations supporting Lindsay Clancy, that action isn’t inherently illegal,” explained Nicole Brenecki, a New York-based lawyer with expertise in employment law.

Still, Brenecki warned, a fired employee could still raise legal concerns if their Clancy-related statements were used as a pretext to get rid of them for other reasons.

“If a case like this came to the court system, it would not be viewed in the context of the free speech alone,” she said. “It would also be viewed in the contexts of employment laws.”

As a “general rule,” however, she said employers would be allowed to prohibit such discussions about the case.

Other considerations would involve whether the speech took place during working hours, disrupted business operations or whether there was discrimination against protected groups involved in the firing.

“Every single case in our court system is very highly and intensely fact-based,” she said. “So we cannot give…any specific explanation as to whether something would be illegal or not. We have to look at the facts.”

Still, Brenecki advised against arguing over strong opinions at the water cooler.

“If you truly want to voice them in a workplace, then be prepared to have to find greener pastures,” she said.

There could be other consequences as well. Earlier this month, an attorney named Alex Thomason said in a TikTok video of his own that he has already spoken with men involved in custody disputes with women who have been posting the “solidarity hold a heart thing” for Clancy.

In one instance, he said, he is looking to have a woman’s visitation rights stripped away.

“I want to be able to have a forensic psychiatrist interview this woman just to see how wack-a-doodle she is, and we’re gonna use her TikTok posts,” he said.

Defense attorney Kevin Reddington has argued that Clancy was under the effects of postpartum psychosis, while prosecutors allege she acted deliberately and understood what she was doing was wrong.

Dozens of supporters have rallied outside the courthouse, carrying signs and wearing shirts with phrases like, “Stand in Peace for Lindsay.”

Jurors began deliberating after both sides delivered their closing arguments Thursday.

They will decide whether Clancy is guilty of first-degree murder, second-degree murder or manslaughter in the deaths of her three children — or not criminally responsible by reason of the insanity defense.

If convicted of any of the three counts of first-degree murder she faces, Clancy would see a sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole.

Chris Sale cut to the chase when questioned about his electrifying performance against the Dodgers on Thursday, where he clocked speeds surpassing 100 mph.

In a post-game chat with the Braves’ broadcast team following their narrow 1-0 victory, Sale delivered a tongue-in-cheek response to queries about his fastball: “With my arm.” The quip added levity to an exhilarating evening for the seasoned pitcher, who, at 37, unleashed a triple-digit fastball for the first time since 2018, while racking up 11 strikeouts.

This commanding shutout marked Sale’s first since June 5, 2019, against Kansas City.

Even more remarkable is Sale’s induction into an exclusive group. According to MLB statistician Sarah Langs, he is now the sixth player in history, aged 37 years and 150 days, to record a shutout with 10 or more strikeouts and zero walks.

Tracing back to 1900, Sale stands alongside legends such as Cy Young, Eddie Plank, Steve Carlton, Nolan Ryan, and Randy Johnson, all of whom accomplished this feat at a similarly mature age in their careers.

READ MORE: Key Witness in Jerry Sandusky Case Set to Recant Testimony, Shattering Decade-Old Conviction

Equally as impressive was the fact that Sale found the heater in a battle against Dodgers superstar Shohei Ohtani in the third inning of the win. 

Sale managed to get Ohtani, a four-time MVP, to swing at a pair of pitches before he threw the 100.1 mph fastball, which the two-way star fouled off.

Two pitches later, the slugger went down swinging at a slider.

Sale struck out Ohtani again in the fifth inning when the lefty got him to chase a 99.6 mph fastball way above the zone. 

Sale has 24 starts under his belt this season and boasts a 2.06 ERA across 144 innings. He’s also struck out 177 batters.

For over six weeks, the Lindsay Clancy trial has captivated audiences worldwide. The harrowing case, unraveling in a Massachusetts courtroom, delves into a tragic narrative of family, murder, and the contentious issue of postpartum psychosis.

Clancy, known for her idyllic summers on Cape Cod with her husband and three children, now faces grave charges in the deaths of her young ones: her five-year-old daughter Cora, three-year-old son Dawson, and eight-month-old son Callan. This trial has consumed her July and August, as she stands accused of first-degree murder.

A guilty verdict would mean life imprisonment without parole for Clancy.

Her defense team concedes that Clancy, a former labor and delivery nurse, did commit the tragic acts but insists that her mental state at the time—specifically postpartum psychosis—renders her not criminally responsible.

Experts speaking to the Daily Mail highlight a potential turn in the trial’s trajectory. Amidst the public’s anticipation of a guilty or not guilty verdict, there looms the possibility of a third outcome—a mistrial, adding another layer of complexity to this high-profile case.

That, said criminal defense attorney and former prosecutor Mark Bederow, bluntly would be a ‘disaster.’

Bederow told the Daily Mail: ‘There’s no way the Plymouth DA is going to reverse course,’ the former prosecutor said. ‘They’re so dug in they almost have no choice, politically, but to dig in deeper.’ 

‘Can you imagine a case like this being retried?’ he asked. ‘It would be a horrible thing.’ 

Dozens of witnesses have testified to the horror that met Clancy’s then-husband, Patrick, on January 24, 2023. Clancy had sent him out to pick up dinner and when he returned to their coastal Duxbury home, he discovered that his wife had strangled their three children with exercise resistance bands. 

She then slit her wrists and neck and jumped from a window on the top floor of the house.

Now paralyzed from the waist down and wheelchair bound as a result, the 36-year-old former labor and delivery nurse has cast a pitiful figure at the defendant’s table.

James Gagliano, a retired FBI supervisory special agent and law enforcement expert, is also fearful that it could come down to a hung jury. He said he sensed that there will be one or two jurors who may hold out to hang the jury, which would force the state to try the case again.

‘The prosecution was better today and it will resonate in juror’s minds,’ Gagliano tweeted after both sides finished their closing arguments on Thursday.

‘The last thing the jury takes away (closing arguments today) might very well be what makes the case. Still fear a hung jury. But now feel conviction on a lesser charge than Murder One (at the very least) will be the order of the day. Time will tell.’

The Plymouth District Attorney’s office has asked the jury not to view the trial as a public debate on maternal health. But former judge Carol Erskine told the Daily Mail that would be hard to avoid. 

Witness after witness told the court that they knew Clancy had suicidal thoughts and called a crisis hotline more than once, and still, could not admit her for hospitalization because there was no suicide plan in place.

‘I’ve seen suicides in my courtrooms,’ Erskine said. ‘Not one case that I ever saw was anything other than impulsive. The notion that there has to be a plan in Massachusetts in order to get the degree of help you need is outrageous and needs to change.’

The fact that this is a case that came to trial at all is a source of outrage to some. But Bederow told the Daily Mail that it was one prosecutors had no choice but to bring, however difficult. Yet, while he defended the decision to prosecute, he had harsh words for the way in which the case has been argued.

‘This is a very clunky, choppy, disjointed case put together by a prosecution team who just doesn’t seem to appreciate the intricacies and nuances of these kinds of cases.’

Bederow, who has represented clients struggling with mental health, said it has been ‘shocking’ to watch prosecutors portray Clancy as a ‘selfish’ mother who ‘calculated’ the murder of her children and faked her own suicide.

MORE STORY: Watch Maine Meteorologist’s Hilarious On-Air Giggle Outburst

He described the prosecution’s approach to mental health as ‘very antiquated,’ expecting a defendant who is claiming an insanity defense to be ‘standing in a corner, staring at the wall, rocking back and forth, talking nonsense.’

In Massachusetts, the burden of proof lies with the prosecution when a defendant makes an insanity defense, meaning the defendant only has to prove they were insane at the time of the killing. Meanwhile, the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant could not conform her actions to the tenets of the law.

Her lawyers and her ex-husband, who has now remarried and says he has forgiven her, claim that her actions were contaminated by more than a dozen medications that she had been prescribed for her worsening psychiatric condition and suicidal thoughts. Clancy is suing her medical providers for failing to properly diagnose and treat her.

The heart-wrenching trial, which is being televised, has seen a swell in public interest, and Clancy has garnered support both online and in-person.

The case, which has renewed criticisms over how the mental health system treats women, has not only sparked conspiracy theories on social media, but drawn hundreds of women to Plymouth, where they have stood outside the courthouse in pink clothing, protested at the state hospital where Clancy is being held and raised more than $1 million for family through a GoFundMe.

Clancy has also received support from Russell ‘Rusty’ Yates, the ex-husband of Andrea Yates, the Texas mother who drowned her five children in a bathtub in 2001. After being convicted of five counts of capital murder and sentenced to life in prison, Andrea’s verdict was overturned and she was found not guilty by reason of insanity.

‘If someone driving a car lost control because of a sudden heart attack and the car ran over and killed a pedestrian would you convict the driver of murder?’ asked Yates’s attorney, Wendell Odom, Jr, who wrote on the subject for the Daily Mail. ‘The answer is obvious.’

For his part, Bederow said he’ll ‘never understand’ why prosecutors didn’t try to get ahead of Clancy’s mental health struggles by acknowledging them – a move that could have helped them gain credibility and trust with the jury.

Instead, he said, the DA’s office likely ‘pissed off’ jurors with their ‘wooden’ treatment of Clancy’s ex-husband Patrick and their ‘inappropriate’ ‘stunt’ of asking Clancy’s former mother-in-law Susan about whether her Catholic faith led her to consider murder as ‘a mortal sin.’

‘That’s a dog whistle for the jury,’ Bederow said of the Catholicism question. ‘I can’t fathom that was an accident.’

On Monday, religion was raised again by a state witness, prompting the defense to move for a mistrial.

Judge William Sullivan denied the motion but instructed the jury to disregard the statement from the prosecution’s psychologist, who testified that he had asked Clancy if she knew suicide was a ‘mortal sin.’

‘Raising Catholicism or religion is a violation under Massachusetts General Rules of Evidence,’ Erskine said. ‘It’s expressly barred.’

She called the question that was asked of Susan, ‘one of the most egregious mistakes I’ve ever seen by a prosecutor.’ Although the DA’s office called it an accident, the retired Massachusetts judge said it seemed ‘intentional’ because it would be shocking for a prosecutor not to know that rule.

When Erskine first learned that the case was going to trial and that Clancy was being charged with first-degree murder, she wasn’t surprised. But she noted that those charges came ‘very quickly,’ before there was any investigation into Clancy’s mental health issues.

‘The issue of criminal responsibility is something the Commonwealth may have underestimated,’ Erskine said.

For her part, Erskine said: ‘There’s really no way to assume that a juror is thinking one way or another, and in particular by any facial expressions or anything else that you can see. 

‘I never ascribe to the believe that anybody can read what a juror is thinking based on watching them, taking notes or changing their facial expressions.’

‘As a judge, my job was to oversee the trial and make sure that it proceeded fairly and that the rights of the defendants were protected. But beyond that, my philosophy has always been that it’s up to 12 people to make that decision.’

After over thirty years of mystery, the last unknown victim of serial murderer Keith Hunter Jesperson, infamously dubbed the “Happy Face Killer,” has finally been identified. On Thursday, officials revealed the breakthrough discovery concerning the remains found beside a California highway.

Lydia Jane Wade McWhorter from Texas was the name unveiled by the Riverside County District Attorney’s Office. She was previously only referred to as “Claudia” by investigators. The identification was made possible through DNA analysis linking her to a maternal relative.

The body of McWhorter was discovered on August 30, 1992, off Highway 95, roughly seven miles north of Blythe, California.

Jesperson, a truck driver who crisscrossed states committing his heinous acts, confessed to the brutal murder of eight women, McWhorter being among them.

While Jesperson had mentioned knowing her as “Claudia,” authorities were unsuccessful in verifying if that name was authentic until now.

The identification comes after Riverside County investigators publicly renewed their effort to identify McWhorter in 2024, when genetic genealogy had connected the unknown victim to relatives on her father’s side but had not produced the maternal connection needed to confirm her identity.

News Media reported at the time that DNA testing had identified Summer Gonzales as the victim’s paternal half-sister. Gonzales said she wanted to learn her sister’s real name and eventually lay her to rest with family.

An investigative lead ultimately brought the cold case team to one of McWhorter’s direct maternal relatives, according to the district attorney’s office. Investigators then identified a possible genetic connection to another member of the maternal family.

A DNA sample confirmed that connection earlier this week, allowing investigators to positively identify McWhorter nearly 34 years after her body was found, authorities said.

McWhorter’s sisters, who grew up with her, had spent decades without knowing what happened to her after she disappeared from Texas in the 1990s, according to prosecutors.

“I want to thank the public for the role you play in our investigations,” Billy Hester, supervising investigator of the Cold Case Unit, said in a news release. “When people take the time to share information, submit a tip or simply pay attention to what is happening in their community, it can make a real difference. You may not know where a piece of information will lead, but our investigators will follow it. Most importantly, I hope this will finally bring closure to Lydia’s family.”

The district attorney’s Division of Victim Services is working with McWhorter’s family as they decide how to honor her and lay her to rest.

Jesperson was arrested in 1995, and eventually confessed to killing eight women between 1990 and 1995 in California, Washington state, Oregon, Florida, Nebraska and Wyoming.

He became known as the “Happy Face Killer” after sending letters about his crimes to the media that he signed with a smiley face.

He pleaded guilty to McWhorter’s murder in Riverside County on Jan. 8, 2010, and was sentenced to 25 years to life in prison. 

He is serving multiple life sentences in Oregon.

With McWhorter’s identification, Riverside County’s cold case team has now closed the final unidentified-victim case tied to the murders for which Jesperson was convicted.

An unexpected twist has emerged in the high-profile case of Jerry Sandusky, as one of the former Penn State football coach’s accusers is reportedly set to withdraw his previous testimony more than a decade after Sandusky’s conviction for child sex abuse.

Sandusky, now 82 years old, is scheduled for a court appearance on September 8, during an evidentiary hearing that promises to bring new revelations. One of his accusers, a key witness during the trial, reportedly intends to inform the court that Sandusky, the erstwhile defensive coordinator for the Nittany Lions, did not actually abuse him. The accuser alleges that his initial testimony was influenced by prosecutorial tactics, ABC News disclosed.

In a dramatic turn, the accuser, who goes by Victim 10, claims in a sworn affidavit acquired by the news outlet that prosecutors guided his testimony. They supposedly encouraged him to reconsider and reconstruct his statements, casting doubt on his prior allegations.

Victim 10 further asserts that throughout the pretrial phase, prosecutors suggested that any inconsistencies in his memory could be attributed to trauma, a claim meant to justify memory gaps.

“Throughout the pretrial process, I was informed—both overtly and subtly—that trauma might have fragmented my memory,” the affidavit states, according to ABC News. “I was told I could confidently affirm details I did not fully remember, and assured that this was a common, anticipated occurrence.”

Prosecutors are expected to address allegations at the hearing.

Sandusky’s defense team said in a motion seeking a new trial that Victim 10’s now-estranged wife was able to testify that he was not sexually abused by the ex-coach.

The Pennsylvania Attorney General’s Office, however, said that the woman’s opinion on what she thinks may have happened to Victim 10 when he was 10 years old, or any other Sandusky child victim, was “irrelevant and inadmissible,” the outlet reported.

Sandusky was convicted of 45 counts of child sex abuse in 2012 for sexually abusing 10 boys over the span of a decade. In 2019, his 30-to 60-year prison sentence was reaffirmed by a judge.

During his trial in 2012, victims testified that Sandusky subjected them to a spectrum of abuse, from grooming to violent attacks.

READ MORE: Emotional Revelation: Shelley Fabares’s Cause of Death Unveiled After Co-Starring with Elvis Presley

The abuse, which took place from 1994 to 2009, involved young men he met with his Second Mile Charity, an organization he founded for at-risk youth that he used to find and groom child victims.

Letters written by the victims described the effect of their abuse as boys and in the years since, detailing their anxiety, difficulty with family and social relationships, and anger about what occurred.

One of them, described as Victim 4 in court records, said he does not forgive Sandusky and spoke of efforts to “attack us as if we had done something wrong.”

Sandusky’s arrest in 2011 — he retired from coaching at Penn State in 1999 — also prompted the firing of Hall of Fame head coach Joe Paterno, who died of lung cancer less than three months later.

Penn State has also paid more than $100 million to people who said they had been abused by Sandusky.

Former Penn State President Graham Spanier was previously convicted of child endangerment for failing to report the former coach’s abuse in 2001.

A federal judge tossed out Spanier’s conviction in 2019, a day before he was set to report to a two-month prison stint.

In 2024, Sandusky maintained his innocence from prison, insisting to the Daily Mail that his accusers were “coached and led” in their testimony and driven by money to lie.

“I never ever in my life ever thought about molesting anybody,” Sandusky told the outlet from Laurel Highlands State Correctional Institution in Pennsylvania.

“I was accused of heinous crimes, which I’ve never committed,” he added. “My wife was my only partner in sex and that was after marriage.”