Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 25 to 36 of 44
  1. #25
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,283

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LurkerXIV
    Why would a person, innocent of the murder and the coverup, wait from 11 a.m. until 1 p.m. to notify authorities and all the guests at the house that he had discovered the body?

    This is one of those "consciousness of guilt" things that pop out at you.
    I don't think John Ramsey wanted to be the one who found JonBenét's body, Lurker, but as time was passing, not a single person in that house unlatched that wooden bar at the top of the windowless room, other than Fleet White, earlier that morning, and he reported he had seen nothing at that time (?). John Ramsey knew he had to do something to move from A to B, and he jumped at the chance when Linda Arndt asked him to go through the house. He sure made a beeline for the bottom of the house, not the top.
    elle: The RST can't handle the truth!
    Just my opinion.

  2. #26
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    in my bathtub, which is shaped like a giant clam
    Posts
    571

    Default

    Has Stewart Long disputed the account Thomas has in his book?

    -Tea

  3. #27

    Default

    I'm sure Stewart Long would go along with any excuse the Ramseys had for that little discrepancy: he "misheard/misunderstood" John; John misspoke; LE made it up; whatever.

    I think it bears repeating that Linda Arndt said JonBenet's body was already starting to smell.

    If John checked her out in the basement that morning sometime around 11 am, he knew time was running out for getting the body out of the home before it turned into a real mess.

    Even if he didn't check her out that morning at 11, if he knew she was down there, he HAD to be thinking, LE has entirely MISSED the body, they're NOT LOOKING, awaiting a phone call from kidnappers! The big kids are going to be here soon. How long before "somebody" finds that body?!

    Panic. What if the big kids find her? Trauma, at least. What if nobody finds her until she smells so bad she attracts attention FROM THE BASEMENT? Oh, that would be ugly. And what if he and Patsy had to sit in that house until one of the above? I imagine the stress was unbearable. What if Patsy lost it under the pressure?

    Maybe THIS is why John "disappeared" into the basesment to "think" that morning. Maybe he was checking on her. Looking to see how much longer they had before "somebody" had to find her, before her little body started real decomposition.

    And maybe this was why he didn't "find" her yet. Rigor had started, but no significant smell yet. Still had a little time for "someone else" to find her. For all that staging to be found by someone else.

    By 1 pm, after hours of only Arndt there, nobody looking for JonBenet, it must have seemed like the ransom note worked TOO well. Whatever prompted Arndt to tell John to look for "evidence," I'll never know, but it was the stupidest thing I've ever heard of a cop doing. After that, with the Rams lawyered up, with half a dozen random people running all over the house like tourists, it was over.

    Make no mistake about it: whoever put JonBenet in that basement room EXPECTED LE to find her immediately. Who wouldn't? A missing child in a big house, of course they would search every room. The killer's big mistake was latching the cellar room door at the top. The cop saw that and made little effort to open the "stuck" door, because a kidnapper could NOT go into the room and then latch the door from the outside. Obviously, the cop thought that this was a kidnapping.

    And since Fleet actually opened the door and didn't see the body because he couldn't find the oddly placed light switch in the pitch black room, there was no reason for anyone to look there again. He thought. He was looking for a living child, after all. Only a moment's pause, listening with all his senses, told him everything in this room was inanimate. He was right.

    This is why John Douglas' argument that John wouldn't "find" the body if he staged it is so stupid. It's easy to see why John realized he HAD to find the body. By 1 pm, how many opportunities was he going "to get" before it got worse? Big kids coming who might "roam" around looking for evidence on their own...Arndt all alone couldn't keep track of all those people...body decomposing...nobody even looking for a body in the house....

    He had to go for it when Arndt gave him his chance, IMO.

    "University of Colorado Law Professor Paul Campos declared the letter a 'reckless exoneration.' He went on to state, 'Everyone knows that relative immunity from criminal conviction is something money can buy.
    Apparently another thing it can buy is an apology for even being suspected of a crime you probably already would have been convicted of committing if you happened to be poor.'"
    FF: WRKJB?

    ~~~~~~~
    Bloomies underwear model:
    3 Dimensional

    ~~~~~~
    My opinions, nothing more.

  4. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JC
    I saw the little puke too. He didn't poke her because he didn't have a condom.

    If Juron expected to have sex with Natalie, as he said several times, why didn't he get a condom at some point? If he changed his mind about going to his home because his family was asleep, and he didn't have his condoms with him, then why not ask the Kalpoe brothers for one? Surely among these three studs ONE had a condom on him.

    No? Why not stop by his house and get one and then leave? He had an apartment separate from the rest of the house, didn't he? He said himself wanted sex. He said himself he expected sex. But no effort to get the condom he had to have?

    That's so much BS. Juron was known to be a party boy, hanging out at the bars and gambling routinely, nightly, even though HE WAS UNDERAGE. Who was paying his gambling bills? His drinking tabs? His father, that's who. Don't tell me his dad didn't know what his son was doing every night.

    "University of Colorado Law Professor Paul Campos declared the letter a 'reckless exoneration.' He went on to state, 'Everyone knows that relative immunity from criminal conviction is something money can buy.
    Apparently another thing it can buy is an apology for even being suspected of a crime you probably already would have been convicted of committing if you happened to be poor.'"
    FF: WRKJB?

    ~~~~~~~
    Bloomies underwear model:
    3 Dimensional

    ~~~~~~
    My opinions, nothing more.

  5. #29

    Default

    Let's don't forget a very important piece of this evidence puzzle the Rams have spent a decade hiding: the missing cell phone record for December, 2006.

    The RST can spin this every way they want, but it always comes back to this: the Ramsey phone records were NOT subpoenaed...EVER, thanks to Alex Hunter, and that means Hunter was in on the deal from the beginning, IMO; when the Rams FINALLY gave up their phone bills, one cell phone had NO CALLS on the ONE MONTH the Rams ALLOWED LE to see--December, 1996--and the months previous to that had lots of calls on that cell phone, which we know because Thomas wrote that he asked the phone company rep he got the blank record from and the man said, yes, the phone had other calls from the previous months: the days or months after Dec. 26, LE will never know, because again, Hunter NEVER got a subpoena for the records. Therefoe, the RST can claim the cell phone was MAYBE lost: how convenient. Hunter AND HIS ENTIRE LAW STAFF, INCLUDING KEENAN, was either stupid or corrupt, because he gave the Rams every advantage a child killer could ever need to avoid prosecution, didn't he? Even when ALL the evidence was pointing at the Rams, ALL THROUGH 1997, Hunter STILL did not subpoena the phone records!

    And anyone who expects us to believe that Haddon's law firm could not get phone records "tampered with," then I suggest they read the record of the Kobe Bryant case and how many times Kobe's accuser had her name, medical records, and sealed court testimony released to the PRESS by THE CASE JUDGE'S OFFICE. Then ask yourself who lost a job over that? If Haddon's pit bull lawyer who said the accuser's name 6 times in a public hearing with the press there ever saw ONE SANCTION for her actions, though the judge kept "admonishing" the lawyer repeatedly. We're talking about the judge's office and the lawyer BREAKING THE LAW: Colorado HAD a rape shield law in effect. But guess what? If you watched that case, you saw the pundits on TV going from "Oh, the rape shield law will protect the accuser's rights" to "This law may be overturned" in a matter of a few months. Why do you think that was? It was because HADDON has more power in Colorado law than we mere mortals have a clue about. He had Hunter coming and going. I believe that and nothing anyone ever says is going to convince me otherwise because Hunter gave away this case up front and his behavior and completely irresponsible conduct as the DA in this case proves it to me beyond any doubt.

    But for those of us who aren't so gullible or corrupt, we can deduce one thing from this missing cell phone record: the Rams didn't want anyone to know what calls they made that night and that month on that phone. It's not far to go to see that, if this entire cell phone coverup was indeed to keep the record of those Dec. 25/26 calls out of the hands of LE, then John Ramsey knew everything long before that 911 call that morning.

    And that's what I believe. I've thought at times in the past that JR wasn't in on the crime, or only was part of the cover up, but the missing cell phone record is good evidence to me that says JR was part of the coverup, at least. Did he fashion the garrote? I think so. JMO Did he molest JB? I have no idea. But if he was part of the strangulation/coverup, part of a plan to use a paintbrush "to stage" vaginal injuries to cover for old vaginal injuries, then he at least knew about them, IMO.

    And another thing: that whole "reading the note on the floor in his underwear" story--I found that quite suspect, as well. I can't imagine any human being in America, with chairs and tables, and even stairs right where the note was found, who would preceed to take a three page not and put it on the cold floor in the dark morning of winter, while in his underwear, and then get down on his knees and read it, without glasses, lighting had to be bad on the floor, compared to sitting at a table with a lamp or closer, at least, to an overhead or wall light.

    Not to mention JR was 53 years old at the time. Puhleeze. IMO, that cell phone call might have covered a lot of ground: fingerprints on the note that belonged ONLY to the Rams would be evidence up front in a trial. Of course, it would be natural for them to be there after reading the note. But in the panic of trying to think of how to cover up a little family molestation and murder one desperate Christmas night, those things might be decided quickly: don't leave our fingerprints on the note!

    But how to explain that? Did John say well, we didn't want to DISTURB any fingerprints on the note, so we laid it out on the floor? Nope. Why not? It would have made sense? But then, he'd have to have admitted they were thinking ABOUT FINGERPRINTS. Wouldn't do. How could they know what the note said BEFORE THEY HELD IT AND READ IT?

    Oh, leave it to the Rams: Patsy "jumped" over the note on a winding spiral stair and read it bending over it in a dim hallway, as it lay across the stair tread. Then she did/didn't/can't remember if she "handed" it to John. Neither can he. But he takes it and lays it on the cold floor and reads it in the dim light. In his underwear.

    And when a cop arrives, what does John do? Does he hand the note to the cop? Nope. He takes the cop back to the hall where the note is laying, and he "shows" it to the cop. Note lying on the floor.

    I'm sorry, but this is one of the more ridiculous aspects of the Ramsey stories. It's so absurd, one has to ask, what were they trying to gain by making up these jumping all over the place and crawling around in his underwear to read the note stories?

    Well, we can't really know, can we? But I can speculate: I think during that night-from-hell, cell phone calls were made, and discussions were had in which advice was given. From there, came the amalgam of stories, the ransom note, and lawyering up day one...all of it.

    Among those calls I speculate that Dr. Beuf might have been contacted about a head injury. Possible questions were asked about what would happen at the ER if it were discovered that JonBenet had been molested. From there, a lawyer was called. Possibly he made calls. Back and forth.

    Maybe the Ramseys were told what would happen if they took JonBenet to an ER: she would be examined and her vaginal injuries would be found. Perhaps she had convulsions and they were told her brain injury was severe. Maybe that's why the flashlight was taken out: maybe Dr. Beuf told them to check her pupils for dilation to determine the extent of the injury.

    I know some argue that the amount of blood associated with the brain injury proves that the injury came at the time of strangulation, but I think that may or may not be true. Other arguments have been made by medical experts that the brain injury evidence is consistent with it having occurred as much as an hour before the strangulation. We will never know, will we? But it must be considered by anyone who wants to look to the evidence for the truth: the brain injury COULD have come an hour or more before the strangulation.

    So I'm speculating that calls were made on that cell phone that morning to "someone." Dr. Beuf, maybe; a lawyer, certainly, if anyone was called.

    Of course, there are various scenarios as to when this or that happened, in what sequence, but it all comes back to that missing cell phone record for me. How much "coincidence" can we swallow in this murder? Coincidence the record for that month was "empty" a year later when "turned over" by the Rams? Coincidence that the DA didn't subpoena the Rams' cell phone records--EVER? A standard and absolutely ELEMENTARY investigative step any LE or DA would take IMMEDIATELY in any murder case, not to mention A CHILD MURDER CASE WITH THE CHILD FOUND IN THE BASEMENT WITH A SUSPICIOUS RANSOM NOTE SUSPECTED TO BE FROM THE FAMILY EARLY ON. Coincidence that neither of the DA's detectives asked the Rams "too much" about the cell phone or the record in 3 DAYS of questioning in 1998, a year and a half after the murder and six months after the LIMITED records were turned over to LE?

    Oh, come on! How stupid are they in Boulder? Not stupid at all, IMO. It was a well coerced plan to keep the truth of who murdered a child on Christmas Night, who molested her, from ever seeing the light of day.

    "University of Colorado Law Professor Paul Campos declared the letter a 'reckless exoneration.' He went on to state, 'Everyone knows that relative immunity from criminal conviction is something money can buy.
    Apparently another thing it can buy is an apology for even being suspected of a crime you probably already would have been convicted of committing if you happened to be poor.'"
    FF: WRKJB?

    ~~~~~~~
    Bloomies underwear model:
    3 Dimensional

    ~~~~~~
    My opinions, nothing more.

  6. #30

    Default

    Is there any Ramsey comment on their MISSING phone records? I know there's maybe a lost phone, and a new gift/not a gift phone, but...

    Like in numerous other areas, here the Ramseys leave you hanging, there's no other shoe to drop regarding

    -did they make any cell calls in December (not to their recollection?)

    -the "and hence" in the liturgy thank you note (their two individual verisions melded together, then editted by Walker(?) & Stine, but no memory (or record) of where in the process 'and hence' was added.

    -discovery their security system breached in Atlanta with no police notification, and no mention of any attempt to establish why (likewise police not responding to Burke's Boulder school alarm)


    In each of these instances, they simply fail to provide information that they undoubtedly possess and...if their hands were clean, they would

  7. #31

    Default

    If anyone is so naive as to believe powerful and connected lawyers do not do what I'm postulating that Hunter and Haddon did, then maybe this website will help:

    http://sinhablar.com/

    This site documents the legal troubles of Anthony Pelicano, a PI in LA who has broken the law many times for his lawyer/personal clients, according to the indictments recently brought against him. What he did is so pervasive, if true, that the only thing MORE shocking is WHO he did it for: lawyers and their clients.

    We're not talking small time attornies and clients. We're talking about big law firms and monied clients.

    Then think about Lockheed Martin: one of the world's biggest defense contractors; sells weaponry and planes to governments all over the world; could have any one of us disappear without a trace in hours, if they wanted; yeah, our worst nightmare--see the film Lord of War to get the gist of what I mean.

    So let me draw you another little picture, nothing but speculation, mind you, but something to think about:

    Lee Hill was Nancy Krebs' lawyer. She said she saw Hill on TV and that's why she chose him.

    Alex Hunter pointed the reporter/author Stephen Singular to California to "investigate" Fleet White, and why was a DA doing that to a private citizen? Singular didn't work for the DA's Office or LE or a lawyer, he was a REPORTER. But Hunter did that more than once to more than one person he had a personal vendetta against, didn't he? Singular was one of a few people present at the Daily Camera meeting with Nancy Krebs, along with the Daily Camera editor and Alex Hunter, and I belive Nancy's lawyer, Lee Hill, that spawned the hideously libelous news article of Nancy accusing the White family of being child sex ring members for decades. Of course, now we know that Krebs equally fingered John Ramsey, don't we, but that didn't seem too important to Hunter or the editor, so that didn't end up in the article for some reason, a murdered child in John Ramsey's basement notwithstanding....

    So, from Hunter to Singular to Hill, who represented Nancy when she came to Boulder for her LE interviews.

    Now, what does this all have to do with Anthony Pelicano? Probably nothing. But if you want to play six degrees of separation, keep reading.

    Lee Hill has had a few articles written about him--before he became a fugitive from the law for domestic violence and weapons possession. In one or two, Hill bragged about his good buddy Steven Seagal, a martial arts motion picture actor you have all no doubt seen at some point, if only channel surfing. Seagal has been accused of abusing one or more of his wives, BTW. And Hill was one of his big groupies, name-dropping every chance he got about his good friend Seagal. (Reminded me of Mame, who also figures into this scandalous chapter of the JB murder.)

    So follow Hill to Seagal...to none other than ANTHONY PELICANO: Pelicano worked for Seagal, who was suing an "alleged" mobster who was Seagal's partner in a number of movies they made. Seagal was suing this mobster for various reasons, and Pelicano worked for Seagal, which came out in several articles I read about the suit.

    So we have gone from Hunter to Singular to Hill to Seagal to Pelicano.

    What's missing? Haddon, of course. But then, you can put Haddon in right there before Hunter, can't you? And while we have no actual link from Haddon to Pelicano, not even close, what we do have is a picture of how things can get done: Nancy always maintained that she was in "danger"! She always said the child sex ring was out to get her. But then, there she is, represented by a man who is now charged with domestic violence involving a gun and weapons possession involving knives, who also is on record bragging about his association with a martial arts star whose partner is an alleged gangster, whose PI in a suit has served time for possessing dynamite and is indicted for illegal wiretapping and about a hundred other charges.

    Still with me? Then chew on this:

    Also indicted with Pelicano is a lawyer who used Pelicano's services, as well as a COP who illegally used a LE database to get information for Pelicano, which Pelicano then provided to his clients to be used to intimidate people with whom his clients were in legal conflict. Also indicted are a telephone company employee who helped Pelicano by giving him unavailable information on private citizens. Also on the indictment list are illegal wiretaps resulting in literally millions upon millions of pages of recorded phone conversations which were possible because Pelicano paid at least one phone company employee to tap all these phones. This went on for so long, for so many years, attornies in big suits with powerful people had figured it out and put phone scramblers on their clients' phones. Pelicano did not work for just one attorney. He worked for decades for these firms and their clients.

    More indictments may be coming in the Pelicano case. But maybe not, because a lot of very powerful people might not want their secrets out there, no matter how illegal it was to get them. Michael Ovitz, one of the most powerful men in Hollywood, had to testify before the grand jury hearing this case. Ovitz at one time represented some of the most powerful actors and studios in Hollywood. He worked for Eisner at Disney at one point. Michael Jackson was also a Pelicano client. Pelicano was deeply involved in the first Jackson child molestation criminal investigation, the one with the $20 mil payoff.

    And why do these cops and phone company employees do this? Money, of course. And we don't know what else they had held over their heads by Pelicano, do we?

    But there's my point: the Rams had a year before they turned over those phone records VOLUNTARILY. They only turned over LIMITED phone records, even then. And one of their cell phones was blank for the month of December. Not the months before. LE does not know about the months after.

    Can someone explain this to me so I can understand it?

    If you had in intruder enter your home, murder your child, leave a ransom note, and walk away forever without so much as a glance in their direction by LE, don't you think maybe LE might find a CLUE in your past associations, maybe from a phone record, even a "wrong number" call?

    And if you are too "inexperienced" in criminal matters, don't you think LE/THE DA might do a better job and GET THOSE PHONE RECORDS to help them find a child killer?

    Can anyone think of one decent, legit reason that LE/the DA would not do this to help them find a child killer?


    Or is anyone buying that Hunter just wanted to "create trust" between the prime suspects and LE?

    I am not that big into conspiracy theories, but in the murder of JonBenet, it's hard not to follow the evidence and consider a conspiracy: so much was done by so many to thwart this investigation in so many ways; so many truly innocent people were hurt so deeply and deliberately by the very government agencies that should have been gunning for a child killer, not private citizens who became victims of Hunter's corrupt office, as well.

    How can we consider all of this as just some giant coincidence?
    Last edited by koldkase; March 2, 2006, 12:03 am at Thu Mar 2 0:03:13 UTC 2006.

    "University of Colorado Law Professor Paul Campos declared the letter a 'reckless exoneration.' He went on to state, 'Everyone knows that relative immunity from criminal conviction is something money can buy.
    Apparently another thing it can buy is an apology for even being suspected of a crime you probably already would have been convicted of committing if you happened to be poor.'"
    FF: WRKJB?

    ~~~~~~~
    Bloomies underwear model:
    3 Dimensional

    ~~~~~~
    My opinions, nothing more.

  8. #32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Skigwy
    Is there any Ramsey comment on their MISSING phone records? I know there's maybe a lost phone, and a new gift/not a gift phone, but...

    Like in numerous other areas, here the Ramseys leave you hanging, there's no other shoe to drop regarding

    -did they make any cell calls in December (not to their recollection?)

    -the "and hence" in the liturgy thank you note (their two individual verisions melded together, then editted by Walker(?) & Stine, but no memory (or record) of where in the process 'and hence' was added.

    -discovery their security system breached in Atlanta with no police notification, and no mention of any attempt to establish why (likewise police not responding to Burke's Boulder school alarm)


    In each of these instances, they simply fail to provide information that they undoubtedly possess and...if their hands were clean, they would
    Skigwy, John Ramsey said in his deposition under oath in the Wolf suit that the morning the cops got to their home, the cops had to use "their" cell phones because the cops' cell phones had dead batteries.

    There's another source that the cops used the Ramsey cell phones but I can't remember off the top of my head, might be Thomas' book.

    The RST excuses? "Their cell phones" might mean the Whites' cell phone; cops may have used another cell phone of the Rams, but not the "missing" phone.

    That whole story jams tries to push is BS: Patsy never says in her interview in '98 "when" John lost his cell phone or that this "lost" cell phone was missing at the time of the murder and a concern. And no, we've never seen any actual evidence that John or Patsy ever reported a lost cell phone, something you'd think anyone who cared about catching a child killer would immediately pick up on: what if the KILLER found the phone and used it? That might be the CONNECTION! Forget about a phone bill that could be worth tens of thousands if it was stolen or being used for calls around the world by some cell phone scammer.

    Ooops. No reason to go there, is there? The Ramseys sure didn't think of it. Nor big old Legend In His Own Mind Smit. Nope.

    Which just goes to prove that they weren't that interested in actually finding an intruder, were they?

    No, the Rams nor their spin team will ever give up straightforward answers about much of anything in this case. Bad memory, time, nerves and stress...all good excuses not to remember anything that really matters when it comes to finding who murdered their child.

    It's the old "please feel sorry for me because I'm an orphan" plea: forget that I murdered my parents.

    If the Rams hadn't stalled for months and years in helping LE, then their memories wouldn't have been such a problem. I almost gagged when I read in the NE transcript book the Patsy quote about how she just couldn't remember, and IF ONLY they had been able to talk before 18 MONTHS LATER!

    Ha! That woman has bigger balls than the men who fell for her BS.

    "University of Colorado Law Professor Paul Campos declared the letter a 'reckless exoneration.' He went on to state, 'Everyone knows that relative immunity from criminal conviction is something money can buy.
    Apparently another thing it can buy is an apology for even being suspected of a crime you probably already would have been convicted of committing if you happened to be poor.'"
    FF: WRKJB?

    ~~~~~~~
    Bloomies underwear model:
    3 Dimensional

    ~~~~~~
    My opinions, nothing more.

  9. #33
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,283

    Default

    I hear you loud and clear, KK, and I wish we had answers to all you have stated above. You are so right about those missing cell phone records. I do believe Haddon and Hunter are the root of all evil when it comes to this case, and just how does one go about getting even with them, short of hiring vigilantes? I don't know (?).
    elle: The RST can't handle the truth!
    Just my opinion.

  10. #34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Elle_1
    I hear you loud and clear, KK, and I wish we had answers to all you have stated above. You are so right about those missing cell phone records. I do believe Haddon and Hunter are the root of all evil when it comes to this case, and just how does one go about getting even with them, short of hiring vigilantes? I don't know (?).
    Oh, Elle, I'm afraid Haddon's and Hunter's karma is left for another reckoning.

    I only try to speak about their deeds as often as I can because I want to make sure the documentation is there to anyone interested in the truth of what happened to justice in the murder of JonBenet Ramsey. While I can't know for sure what was said and done behind closed doors, I think the blue print is crystal clear from their actions that this case was bought and sold early on, maybe even before it happened, in the corruption of Alex Hunter by the corrupter Haddon.

    "University of Colorado Law Professor Paul Campos declared the letter a 'reckless exoneration.' He went on to state, 'Everyone knows that relative immunity from criminal conviction is something money can buy.
    Apparently another thing it can buy is an apology for even being suspected of a crime you probably already would have been convicted of committing if you happened to be poor.'"
    FF: WRKJB?

    ~~~~~~~
    Bloomies underwear model:
    3 Dimensional

    ~~~~~~
    My opinions, nothing more.

  11. #35
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,283

    Default

    It's very difficult trying to think of a way of dealing with these creeps, KK. I've probably seen too many movies, but I'm afraid putting pen to paper would just be a tad too mild for this type of organization. One would almost need a "Mission Impossible Team," to deal with them, in the way they deal with others, rather than bullets firing etc., More like a psychological war. However, Sometimes Karma does catch up with people quite fast in their own lifetime.
    elle: The RST can't handle the truth!
    Just my opinion.

  12. #36
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Texarkana, USA
    Posts
    4,261

    Default

    I'm just wondering, besides what money won't buy, about little boy playing possum on the day he's supposed to be leaving for the big boat. It's like ~~ he must already know something is wrong.
    This post, unless it is a legal court document, may not be carried in part, or in its entirety to any other discussion forum or bulletin board without the express written consent of the party who wrote it. It is proprietary to the author and to www.forumsforjustice.org. Violators will be reported to their Internet Service Providers.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •