Fawley letters and possible delay of trial

[janethompson]

Here is an article from today's Richmond Times Dispatch regarding letters BF wrote to two female friends regarding Taylor's death.

It also indicates that the trial may be delayed.

Link (http://www.timesdispatch.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=RTD/MGArticle/RTD_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1137835153071)

[BFD - v2.0]

Originally posted by janethompson
Here is an article from today's Richmond Times Dispatch regarding letters BF wrote to two female friends regarding Taylor's death.

It also indicates that the trial may be delayed.

Link (http://www.timesdispatch.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=RTD/MGArticle/RTD_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1137835153071)

There always seems to be a knucklehead involved at some point.

At least no one can claim the defense isn't doing their due diligence.

I fully expect the letters to become evidence because there is no attorney-client privilege regarding a letter written to someone that has absolutely nothing to do with his defense and/or legal matters. There was no reasonable expectation on Fawley's part that he was sharing information to further his defense strategy with a friend.

I hope the judge allows the content of the letters (regarding Taylor's death) to be released via the hearing. It would be interesting to hear his version because I have doubts they will put him on the stand during the trial.

[poplife]

Will the pros still want to use them if they say exactly what the statement he gave to LE told?

[BFD - v2.0]

Originally posted by poplife
Will the pros still want to use them if they say exactly what the statement he gave to LE told?

I'm sure they will.

State of mind. If the letters come across as hard, cold and matter-of-factly, it will be a basis showing his state of mind and how he felt about that night.

Even if they come across as conciliatory, it would show a stark contrast compared to the torment he put Taylor's friends and family through for the month they were searching and he knew exactly where she was at.

I also doubt if the letters are identical to the story he gave police officers. The overall gist of the story may be the same, but I'm sure there are at least some minor indiscrepancies that can be used against him.

[nibblet]

He no longer has his web site to tell his story so he's writing to his friend Katie.

It would be interesting to see what he wrote - but he has told two wildly differing stories of that night - being abducted and sex-game-gone-wrong.

I'm wondering why Katie turned the letters over to this third party whom I'm guessing is a friend. She had a few options - turn them over directly to the defense or the prosecution or just hold onto them or just destroy them.

[singlesix]

Or she could have posted them here. :D

[janethompson]

Originally posted by Cino


Yeah, it's almost too bad most of the internet was a bunch of *******s to her. Fat chance on that one. Maybe that's something to think about before going off and attacking people whose stories you don't even know.

Katie Hildebrant's statements are fairly well published by her in her blogs and are (or were) accessbile to everyone.

I don't understand how people who live in glass houses (i.e. posting their life stories on the internet) have any legitimate gripe when people stop to look inside those houses and comment on them. It is an invitatation to the world to see and if she doesn't like it then she should get some curtains.

[protectkidz]

The people who knew Ben and Taylor found themselves in the middle of a media maelstrom when Taylor went missing.

Their live journals were attacked with the most malicious, vile and profane comments I have seen on the internet. Taylor's journal itself was inundated with these ugly comments. Luckily, one of her friends (I believe) was able to close down her comments, but not before hundreds were posted.

Katie H.'s journal also was inundated. The fact that she was a friend of Ben's doesn't mean that she deserves such ugliness. The fact that she has a live journal also doesn't mean that she deserves ugliness. Thankfully, Katie has also closed her comments section to anonymous users.

I don't think that Katie Hildebrant is living in a glass house. In fact, I find THAT to be a malicious comment.

[janethompson]

Originally posted by protectkidz
The people who knew Ben and Taylor found themselves in the middle of a media maelstrom when Taylor went missing.

Their live journals were attacked with the most malicious, vile and profane comments I have seen on the internet. Taylor's journal itself was inundated with these ugly comments. Luckily, one of her friends (I believe) was able to close down her comments, but not before hundreds were posted.

Katie H.'s journal also was inundated. The fact that she was a friend of Ben's doesn't mean that she deserves such ugliness. The fact that she has a live journal also doesn't mean that she deserves ugliness. Thankfully, Katie has also closed her comments section to anonymous users.

I don't think that Katie Hildebrant is living in a glass house. In fact, I find THAT to be a malicious comment.

I'm sorry you took my comment as malicious. It was not intended to be. I am merely pointing out the phenomenon of people who candidly post their life stories on the web and then are some how upset when people comment on their postings. It would be no different than me standing on my front line with a bullhorn expressing my inner most feelings and then somehow being offended when the neighbors begin to comment.

As far as Katie, she could certainly have made her livejournal blogs private when all of this started and then she would not have provided any ammunition to the curious on the world wide web. She, however, chose to continue posting and making statements for all to see after all of this started.

[protectkidz]

The comments that Katie has made on her live journal have been about her life - not about Ben Fawley. She has closed her comment section.

You ideas of internet blogging can hold true for ANY internet post. Even message boards. You have seen how mean-spirited people can be here, where there are rules and moderators. Katie's journal was attacked, as was Mike's, as was Taylor's.

For someone to have a journal, that they open in a journal community - expecting this journal to be viewed mainly by those in this community or by invite - is opening a person up to no more than you would open yourself to, posting on a public message board. In fact, I consider it a lot more honest, since she's not dissecting someone else's life, just her own.

Let's look at a hypothetical. What if someone close to you was involved in a violent crime - and everyone here at CTV was made aware of this. Do you feel that you would deserve public bashing on this message board? Or even through PMs? I mean, after all - if you open up an account, and you write your thoughts on the internet....

[janethompson]

Originally posted by protectkidz
Let's look at a hypothetical. What if someone close to you was involved in a violent crime - and everyone here at CTV was made aware of this. Do you feel that you would deserve public bashing on this message board? Or even through PMs? I mean, after all - if you open up an account, and you write your thoughts on the internet....

Whether I deserved bashing would largely depend on what I wrote in my journal, but you are either missing my point or I am not explaining it well enough. My point is this: if you put yourself out there for the public to see then you ought not be surprised by what happens. This is not the same as defending those who have bashed Katie or Mike -- it is simply a view that if you voluntarily post about your life then you ought not be surprised that others will comment.

[singlesix]

Hey Cino. I said she could have. I was adding one more option to the previous post. I didn't say I thought she would or that I thought she should. Did you see the smiley?

Now I know why so many people in Richmond don't like you.

singlesix...sticks and stones, etc.

[protectkidz]

Please try to keep your hostility to yourself, singlesix. I realize that you are friendly with the Richmond skateboarders, but that doesn't give you permission to create an uncomfortable posting environment.

:no:

[jadensmokes]

New article about judges findings today: (sorry I don't know how to trunkate the addy)
http://www.timesdispatch.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=RTD/MGArticle/RTD_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1137835172130

The letters will be used as evidence. And:
Also at today’s hearing, the judge:

'¤Granted a defense motion for a continuance in the case, and set a new trial date for Aug. 17.

'¤Granted a defense motion to have Fawley transferred from the Richmond City Jail to the Middle Peninsula Regional Jail in Saluda, which is closer to Mathews.

'¤Delayed a ruling on a prosecution motion to prohibit cameras in the courtroom until media outlets have a chance to respond.

[nibblet]

Thanks for the update Jaden - I was wondering what happened today. The hearing was mentioned on the news at noon in D.C. but I haven't heard anything yet on the evening news.

[Cino]

Originally posted by singlesix
Hey Cino. I said she could have. I was adding one more option to the previous post. I didn't say I thought she would or that I thought she should. Did you see the smiley?

Now I know why so many people in Richmond don't like you.

singlesix...sticks and stones, etc.

Please forgive my bitter tone, I didn't mean to sound unpleasant. I was only noting that people were pretty vicious to her, so it's unlikely that she would ever share something like that. She might have been more comfortable sharing things, information and herself, if not for that.

[MATTHEWsevenone]

Originally posted by protectkidz
The comments that Katie has made on her live journal have been about her life - not about Ben Fawley. She has closed her comment section.

You ideas of internet blogging can hold true for ANY internet post. Even message boards. You have seen how mean-spirited people can be here, where there are rules and moderators. Katie's journal was attacked, as was Mike's, as was Taylor's.

For someone to have a journal, that they open in a journal community - expecting this journal to be viewed mainly by those in this community or by invite - is opening a person up to no more than you would open yourself to, posting on a public message board. In fact, I consider it a lot more honest, since she's not dissecting someone else's life, just her own.

Let's look at a hypothetical. What if someone close to you was involved in a violent crime - and everyone here at CTV was made aware of this. Do you feel that you would deserve public bashing on this message board? Or even through PMs? I mean, after all - if you open up an account, and you write your thoughts on the internet....

Protectkidz--

I am confused about your hypothetical scenario.

Sounds more like apples and oranges logic.

I will give you that both CTV and LiveJournal/MySpace require a computer connection and access to the Internet. BUT that is where the path separates, imo.

CTV is an internet message board developed to provide an anonynous forum with built in privacy protections. There are passwords, alias screennames, and pms to help nurture an environment akin to a blind study. There are even protocols and built in moderating to ensure a particular benchmark decorum is achieved.

LiveJournal and MySpace are exactly what they say they are -sites developed for individuals to broadcast their self centered world (should clarify that I do not mean to suggest that ALL who participate on these sites are egotistic. I mean eco-centric) into cyberspace. The internet is the most profound PUBLIC DOMAIN in the world. The sites clearly disclose the PUBLIC parameters in space, accessing the site does not require passwords, or "INVITATION" keys. Both are suppositions of yours. And it is not a prejudiced eye that recognizes such sites as glass houses. It is obvious and self evident to most. I could go on and on here but I won't.

You opined that to participate in a LIVEJOURNAL sort of site is more honest to you than to participate on the CTV message board. I see it as differing perspectives and motives than a question between honesty or dishonesty.

Your hypothetical scenario asserts that a CTV poster has a friend who commits a crime. The innocent CTV poster would be undeserving of public (or even private messaging) bashing.

**I believe you mean within the confines of the CTV message board but I could be wrong.

On CTV forum most all identities are cloaked -grant you there are a few whose motives/reasons for joining and participating in Taylor's thread led to their identities being known - or asserted (for in truth, we do not definitively know who is posting as whom do we? - it is a question of choice- unless of course, you know a poster face to face) . So not only would a person be hardpressed to be IDed and a target for what you opined as "bashing". But the friendship connection would be an even harder connection to make ONLINE through CTV message board!

It is like comparing apples and oranges. IMO.

And I can't help but find your conclusion

"I mean, after all - if you open up an account, and you write your thoughts on the internet...."

is both overreaching and missing the parameters and the particulars of the two very different structures.

Aren't Court TV message boards set up as forums to discuss a missing person or a criminal act? Aren't the message board threads fundamentally places for people to gather to investigate (examine, pull apart, sift through, rule out, and theorize all possible connections for either type of case) and to sit in the gallery during the trial/sentencing phases. We discuss and opine. For some it is a matter of right and wrong. For others it is an opportunity to clinically examine the procedures. For others it is a soapbox to support, defend, or assert a position. And, there are empirical, metaphysical, and spiritial planes to each case for each of us. In the end, each of us make choices and with every choice that is a consequence. I would ask

And if one would even go along with the elements of your post - here are a couple of questions for you:

Don't those who participate in the CTV forum deal with scrutiny by other posters/readers? Aren't you advocating a double standard by suggesting that the same such scrutiny would be blunted for LiveJournal participants?

JUST MO.

[singlesix]

"Please try to keep your hostility to yourself, singlesix. I realize that you are friendly with the Richmond skateboarders, but that doesn't give you permission to create an uncomfortable posting environment."

I thought I replied in a spectacularly level-headed manner to his reference to me as the illegitimate offspring of a female dog (or something like that, the posts have gone bye-bye it seems). Did you even see the trash he posted? I wish I'd saved a copy. Anybody know if he was banned?

I declare, dear me, gosh darn and all that good stuff I learned at my grandmother's knee, or grandmothers' knees as it were, that if I get hostile you'll know it without a doubt. I'm 55 and have been around the block enough times that I'm not bothered by an out of control young whippersnapper. I just wanted to say hi to him and went out of my way to keep it clean and cheerful. ;)

BTW, I'm not friendly with the Richmond skateboarders and in fact don't know them. Won't say I haven't seen them around, but we haven't howdy'd or shook hands or nothing. OTOH, I know a lot of people who know a lot of people, etc., etc. and so forth.

[poplife]

Single, the post you are writing of is above, quoted in janepetersons post.

[singlesix]

Part of it anyway.

People always end up looking funny when they have a post in a thread and what they've replied to has gone POOF. Sort of disrupts the flow and continuity.

singlesix

[nibblet]

I read this from the Richmond Times Dispatch and I noticed one thing was missing that he loved to draw and show on his site:

"Johnson yesterday expanded slightly on his previous characterizations of the letters. He said they all came in ornately, hand-decorated envelopes depicting etchings of trees, beach scenes and even portraits of women."

No drawings of skulls.

:read:

[becurious]

Originally posted by singlesix
Hey Cino. I said she could have. I was adding one more option to the previous post. I didn't say I thought she would or that I thought she should. Did you see the smiley?

Now I know why so many people in Richmond don't like you.

singlesix...sticks and stones, etc.


Singlesix, you said you were 55 somewhere in one of your posts but you're friends with people who know him and don't like him? Do you hang around with all these young folks, too?

[MATTHEWsevenone]

I don't understand why she did not give them to the police if they discussed the night Taylor died.

Over and over we hear cries from those on the periphery that they are being misunderstood.

Yet when something so obviously relevant to the murder of an innocent girl comes into your hands, you send it on to a third party who then sends it on to the DEFENSE side of a murder case.

HONESTLY the mindset and priorities of some on the periphery stuns me - everytime!

[Hey Paula]

Originally posted by MATTHEWsevenone
I don't understand why she did not give them to the police if they discussed the night Taylor died.

Over and over we hear cries from those on the periphery that they are being misunderstood.

Yet when something so obviously relevant to the murder of an innocent girl comes into your hands, you send it on to a third party who then sends it on to the DEFENSE side of a murder case.

HONESTLY the mindset and priorities of some on the periphery stuns me - everytime!

I agree. Winding up on the defense side is indicative of the mindset of both parties.

In any event, the Pros will learn about the letters under the terms of discovery.

IMO

[MATTHEWsevenone]

I can be even more cynical - is there a way to track the letters from the jail and make sure all are accounted for?

And is there a way to make sure all the pages for each letter is complete?

Afterall, they have now exchanged hands a min. of three times and I find it so very pecular that both women chose NOT to turn the letters over to the prosecutors.

Here are a couple of really out there ones -

What about what is coming in the jail? Could any of these letters have some sort of code?

I am still mulling things over about that car!!!

ALL BRAINSTORMING.

and

IMO

:seeya:

[MATTHEWsevenone]

I have a question for all:

BEN FAWLEY in RICHMOND JAIL

BEN FAWLEY in Mathews Jail (which I think is really Saluda, isn't it?)

Which is better for prosecution - which is better for defense - why?

[MATTHEWsevenone]

One final question about why Judge granted the continuance.

What were the grounds/reason the Defense asked for the continuance?

I know this is the phase where the "accused" and his rights are on the front burner -- I just want to know the particulars - if possible.

DEFENSE ATTORNEYS PAID BY THE STATE OF VA TAX PAYERS.

His attorneys granted tax dollars for specialized experts

He has been in RICHMOND JAIL - RICHMOND tax papers flipped the bill.

Now he is being moved to Mathews Jail - Mathews County residents flip the bill.

Are the GOOD PEOPLE of MATHEWS happy this Judge has delayed the trial until August?

Just curious. Can Ben Fawley's cameras and such be seized and sold to help offset the financial burden the state and local citizens have been forced to assume?

Does Ben Fawley get SSI checks and are they now being signed over to the State or locality to help offray his medication costs/etc.?

If no, has his stuff been sold already and the proceeds given to his daughters? Or is someone on the outside depositing his checks somewhere?

Just curious. While we wait...

[protectkidz]

Unfortunately, Veracity, the tax payers end up paying for these trials - and also unfortunate, since Mathews County doesn't have the large tax base to help offset these costs.

I think it is soon to move him. His lawyer can drive back and forth to Richmond, and they can move him closer to August which would save money.

[jadensmokes]

Originally posted by protectkidz
Unfortunately, Veracity, the tax payers end up paying for these trials - and also unfortunate, since Mathews County doesn't have the large tax base to help offset these costs.

I think it is soon to move him. His lawyer can drive back and forth to Richmond, and they can move him closer to August which would save money.

I would rather he be in Richmond where there are certainly some big, hairy, mean guys he could bunk with. Then move him when trial time comes. I wouldn't want any chance of him escaping a smaller jail.


Good point about how and to whom they turned over the letters M17.

[MATTHEWsevenone]

Originally posted by protectkidz
Unfortunately, Veracity, the tax payers end up paying for these trials - and also unfortunate, since Mathews County doesn't have the large tax base to help offset these costs.

I think it is soon to move him. His lawyer can drive back and forth to Richmond, and they can move him closer to August which would save money.

Protect -

But who in your view benefits from his move to Mathews? Or does any side? The investigators until Taylor was found were all part of a Task Force - then I guess Mathews guys were brought into the fold.

Yep - I know taxpayers get socked for the trials. I also know the people along the eastern shore are pragmatists. I just wondered how this continuance is being felt by the locals?

I want to know about this Judge and Defense and Prosecution guys. We have had a short glipse of Mr. Collins.

Is this Defense attorney someone who usually is ready and not asking for continuances. Happened in concert with those letters. Connection????

The letters had barely reached them before before they were filing. To beat the PRosecution's filing demanding access to them?

OK TN , this is your area of expertise.

What are your thoughts??

[singlesix]

"Do you hang around with all these young folks, too?"

No.

Knowing people, and knowing people who know people, isn't the same as being friends. I've lived here since '72 and some of my friends, true friends, were born here. Richmond in many ways is a small town - population about 199k - and the Fan is even smaller. You almost have to go out of your way not to meet people. Some of my friends live across the street from the Governor and he seems like a nice guy - and I still didn't vote for him. :)

singlesix

[Cino]

I keep saying I'm going to stay away, then I keep poking my head in.

This time, it's because I can't contain my curiosity anymore . . .

Singlesix, who is it that you think you know that you think doesn't like me, and for what reason? I thought about it, and I still can't think of a single person who would have reason to dislike me. Save perhaps for the roommate with a mother who's a teacher--said roommate won't repay a half-year-old debt and I have called her a few times.

[Hotwater]

Cino, singlesix,

Maybe you guys better take this convo to PM.

Off topic.

Thanks,

--Hh20

[Researcher]

Have been away from this case for a while, but was recently enticed back. ;) It appears I've got lots of catching up to do. Interesting to see that Fawley has written numerous letters to Hildy...and interesting to go back to one of the threads in which we were trying to understand her and her relationship with Fawley:
Hildybrandt & Darkevilgoth (http://boards.courttv.com/showthread.php?postid=7088547#post7088547)

[bananas]

Quote from Janethompson:

My point is this: if you put yourself out there for the public to see then you ought not be surprised by what happens. This is not the same as defending those who have bashed Katie or Mike -- it is simply a view that if you voluntarily post about your life then you ought not be surprised that others will comment.

Wow! This is so true Janet. When you make yourself continually public, you run the risk of public attack. You also open yourself up for all sorts of problems in your own life.

[MATTHEWsevenone]

Originally posted by jace
Matthewsevenone, maybe you shouldn't be so quick to judge people or what YOU THINK they may be saying in their posts. I don't post often but I do read the posts on this board and a few others.
If you go back and view most of your posts (I don't have time to cut and paste all of them) you'll see that you do alot of attacking yourself.

IMOO.

Think it important to clarify differing perspectives between you and I JACE.

From day one, and long before I ever heard of this forum, I debated - A LOT. Which for those who have never done it means spending much time researching/analyzing both pros and cons. Thinking about an issue from differing perspectives, and then developing a strategy to articulate the position you have been given. During the actual event, debaters flow the event, It is sort of like a long piece of paper where one notes key points made by the other side that warrants rebuttal or can help benefit the debater's position. It is a wonderful venure to help stretch minds and force an individual to really access one's reasonings or opinions.


My area of interest in CTV is missing persons. I employ those same tools here. Not a formal sort of criteria of course, but I have sort of been trained over a long time to process information this way. It is not for me a matter of judging, or attacking. It is a forum for lively discussion and open debate. I am sorry you don't see it for what it is. I have explained it before.

In the debating arena - many times one is forced to defend a position that is not one the person personally holds. Makes it very easy for me to not hold drudges or pigeonhole people into specific molds. I think when this particular thread began we had a great number of similar types of minds - who were not into this JUDGE - ATTACK junk but realized fundamentally we were pulling apart - always true to the facts which is critical in debate and some specialized fields and for that matter, isn't it really critical in most all areas of life really? I am not sure when the tenor of this board began to change but instead of being a forum based on examining the facts - it became something very different - some still trying to use critical examination based on facts which still allows room for theories and others who really want to push buttons- why, remains an open question to me.

Sure since I am not on a team where I have to draw to choose a position - being prepared for either side, I hae chosen to be onthe side of the VICTIM.

However, that does not mean that I cannot hear logical arguments rooted in truths about the PERPETRATOR.

The big question is WHERE IS THE TRUTH in this case?

Taylor is dead. She cannot speak. And shouldn't each of us be careful not to assume we know her mind. I know (from first hand experience during a debate) that it is dangerous to try to transfer ones own life expectations and experiences into a scenario which does not really include you. That is also a dangerous course that many jurors take these days and it leads to judgements that are outside the facts offered in the case and the judge or the apellate level must sort it all out.

We can only use what we know about each and as hard as it is at times build the puzzle accordingly. During the trial, we will hopefully get more of the pieces.

But so far, I am not trying to judge anyone. And not trying to attack anyone either!

You, Jace, or anyone else. At one time just for kicks I flowed all of us -- it was very interesting.

If I make a false assumption or I don't fully support my position - by all means let's go to it! But as you post yours, I will never see you as fundamentally attacking or judging anyone - I hope you can see to offer me the same consideration.

My brain is not as quick as it once was. And my eyes are not as sharp as they once were. But my posts are the best I can do. And I am human and I will make mistakes. Accidents will happen. And I will own up to them as soon as I am aware of them.

Isn't that what is expected when an accident occurs?

And so this post is not entirely off topic - isn't that the see saw before us right now.

ACCIDENTAL DEATH or MURDER.

The only two people (we know) to be involved are Taylor and Ben.

Taylor is not here to speak for herself. So we must use various techniques to try and recapture Taylor that night.

Ben is here and has admitted he killed Taylor. But should we merely accept on facia (without careful collaboration/support) his explanation/excuse for how Taylor died?

What are the parameters for a claim of "ACCIDENTAL DEATH" to really be in play here? Do they even exist with what we know so far?

I vote NO. And I am ready to debate it.

[poplife]

Holy cow V/Matt- your last post was all smoke and mirrors, or perhaps debating, but not on point. I gave kudos to your apology after your mistaken assumption post, but you go and reply to Jace w/ all that spaceship stuff and my eyes start getting crossed again trying to follow. I don't think it's so much about debate, but being caustic. You're def a prolific poster, which isn't bad at all times, but my constructive criticism would be, in times like these, just step away from the keyboard, you lose cred when you blather on. IMO :shrug:

[MATTHEWsevenone]

Originally posted by poplife
Holy cow V/Matt- your last post was all smoke and mirrors, or perhaps debating, but not on point. I gave kudos to your apology after your mistaken assumption post, but you go and reply to Jace w/ all that spaceship stuff and my eyes start getting crossed again trying to follow. I don't think it's so much about debate, but being caustic. You're def a prolific poster, which isn't bad at all times, but my constructive criticism would be, in times like these, just step away from the keyboard, you lose cred when you blather on. IMO :shrug:

Poplife -

What "SMOKE AND MIRRORS"?
What "spaceship stuff"?
Where "not on point"?

Caustic is firstly defined as "capable of destroying or eating away by chemical action - corrosive" Where is my post caustic? How?

Granted my posts are long. And that last directly in reply to Jace and not on point for the thread.

A critique (which is by definition a constructive criticism) and well known in debating and public speaking classes requires specifics.

You mentioned "SMOKE AND MIRRORS", SPACESHIP STUFF" ...

I need specifics to reply to you.

Or was your post just your opinion peppered with specific buzz words to create a negative image?

[protectkidz]

Veracity:

Sorry for being snippy in the post above - it occured to me that what I might be perceiving as you enjoying the sound of your own voice, may in fact be you trying to get people to discuss this case.

There doesn't seem to be much discussion about the case here these days. Mostly, just people drawing lines in the sand because they refuse to respect the opinions of others.

There has also been what has been perceived by many as somewhat sneaky behavior behind the scenes. So, of course that makes for an uncomfortable, and even, shall I say - "hostile" environment.

Sadly, posters such as Peace and peeparoo are no longer with us. Those two always were able to add valuable input, as well as steady and calm posting - respectful of others.

I hope this somewhat explains.

PK

[MATTHEWsevenone]

Originally posted by protectkidz
Veracity:

Sorry for being snippy in the post above - it occured to me that what I might be perceiving as you enjoying the sound of your own voice, may in fact be you trying to get people to discuss this case.

There doesn't seem to be much discussion about the case here these days. Mostly, just people drawing lines in the sand because they refuse to respect the opinions of others.

There has also been what has been perceived by many as somewhat sneaky behavior behind the scenes. So, of course that makes for an uncomfortable, and even, shall I say - "hostile" environment.

Sadly, posters such as Peace and peeparoo are no longer with us. Those two always were able to add valuable input, as well as steady and calm posting - respectful of others.

I hope this somewhat explains.

PK

No harm no foul in my book - Protect - you were there from the early days. I love that you are here.

Guys and gals - we have a trial looming. We have some weeks - months actually to really think about things. And many of us have vivid memories of Ben Fawley handing out fliers and recall all too well the interviews done and when the car was found and ... we did timelines and researched all sorts of stuff...

And there will hopefully be joiners who were not there as the trial picks up momentum. What we can bring to the discussions will be very important -- IMO.

Even if someone posts a post that APPEARS to be PRO this or CON that - there was a time when it was just a concerted effort to find the truth. It was not baiting, it was just a tool to get us all thinking. Find where the rubber met the road.

I so want this forum back to being the thinking machine it was. Not a game of verbal dodgeball...

I think we can.. I sure am going try...

WE ARE NOT ON TRIAL - BEN FAWLEY IS!!!!!!!

This is not that Peterson board! We can be passionate, and use our common sense and at the end of the discussion just agree to disagree if we must.

Right?

And for the record -- I'm not here for Dorkette. I was here for Taylor from day one. Maybe using a new moniker these days, but I intend to discuss every facet of this case. Dorkette said at the beginning she would not censure us and I'm going to count on it.

I really don't think we need to feel uncomfortable or feel we have a bit in our mouths to force us to turn our heads one way or another. I think we can each look at the particulars of this case and see where REALITY is.

[Dorkette]

You are correct - I will not censure and I truly hope the posters will write without my presence inhibiting them from writing what they need to write.

As I have said before, there is nothing that can be written that is worse than knowing the person who murdered your daughter left her to rot (do you have any idea what was left of her?! What the ME told me - it isn't pretty) and from day one has continued to tell one lie after another.

I am wrong, the worst is knowing Taylor had her entire life ahead of her and it has all been taken away. And selfishly, I will never get to...getting too emotional. Sorry, stick to the facts, theories.

Dorkette

[protectkidz]

None of us have forgotten, nor will we forget, the true reason of why we're here.

[MATTHEWsevenone]

Originally posted by Dorkette
You are correct - I will not censure and I truly hope the posters will write without my presence inhibiting them from writing what they need to write.

As I have said before, there is nothing that can be written that is worse than knowing the person who murdered your daughter left her to rot (do you have any idea what was left of her?! What the ME told me - it isn't pretty) and from day one has continued to tell one lie after another.

I am wrong, the worst is knowing Taylor had her entire life ahead of her and it has all been taken away. And selfishly, I will never get to...getting too emotional. Sorry, stick to the facts, theories.

Dorkette

Thanks Dorkette -

I really believe that to fully get it - the particulars count! They can't be sugarcoated or bleeped out or glossed over.

Taylor deserves more. She deserves the truth.

And for the record - I hold the opinion that Taylor left us that night just a fraction of a second before the horror occurred. I WILL NOT DEBATE THIS. It is a matter of faith. And I have had enough occur in my life to accept it.

[Cino]

Originally posted by Hotwater
Cino, singlesix,

Maybe you guys better take this convo to PM.

Off topic.

Thanks,

--Hh20

Sorry, Hotwater, it's just hard to keep the rules straight when they (or at least the meanings thereof) keep changing. :confused:

[Researcher]

Originally posted by Cino

Sorry, Hotwater, it's just hard to keep the rules straight when they (or at least the meanings thereof) keep changing. :confused:
Hi, Cino.
I agree that we should all abide by the rules of these boards. To that end, I have asked that the "Rules and Guidlelines" that usedto be posted be posted again for everyone's reference.

BTW, I'm glad you're here and posting. I've a great deal of respect for your dogged equanimity and effort after honesty. You are incredibly articulate...and courageous. Hats off to you, Cino. You will go far in life.

[protectkidz]

:)

[Hotwater]

Cino:

Well, the rules seem to have vanished and we are still trying to figure out how to get them back. But not to worry! (yeah, right) we have rules somewhere!

Anyway, I'll let you know when the tech people find them and put them back up. We are LONG overdue for a software update.


Thanks!

--Hotwater

[singlesix]

Court TV Message Board Rules and Guidelines

There have been no posts in the last 1000 days in this forum.

Show threads from the beginning

___________________

Almost looks like a hack doesn't it, unless the admin hit the delete key by accident.

:confused:

singlesix