Justice Watch Support JW "60 Minutes Four" [ Main ] [ Post New Thread ] [ Help ] [ Search ] Table of Contents ................................................................... 60 Minutes Four, darby, 10:41:06, 4/02/2001 just wondering, mary99, 11:34:20, 4/02/2001, (#1) The way I see things..., Greenleaf, 12:34:36, 4/02/2001, (#2) Greenleaf..., 1000Sparks, 12:40:06, 4/02/2001, (#3) Notes from..., mame, 13:37:50, 4/02/2001, (#6) Mame, mary99, 14:44:12, 4/02/2001, (#13) Greenleaf, JR, 19:56:30, 4/02/2001, (#47) Is the Dave Lucas, Holly, 13:28:31, 4/02/2001, (#4) holly, mary99, 13:36:11, 4/02/2001, (#5) mary99, darby, 13:47:59, 4/02/2001, (#7) darby., Holly, 15:04:25, 4/02/2001, (#18) Darby, mary99, 14:31:36, 4/02/2001, (#9) AK on Dave Lucas, HappyGal, 14:16:28, 4/02/2001, (#8) Thanks, HappyGal, mary99, 20:24:40, 4/02/2001, (#51) Ric, rose, 14:37:38, 4/02/2001, (#11) In my friend's, Holly, 14:55:27, 4/02/2001, (#14) my bad, mary99, 14:35:55, 4/02/2001, (#10) mary99, Scully, 15:03:11, 4/02/2001, (#17) Scully, mary99, 18:15:29, 4/02/2001, (#35) mary99, Holly, 14:56:30, 4/02/2001, (#15) hey, Holly, mary99, 20:26:24, 4/02/2001, (#52) rose, mame, 14:42:24, 4/02/2001, (#12) What made rico, Holly, 14:58:39, 4/02/2001, (#16) Mary99, Grace, 15:09:00, 4/02/2001, (#19) I don't know, janphi, 15:51:09, 4/02/2001, (#21) Well, Janphi., Holly, 16:09:13, 4/02/2001, (#23) Don't know, janphi, 16:20:38, 4/02/2001, (#25) Nice Try..., shadow, 15:43:51, 4/02/2001, (#20) shadow & GL, darby, 15:52:47, 4/02/2001, (#22) In the interest of clarity, A.K., 16:26:46, 4/02/2001, (#27) BTW, AK -, Holly, 18:47:12, 4/02/2001, (#42) Nice try, AK., Holly, 17:14:16, 4/02/2001, (#30) Holly, mary99, 18:02:17, 4/02/2001, (#33) Darby., Holly, 16:19:26, 4/02/2001, (#24) Darby..., shadow, 16:23:37, 4/02/2001, (#26) shadow, darby, 16:40:22, 4/02/2001, (#28) janphi, Grace, 17:10:16, 4/02/2001, (#29) Well, Gemini, 17:41:58, 4/02/2001, (#31) Gemini., Holly, 18:34:02, 4/02/2001, (#40) Gemini., Holly, 18:01:29, 4/02/2001, (#32) Holly, Gemini, 18:06:43, 4/02/2001, (#34) What would, Morgan, 18:32:29, 4/02/2001, (#39) Morgan - , Holly, 18:42:44, 4/02/2001, (#41) Janphi and shadow....., rose, 18:25:56, 4/02/2001, (#38) Well, are you, Holly, 18:22:35, 4/02/2001, (#36) Maybe, Gemini, 18:24:57, 4/02/2001, (#37) That's exactly, Real Stormy, 18:49:38, 4/02/2001, (#43) RS, Gemini, 19:16:21, 4/02/2001, (#44) A.K.'s first mention, Grace, 19:27:20, 4/02/2001, (#45) Don't it make my brown eyes BLUE?, Holly, 19:58:46, 4/02/2001, (#48) Then ..., Grace, 19:40:10, 4/02/2001, (#46) Holly re: post #36, Imbackon, 20:52:01, 4/02/2001, (#60) Imbackon, Grace, 21:05:01, 4/02/2001, (#63) ~evolved~, mary99, 21:38:00, 4/02/2001, (#65) My posts, janphi, 21:46:51, 4/02/2001, (#66) Janphi, mary99, 22:03:04, 4/02/2001, (#67) Another theory?, watchin', 20:38:13, 4/02/2001, (#55) Thanks Grace, mary99, 20:35:57, 4/02/2001, (#54) Mary99, Grace, 20:45:11, 4/02/2001, (#57) LOL, Grace, mary99, 20:54:25, 4/02/2001, (#61) Housing Prices, JR, 20:18:38, 4/02/2001, (#50) two cents, darby, 20:16:51, 4/02/2001, (#49) posterz were speculatin', mary99, 21:01:11, 4/02/2001, (#62) Quilty, janphi, 20:30:02, 4/02/2001, (#53) A ll K nowing, Holly, 20:45:17, 4/02/2001, (#58) Janphi, mary99, 20:43:55, 4/02/2001, (#56) Holly, darby, 20:47:14, 4/02/2001, (#59) Another speculation, Imbackon, 21:35:17, 4/02/2001, (#64) Imbackon -, Holly, 22:10:41, 4/02/2001, (#68) AK or anyone..., watchin', 22:21:25, 4/02/2001, (#69) I'm curious, Edie Pratt, 22:56:10, 4/02/2001, (#71) EdieP, Holly, 06:30:31, 4/03/2001, (#81) hmmm, mary99, 06:58:07, 4/03/2001, (#83) Mary99, JR, 14:05:15, 4/03/2001, (#88) re: actress-Allison Walker., Imbackon, 22:55:33, 4/02/2001, (#70) Imbackon, mary99, 23:57:05, 4/02/2001, (#75) hi Imbackon, Gemini, 23:00:42, 4/02/2001, (#72) Gemini is correct, Imbackon, 23:56:25, 4/02/2001, (#74) both are true, mary99, 00:05:42, 4/03/2001, (#76) Tempest in a teapot, FT, 23:10:31, 4/02/2001, (#73) FT., Holly, 05:54:58, 4/03/2001, (#78) FT, A.K., 02:51:19, 4/03/2001, (#77) The Fleet, Holly, 05:58:46, 4/03/2001, (#79) FT, Morgan, 06:19:01, 4/03/2001, (#80) WOW, RiverRat, 06:55:21, 4/03/2001, (#82) AK, darby, 07:33:19, 4/03/2001, (#86) Where was it said, Holly, 07:15:22, 4/03/2001, (#85) RR, mary99, 07:02:54, 4/03/2001, (#84) What, Morgan, 07:37:36, 4/03/2001, (#87) stealing stationary, Edie Pratt, 14:15:41, 4/03/2001, (#89) ................................................................... "60 Minutes Four" Posted by darby on 10:41:06 4/02/2001 Repeating my post (to fly) from last thread. The 60Minutes journalist told mame that the show couldn't happen if Fleet White was tipped off, so yes, mame probably didn't announce it to the forum for that reason. If you believed that 60Minutes (a fairly reputable news-o-tainment show) had found evidence that would promote justice for an abuse victim as well as expose her abusers, you'd probably keep quiet as well. HOWEVER, with all the full-fledged anti-mame forum campaigns going on, mame could just as easily gotten to the breaking point and let the whole thing out of the bag. Sure, when no 60Minutes show ever came--or perhaps a show, but not the type mame anticipated--the forums would then learn the truth. But that whole process--from interview to airing--might have taken a lot of time. In the meantime, lots of folks could have gotten it into their heads that real evidence existed proving FW to be an evil person. The whole thing was very risky if the journalist was trying to do a favor for the Whites. Since she decided to take that risk, it tells me that she actually had only her bad self in mind to benefit from the video. If indeed this journalist works the forums (as I suspect), she might have thought it funny that mame may have argued for MW's cause from a stance that was bolstered by the belief that 60Minutes had the proof that MW told had the truth. If the journalist is also someone who actually posts (and I'm not saying she is), she might have even had fun provoking mame and others who might have known about 60Minutes. This whole thing might seem funny and great fun to some--but the truth is, the journalist was toying with peoples' lives. Not just MW's or mame's--but the Whites' as well. [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 1. "just wondering" Posted by mary99 on 11:34:20 4/02/2001 Darby, thanks for starting this thread. It's hard (for me, anyway) to keep on track sometimes but the big picture points to an effort to undermine the credibility of a person who had valuable information. The FW libel suit- and the ramifications thereof-could be coincidence but the suit being withdrawn (more conflicting stories there, too) right after the hoax was discovered does point, imo, to some connection between the two events. I would like to find the Dave Lucas radio show interviews, but the link is down. Maybe Mame could arrange with Toppcatt to re-broadcast them with any other case-related audio for those who are interested. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 2. "The way I see things..." Posted by Greenleaf on 12:34:36 4/02/2001 MW's claims of FW's involvement is vastly different from JW sluths's claims of the Ramseys' involvement. Firstly, everything seems to point to the Ramsey's guilt. The clues, the circumstances and their behavior. There has, to date, been no creditable evidence of an intruder. On the other hand (IMHO) any reasonable person, who seriously studies this case, can come to no other conclusion, however reluctantly, than the parents, and the parents only, were involved in this child's murder. (I refuse to say "death,as it was MURDER). I believe there is as much evidence against the Rams as there was against O.J. The MW's saga is altogether a different can of worms. It's a convoluted maze of bread crumbs, along a thorny path, leading to a wastelands of explosive puff and frill. It is fraught with danger, by people, however sincere, wielding reputation-killing swords of the most ruinous kind. I, for one, have found all the ranting and raving about FW to endear me to him all the more. The Ramsey case, IMHO, is rather simple, sans MW and FW. True sleuths stick to the facts. Inferences, of course, can be made, but hopefully, in a prudent manner. I view FW and his wife as peripheral players, caught up in the crazy Ram web of deceit and lies. I realize that there are those who will vehemently disagree with me, and that's OK. I feel great empathy for FW and his family, and I cringe at the thought of contributing in any way, however small, to the feeding frenzy of FW. Although I confess that I have not always been prudent or logical, I have tried to be fair. I apologize for those times when I succumbed to periodic bouts of silliness, but it is always done, sans all malice. This is not a flame against anyone, but a reminder that we must all be cautious with our accusations. God only knows who reads these posts on these threads. We have some of the best, most intelligent sleuths on the Web, right here at JW. I am proud to be apart of this great family of caring souls. There's a silent camarade amongst us, as we all abhor child abuse. Greenleaf p.s. It's been awhile since I thanked Chris for allowing us into her home. Thanks to her, Pedro, China, and all the others, who make this such a great place. What a diverse group we are! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 3. "Greenleaf..." Posted by 1000Sparks on 12:40:06 4/02/2001 ditto.... very good post. and I was kidding on the thread yesterday.. no need to be sorry about posting that.... BANG! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 6. "Notes from..." Posted by mame on 13:54:15 4/02/2001 NOTE: This message was last edited 13:54:15, 4/02/2001 your FLAKY journalist...someone forwarded me a post made by rico at another forum referring to me as a flaky journalist...gotta love it...it's a rather endearing title i'd say. i'm confident we'll all know at some point if i deserve it. there are a couple matters i need to clarify...rico also suggests we would do well to get our fact straight... ok, i'll buy that...rico wants us to obtain public records which he claims can't legally be posted on the internet. hell, it's been done here for years...i've never heard of an arrest. further, every reporter i know uses public records to glean information for stories on a regular basis...so if rico feels uncomfortable posting the exact records (even though journalists print such records regularly...he could very easily share such research in a written format without fear of breaking laws. 1. rico wants us to get a copy of nancy's bankruptcy filing. FACT: NANCY HAS NEVER FILED FOR BANKRUPTCY!!! so, i suggest rico dig a little deeper and see if the bankrupt nancy krebs he found is another research mistake...an unfortunate blunder similar to the mistake made regarding the aging, blonde SAG actress who some claimed was this nancy krebs...only to find out she only shares the name. rico, could you kindly post information about this court filing so we might publicly confirm or rule out the identity of the person you speak of. 2. Rico also suggests a search of public records to obtain a background on mary bienkowski...including divorce, employment and real estate records. beyond the fact that such records show ms. bienkowski had a career, a divorce and owned real estate. sounds like this might show she has a life. i have no idea if in fact bienkowski ever married, divorced or bought a house. i do know she has had a highly regarded professional career as a therapist who specializes in treating women who have been sexually abused. if she had or has a house or a husband never seemed relevant to my work. if such real estate and marital status records reveal information that's important...please share it with us. rico also says that nancy has a long history of "biting the hands that feed her"...i'm not sure what rico means...but, i'd like to remind rico that those who fed her...also, brutally raped her. guess this proves these folks aren't all bad...hell, they were kind enough to give her food, shelter and clothing. i am more than willing to help confirm or deny charges against this woman. nancy krebs relevance to this case is yet to be determined by law enforcement officials. if i had reason to trust the BPD i'd have walked a year ago. until her story and the information she brought forward is fully looked at and investigated, many find it important to any serious investigation. and to any sleuth who claims to intelligently investigate this case by fairly looking at ALL information. such fair minded sleuths know that research into this story could possibly rule it out...making certain it doesn't muddy the waters in a courtroom someday. so i ask again...if anyone has information for or against these type of allegations...please be a fair sleuth and post it. there are dozens of news articles, my interviews, and further information found by sleuths at here...this archive is now a huge collection of information at our disposal. it's time to balance that research showing the other side...i want any and all information to come to light in this story and all the others. for those who don't buy it..then don't investigate it...i again suggest they bypass such threads...or, step up to the plate and engage in a real sleuth to determine this woman's possible importance to this case. or, her unimportance. if anyone has solid information that suggests or proves she is not worthy of further sleuthing...help us and most of all jonbenet ramsey by revealing it. if you are shy and would rather not get involved...i'll post any and all information sent to me...regardless of it's content. (mamensadie@yahoo.com) if you're not interested or think it's all bullchit...your sleuthing help is needed on many threads and the zillions of investigations surrounding this case. i'm here...i'm scrappy and strong...i'm gonna stay here...walking away means the bad guys and girls win...i'll help research any information that is brought forward for public discussion...no matter what that information is. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ EMAIL mame ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 13. "Mame" Posted by mary99 on 14:44:12 4/02/2001 Does Rico really think proving that MB bought a house or had a divorce, means anything? OTOH, I'm still waiting for v_p to produce her MW credibility-shattering info she alluded to on thread IV or V of the California/MW thread. Anyone have that saved? How anyone could protest speculation about Fleet White while sitting on 'proof' that the MW allegations are lies makes no sense to me. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 47. "Greenleaf" Posted by JR on 19:56:30 4/02/2001 Very lovely post. I do have to disagree on the O.J. evidence comment though. IMO there is significantly more to point to the R's guilt than there ever was to O.J.'s. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 4. "Is the Dave Lucas" Posted by Holly on 13:28:31 4/02/2001 radio show the one where AK was offering case insights? FWIW - Elsewhere someone is offering hard evidence of the alleged Nancy fraud - information that her therapist bought a house for less then the previous sale price. Whatever. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 5. "holly" Posted by mary99 on 13:36:11 4/02/2001 ~~yepperz [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 7. "mary99" Posted by darby on 13:47:59 4/02/2001 The more I think about it, the less I think that FW is behind what the journalist did. As I said up above, the journalist apparently doesn't care about the truth or anyone's cause--besides her own, that is. 1001Sparks--BANG, yourself ;-) [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 18. "darby." Posted by Holly on 15:04:25 4/02/2001 Both scenarios are possible or one scenario is possible. Personal enrichment and a lack of ethics could be the underpinnings of either possibility. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 9. "Darby" Posted by mary99 on 14:31:36 4/02/2001 I agree, Darby, that what the would-be journalist did was simply for her own financial gain and presumably the ego gratification that would come from having her own little treasure trove of case info to sprinkle throughout the JBR forum world. BUT, Fleet White's action's in filing the libel suit and then suddenly choosing to drop it seem to mesh with the timing of the: 1) attacks on Nancy which fueled the fires which fed the libel suit 2) the BIG FW media event tooted by our own A.K. which never materialized 3) the outing of the 60 Minutes hoax-er So what I perceive is an attempt by the would-be hoax-er to ingratiate hirself with Mr. White, to 'scoop' a big MW story, and pit forum against forum, poster against poster, until none are left standing. Except the would-be hoax-er and hir cronies. And meanwhile the perverts who abused Nancy Krebs and possibly know who also abused JonBenet Ramsey can relax and enjoy the deathly silence on the internet. Back to the bedwetting theory. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 8. "AK on Dave Lucas" Posted by HappyGal on 14:16:28 4/02/2001 I am just a lurker here but I also asked about the interviews from the Dave Lucas show and this is what I was told via e-mail: "The web site you asked about contains the Dave Lucas radio show interviews from the fall of 1998 and into the spring of 1999 and they do include the voice of the poster known as "AK." Yes, it is a woman's voice. That site is called the Webdollie Real Audio site and it is owned by ACandyRose. The Webdollie site is part of the ACandyRose Internet Subculture web site. That site along with several sections of the subculture site were removed last summer when several posters from JW accused ACandyRose of plotting and planning dastardly deeds on a private forum against other Internet posters in relation to the Mystery Woman/Fleet White story. There was no plotting and planning of any dastardly deeds. The ACandyRose Internet Subculture web site was created as a working archive tool for all the forums but apparently some didn't feel that way. Both sites are under reconstruction. Thank you for asking." [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 51. "Thanks, HappyGal" Posted by mary99 on 20:24:40 4/02/2001 Too bad ACR can't share--she shared so very much in the past. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 11. "Ric" Posted by rose on 14:37:38 4/02/2001 Rico said on another foeum that in the near past that a house sold for $489,000 and shortly there after was bought by MB or her husband(did not make it clear whose name was on the real estate transaction) at $90,000 less. Best deal in heard of in long time. Is this true and what was he driving at? Ditto Greenie's post, right on. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 14. "In my friend's" Posted by Holly on 14:55:27 4/02/2001 community a house sold for $60,000 less than the sale price of just a year before. The reason - a plan to dredge the creek was booted and the attraction of building a dock for a large sailboat went poof. Several homes in her neighborhood went for far less than their last fairly recent sale amount. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 10. "my bad" Posted by mary99 on 14:35:55 4/02/2001 Oops, I did it again... That would refer to the infamous night of the google searches which produced every Fleet White post ever written to date by mary99, and my 'ilk.' Now that I think about it, that was pretty funny. Or was it? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 17. "mary99" Posted by Scully on 15:03:11 4/02/2001 Would you feel offended if I asked you in good faith to present your theory about who you think murdered JBR? I've read countless theories on this forum but I don't recall ever having read yours. If you feel this request is too personal please feel free to just ignore this post. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 35. "Scully" Posted by mary99 on 18:15:29 4/02/2001 I used to believe that Patsy killed JB in a religious sacrifice/incest coverup but have since changed my mind to believe that JR was involved in incest and possibly a little kiddie porn and he or someone close to him "fooled around" with JB and went too far. I think PR has been set up as the patsy and is willing to take the rap as the other sordid mess is much, much, MUCH more evil. That's it in a nutshell. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 15. "mary99" Posted by Holly on 14:56:30 4/02/2001 Will you send me a link to that place? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 52. "hey, Holly" Posted by mary99 on 20:26:24 4/02/2001 I did. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 12. "rose" Posted by mame on 14:42:24 4/02/2001 if that's true, i'd say they got a helluva deal! and further, i'm not sure what relevance such transaction has to her credibility or this case! now, if you find a real estate fraud, or other savory info i'd love to see it. but, as it stands is a helluva real estate deal...that is unless it's a volcano fault or there's nuclear waste in the basement... [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 16. "What made rico" Posted by Holly on 14:58:39 4/02/2001 think the formerly bankrupt Nancy Krebs is the Nancy Krebs in question? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 19. "Mary99" Posted by Grace on 15:11:42 4/02/2001 NOTE: This message was last edited 15:11:42, 4/02/2001 LOL. Edited to say: This was supposed to be after post #5, but ended up down here. Mame, thanks for addressing the rico posts. I hope somebody comes through with the Bienkowski records. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 21. "I don't know" Posted by janphi on 15:51:09 4/02/2001 I don't have inside sources or the resources that investigators or others have who can look into courthouse records and all that. I'll just tell what I "know"--meaning what I found when I went looking for that stuff. There are three NK's who have filed for bankruptcy, only one in a state where NK has lived. That one's middle name is Dale, NK's isn't. That one lived in Santa Barbara, NK didn't. My thinking is that that is the wrong person. Secondly, those two addresses are not houses, they are offices. Don't know if they are strip centers or very small office buildings, but they are commercial, not residential. I don't know who bought or owns them, but I can see who the tenants are. Nothing looks unusual to me. Don't know if the CS poster is referring to the atty at one of those addy's, but I'll sleuth some on that guy later. Mary Bienkowski's license to practice Marriage & Family Therapy is all in order and doesn't expire until late in 2001, which is just a renewal date. Her intern license was "canceled," but that was because she became a full-blown therapist at that time. She told "us" (the public) that at the start. Nancy started with her when she was still interning. I'm going to speculate on something here, though. I'm not a mind reader and I don't know what that poster is actually looking at, so I could be way wrong, but I'd like to clear it up, anyway. The name of Mary Bienkowski's clinic was Central Coast Pain Center at one time. It doesn't appear to be there anymore at the Laurel Lane office addy. The poster might be getting this mixed up with the Central Coast (Neuroscience and) Pain Management Group, LLC, because of the similarity of names. I almost made the same mistake. The head of that, Pilch, IS involved in a major scandal, with elements that would appeal to an anti-NK person. I think that MIGHT be where the problem lies, but could be wrong. As far as I know, there is no relation and the scandal is probably why the building was sold undermarket--all of the guy's stuff is being liquidated for cash. May be court ordered, but I'm not sure. Just my two cents' worth here. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 23. "Well, Janphi." Posted by Holly on 16:09:13 4/02/2001 If the poster in question actually thought that feel good doctor had something to do with Krebs, that is as lame as it gets. I remember when you discovered the Los Osos scandal and a "girlfriend" of the Drs girlfiend had helped her friend "tie up" the nasty Dr as a lesson. Wasn't there a lawsuit that the feel good doc had raped his former stripper girlfriend? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 25. "Don't know" Posted by janphi on 16:20:38 4/02/2001 I've forgotten the details, they're somewhere in my notes. I don't know if that's what is being looked at, just thought it might have gotten mixed up somehow. Just don't see any other tie-in. But the poster hasn't named the owners (which the post said could be had with a phone call and the SLO county clerk says can't), so that's why I just speculated. I think it's kinda mean for people who do have professional access (like I used to) to lord it over everyone else who doesn't. Either paraphrase the info, or post what's ethical to post, or just leave it alone. Thanks so much for thinking it's lame, when I wondered about it, too! ;-) [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 20. "Nice Try..." Posted by shadow on 15:43:51 4/02/2001 Greenleaf!! However you are wasting your time - why not just treat us with a new thread of some more of your famous quotes? shadow [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 22. "shadow & GL" Posted by darby on 15:52:47 4/02/2001 You are both eloquent writers, and I understand and respect your positions on MW. However, this isn't really about MW--It's about a journalist who tried to pull a scam--a scam that could have hurt BOTH FW and MW. I feel as if I'm beating my head against a wall. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 27. "In the interest of clarity" Posted by A.K. on 16:26:46 4/02/2001 mame, forgive me if this has been answered on another post. Who was the newsperson and network that announced the 'Kevin Costner was aboard the Aspen flight' rumor? Thank you. Further evidence of how the JW Telephone Game persists... I never said that NK was the blonde actress. She is not. The actress's name has not been mentioned here that I've seen. Nor should it be. I very well know who I mean when I write about NK. Holly, since I have not seen any JW poster requesting that you NOT mention the name of the so-called 60 Minutes' producer, and I have assured you it is not me, I see no reason to protect the name. Let it rip, babe. That's never been a problem with you before. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 42. "BTW, AK -" Posted by Holly on 18:47:12 4/02/2001 "in the interest of clarity" why don't you provide the name of the washed up actress to which you have alluded for the past many months. Since you make no claim that the blonde SAG member is a member of JW, you shouldn't fret that a House Rule will be violated. Go for it. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 30. "Nice try, AK." Posted by Holly on 17:14:16 4/02/2001 Because no poster has asked not to mention the name, therefore I should? Amusing. And if I decline it means - what? Not a chance, kiddo. However, if you wish to email YOUR name to me, I will post if you are not the producer in question. While you're dropping in from your busy rl, check out Janphi's explanation of one the recent blunders posted at another forum. Just in case this explains some of the NK/MB confusion. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 33. "Holly" Posted by mary99 on 18:02:17 4/02/2001 A.K. sez: I never said that NK was the blonde actress. She is not. The actress's name has not been mentioned here that I've seen. Nor should it be. I very well know who I mean when I write about NK. Do ya think the blonde actress posts here, A.K.? Why should her name not be mentioned? If she scammed someone in relation to NK/MW , please share. Holly, don't you just love the way A.K. holds those secrets close? I think our A.K. just wants another shot at google fame. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 24. "Darby." Posted by Holly on 16:19:26 4/02/2001 I guess after 300 + replies, the starting point is becoming harder to see. And frankly, it's hard to avoid posters sharing their positions on Nancy Krebs once certain people try to divert attention from what the original concern was. My only intent was to inform posters about the bizarre 60 MINUTES episode and my concern that the timing with the FW criminal libel complaint was extraordinary. It really has NOTHING to do with Krebs' value to the cause of justice for JB, her credibility or her story. And it is my belief that the poster is a forum regular or close to someone who is. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 26. "Darby..." Posted by shadow on 16:23:37 4/02/2001 I'm not questioning the 60 Minutes "situation" because, as some others here have indicated, I'm not sure I understand the "full story" here... there have been questions asked by fly and Rose (to name a couple) that weren't answered that probably would have given me better data to work with to understand. There also seems to be things going on that cannot be discussed in detail. My position on Nancy (MW) has not changed since the story first "broke" on the JW Forum. I have never attacked her, have never attacked those supporting her, and have never said anything that she has alleged is untrue (although I have had some trouble understanding just what she has alleged). Fleet White has never been a hero of mine - and I have no problem with Nancy's supporters discussing all of the "possibilities" based on her allegations being true. My problem has always been a simple matter of believing that it's not cool to call someone a sexual prevert until I see a little proof. In this situation, I have not applied a "double-standard" as relates to my position on the Ramseys - 1) I have never said either JR or PR killed JBR; 2) I have never said JR sexually abused JBR; and 3) I've never made nasty personal statements about JR or PR. shadow [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 28. "shadow" Posted by darby on 16:40:22 4/02/2001 Fair enough-Re Paragraph 2. But we've all been there done that. Again, this is about a different matter. I think I'm unable express this any better than I have. I tried. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 29. "janphi" Posted by Grace on 17:10:16 4/02/2001 Thanks for that information. It's very interesting. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 31. "Well" Posted by Gemini on 17:41:58 4/02/2001 personally, these threads don't offend me. In fact, it's kinda refreshing to read posts about something meatier than what PR wore or whether she blinked too much or how many times JR said "uh" (yawn). This must be my day for coming in to agree with someone I usually don't agree with, but A.K. is right ... read all those posts months ago ... she did not say - or even suggest that I could tell - that the "aging actress" was NK. I got the impression she meant this actress (and her associates) may have put MW (as she was known at that time) up to instigating a bit of drama so they could capitalize on it with a quickie movie. I thought this sounded very far fetched then, and still do. However, I don't see how anyone could have misread to the point they believed A.K. was identifying NK as this alleged actress. The poster rico has always seemed particularly zealous on the MW subject ... frantic even ... which has made me go "hmmmmm" a time or two. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 40. "Gemini." Posted by Holly on 18:34:02 4/02/2001 I guess you read Janphi's excellent post that might /prolly does explain the MB statements rico makes. If you GOOGLE Boris Pilcher, I think you'll find a 2000 SLO newspaper cover story of Pilcher and the scandal. Heather Norby is mentioned as the girlfriend of one of the accused MDs and I think that name may also have led some to make leaps of logic and fall flat on their noses. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 32. "Gemini." Posted by Holly on 18:01:29 4/02/2001 I think all that happened was that the poster mis-remembered a post read months ago. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 34. "Holly" Posted by Gemini on 18:06:43 4/02/2001 I think you're right, but it's good to get it straight before it builds. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 39. "What would" Posted by Morgan on 18:32:29 4/02/2001 be the point as far as AK is concerned about putting up the producer's name? If it is AK she would simply deny it. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 41. "Morgan - " Posted by Holly on 18:42:44 4/02/2001 If she repeats the challenge every hundred posts or so, I guess the desired effect is to remind posters (who might resist the urge to take 4-5 hours re-tracing)that I claimed she was the producer and now won't back up my allegedly bogus accusation. That's AK spin. The fact is I never said AK was the producer/journalist to begin with. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 38. "Janphi and shadow....." Posted by rose on 18:25:56 4/02/2001 Janphi, thanks for clearing that up. Shadow, ditto on MW thoughts. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 36. "Well, are you" Posted by Holly on 18:22:35 4/02/2001 referencing #36 of the original thread? I think the poster does seem to be trying to recall the best he/she could. My belated recollection was that a washed out actress conspired with others to send Nancy on her mission to torpedo the Fleet. I do think that others may have mis-remembered as well. And I think if anyone went GOOGLING they may have thought they figured it out, but it was the wrong conspirator. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 37. "Maybe" Posted by Gemini on 18:24:57 4/02/2001 A.K. would be willing to enlighten us? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 43. "That's exactly" Posted by Real Stormy on 18:49:38 4/02/2001 What it was--a has-been actress trying to set up a role for herself. Gem--Apparently my much-vaunted and widely- heralded charm has eluded you. You do admit, however, that I am not a snob at all times. Unfortunately, I can't reciprocate. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 44. "RS" Posted by Gemini on 19:16:21 4/02/2001 LOL! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 45. "A.K.'s first mention" Posted by Grace on 19:27:20 4/02/2001 of the actress: 6/1/2000 ... Finally, I hope that everyone who contributed to this all-too-transparent hijacking attempt will be called on the carpet and asked to explain their actions in a proper forum. I have no intention of making things worse by saying more. But I'll just bet there's a washed-up, blue-eyed, lousy actress who's mourning her dashed hope to regain a public profile. Perhaps her partners in crime will now learn that it's not an easy thing trying to sell tainted goods. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 48. "Don't it make my brown eyes BLUE?" Posted by Holly on 19:58:46 4/02/2001 "Who mentioned that the hoax was connected to a "washed-up blonde actress"? Me, and I stand by that. (When Edie Pratt later asked about it, I explained that someone flashed a shiny object in front of said actress' gaze and she flew off to another distraction. I don't believe I ever mentioned her eye color; Holly added "blue" along the way. Did this actress initiate the hoax? No, she was just briefly part of the mix." from AK's WOR post. And from the June 200 AK post - "But I'll just bet there's a washed-up, blue-eyed, lousy actress who's mourning her dashed hope to regain a public profile So, AK can no longer recall accurately that it was AK who really gave the SAG actress BLUE EYES. Something she told posters, was an embellishment I was responsible for. Well, I guess she just makes up this crap on the run. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 46. "Then ..." Posted by Grace on 19:40:10 4/02/2001 6/2/2000 The actress I mean is not nearly as successful as Hawn but is a name many of you would recognize. She's in the Screen Actor's Guild, but I doubt any of her reviewers have had glowing words to say about her past work. My mentioning her is a theory only, and possibly one operating serendipitously from MW and her immediate handlers. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 60. "Holly re: post #36" Posted by Imbackon on 20:52:01 4/02/2001 Here is what I said in the post you mentioned. "As usual I write on threads that are nearly dead***(special note as to how un-dead the threads actually were LOL)****, but I found a strange coincidence today. Remember long ago when AK was writing about the washed up actress who was also a sag member who was supposedly purpretrating(is that a word?) some sort of lie regarding mystery woman? Well, today I discovered that there is a Nancy Krebs who is a Christian music singer, who of all things is also an emmy award winning actress and sag member. Now I know that this can't be the same Nancy as everyone who met her implied MW was basically homeless and the Nancy above is obviously not, but is this a bizarre coincidence or what! Just who was the washed up actress that AK was talking about??? Enquiring minds wanna know." ********************************************** Please notice that I never said that AK said that MW is the actress. Actually AK's orginal posts as noted in prior posts were very cryptic and actually confusing (what did she mean by hijacking?)as to what point she was trying to make. Holly then replied to my post and wondered if AK found NK on a google search. Holly doesn't know any more than I did what AK's original point about the actress was. Perhaps AK did do just that, since it is hard to tell from her posts about it what she was illuding to anyway. My original point here was what were the odds that there is a washed up blonde sag member( I only say washed up because she is now into music and not on any show and that could be intrepreted as being washed up though not necessarily true) with the same name is MW? I wish I hadn't noted my obversation now since Janphi had apparently already posted long ago about this connection of names(apparently missed by me). DON'T FORGET It is by faith on all posters part what MW's real name is. So maybe the connection is nil! Imbackon [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 63. "Imbackon" Posted by Grace on 21:05:01 4/02/2001 Don't be sorry you posted that! Obviously, some of us missed it when janphi posted it. I continue to think it's a find with a lot of merit. A.K.'s actress posts evolved with the circumstances, so it's anybody's guess what she was thinking in her first post. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 65. "~evolved~" Posted by mary99 on 21:38:00 4/02/2001 Excellent way of putting it, Grace. Could she have been (gasp) making it up? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 66. "My posts" Posted by janphi on 21:46:51 4/02/2001 are very easy to miss, for some reason. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 67. "Janphi" Posted by mary99 on 22:05:19 4/02/2001 NOTE: This message was last edited 22:05:19, 4/02/2001 Your posts are always packed with info, don't think anyone has missed them. I saw (on the Rex Krebs post) the name Nancy Boykin and thought that was fascinating ... especially since Penny Boef also had a part on Dallas. And PR took JB to Texas, where she (PR) found a huge diamond ring on her finger at the end of the summer, and JB was "so put together" at the end of that summer it took Judith Phillips breath away. I'm listening...and thinking about what it might mean. Lights, cameras, action? Since you did all the Rex Krebs research, take some credit for once and start a thread, willya? :-) You always bring lot to the table here and I appreciate your hard work in digging up this info and apologize if you feel like it's been overlooked. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 55. "Another theory?" Posted by watchin' on 20:38:13 4/02/2001 I am not up with the journalist saga, but since AK is tossing out theories, perhaps she could enlighten us on the inference that Nancy's attorney now needs a defense in court? That statement is in WOR under my thread re: Nancy. Is Nancy' attorney now up for discrediting? These hit and run statements are confusing. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 54. "Thanks Grace" Posted by mary99 on 20:35:57 4/02/2001 Do you also have the post where A.K. said the movie "Bless the Child" was part of the Satanic cult/Stephen Singular/MW agenda? I know it's a lot to ask, but I just love A.K.'s rhetoric. ~~yum-yum [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 57. "Mary99" Posted by Grace on 20:45:11 4/02/2001 I might have it on one of the threads I saved. I'll have to look tomorrow. Did she say it at JW, though? I'm thinking that was at another forum, but I can't quite remember. If it wasn't here, I don't think I'm allowed to post it. Do you remember which thread it was on? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 61. "LOL, Grace" Posted by mary99 on 20:54:25 4/02/2001 There were sooooo many! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 50. "Housing Prices" Posted by JR on 20:18:38 4/02/2001 Can a d do flutuate for many reasons. When I lived in Calif. the market went nuts then dropped but some people were forced to sell for various reasons at less than what they had paid. The house across the street from me (which I had looked at) sold for approximately $30K under the previous price paid (plus the owners lost thousands more on improvements.) They bought a 2 bedroom thinging their family was complete then she got pregnant and they couldn't fit their family in the house. Unfortunately, the person who bought then leveled the house failed to do his research. Our properties were zoned R2 (meaning 2 residences could be placed on a lot and in fact some older homes had 1 bedroom 1baths sitting behind them.) The city had changed the requirements for R2 but had not re-zoned our neighborhood. The second buyer then sold the empty lot for less than he paid (and lost thousands on the bull dozing.) A young (single)engineer bought the lot and was custom building to fit into the neighborhood but had spent so much on his house he will most likely never retrieve his costs. The house (not finished when I moved to Texas) was gorgeous and the kitchen was to die for. The engineer was determined to drive every nail himself and had been at it for 3 years when I moved. He told me his materials costs - God knows what labor rates would have added to the costs but then carpenters would have had that house up in a few weeks - not years. LOL! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 49. "two cents" Posted by darby on 20:16:51 4/02/2001 One thing that was made public about Nancy VERY early on was that she has blue eyes. So when AK mentioned a "blue eyed actress," I guessed that AK was referring to Nancy herself. However, I wondered where in the world the details about the sagging career and membership in the Screen Actor's Guild came from. Now, with Imbackon's discovery (on the first thread) that she found a Nancy Krebs on an internet search who is a SAG member with a not-so-active acting career--I wonder if AK had also found this information and assumed it was MW. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 62. "posterz were speculatin'" Posted by mary99 on 21:01:11 4/02/2001 it was the blonde Profiler actress-Allison Walker. Sumthin' about loggin' and Tal Jones in ma mem'ry banks. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 53. "Quilty" Posted by janphi on 20:30:02 4/02/2001 The jury found Rex Krebs guilty on all 9 counts, including 6 special circumstances, making him eligible for the death penalty. Don't know much more, as far as timing of when they'll go into the 2nd phase. Perhaps right away. The counts: Count 1-Murder of Rachel Newhouse; includes 2 special circumstances: (1) kidnaping for sexual purposes, and (2) forcible rape. Count 2-Murder of Aundria Crawford; included 3 special circumstances: (1) kidnaping for sexual purposes, (2) forcible rape, (3) forcible sodomy. Count 3-Kidnaping for sexual purposes of Rachel Newhouse. Count 4-Forcible rape of Rachel Newhouse. Count 5-Burglary. Count 6-Kidnaping for sexual purposes of Aundria Crawford. Count 7-Forcible rape of Aundria Crawford. Count 8-Forcible rape of Aundria Crawford. (Same as count seven.) Count 9-Forcible sodomy of Aundria Crawford. There is also a sixth special circumstance for a double murder. ******************************** One of those little co-hinkydinks about the "actress." There was an actress named Nancy Boykin who played a waitress for two seasons on "Dallas," along with Penni Pearson, Dr. Boof's mizzuss. (And a good friend of mine was in a couple of those early ones too.) I don't have a clue who the "tainted" actress could be and I won't play games like that. I can't even begin to conjure up ANYTHING that would "taint" ANYONE in Hollywood nowadays, can anyone else? Really! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 58. "A ll K nowing" Posted by Holly on 20:45:17 4/02/2001 said it was a name we would recognize. Darby -- I think you missed a coupla' beats. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 56. "Janphi" Posted by mary99 on 20:43:55 4/02/2001 Thanks for checking back to find out. Glad that creep was convicted. Wanna be the one to start a Rex Krebs thread? You already laid out quite a bit of info on him on thread 2 but please go ahead and re-post it. Hopefully we can add to what we know about him when the penalty phase begins. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 59. "Holly" Posted by darby on 20:47:14 4/02/2001 What did I miss? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 64. "Another speculation" Posted by Imbackon on 21:35:17 4/02/2001 You might ask yourself, why did Imbackon bring up about Ak's actress stuff on the thread about the supposed fake 60 minutes show. Wellllllll, Could it be possible that the actress that AK was talking about with her hijacking and all, was the same person who was supposedly working for 60 minutes? I can't remember the dates of all the events, but seems to me it could have been around the same time frame no? Perhaps Ak, knew about the interview but is now saying that the interview was not negative in any way now. This is only for discussion, not meant to cause trouble. Imbackon [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 68. "Imbackon -" Posted by Holly on 22:10:41 4/02/2001 Interesting thought. The journalist/producer has writing credits starting in the 80s and as current as last month. I see no acting credits for this woman. And her name is unrecognizable -something supposedly not associated with the fading actress. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 69. "AK or anyone..." Posted by watchin' on 22:21:25 4/02/2001 have an answer to post #55? Thanks [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 71. "I'm curious" Posted by Edie Pratt on 22:56:10 4/02/2001 what would have happened if MW hadn't called to verify? Would this "producer" have carried out the sham, have her show up at some seedy motel with a "cameraman" in tow? How far could this have gone, and then what would the "producer" do with the product? Present it to 60 Minutes? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 81. "EdieP" Posted by Holly on 06:30:31 4/03/2001 I think 60 MINUTES/Mike Wallace never even knew about this effort. And any legit producer would have known how nationally uninteresting the subject was. This is just speculation. The Nancy Krebs information and claims had very limited exposure in the national media. The producer first called someone just outside the immediate group of people supporting Nancy and inquired what was new. It then evolved into a keen interest in Nancy Krebs. And shortly became a very intense campaign to get Nancy to LA and on video. It would not surprise me if some Boykin relatives or high school friends from 22+ years earlier were then going to offer that all of this is news to them and that Nancy is non-credible - and always was. Then I wondered if a GLOBE/tab piece would try a hotel room/video taped story like JB WITNESS A FRAUD! Maybe show stills of Nancy from the video. Then a pic of some paid Nancy acquaintance from high school who would describe teen parties or whatever to suggest a history of a "bad rep". Maybe some comments from an unnamed SLO law enforcement officer/friend of the infamous Sgt Bell, claiming Nancy loved to "cry wolfe". And of course the BPD had already provided a press statement terminating their investigation of her claims. Then the balance of the piece would probably detail the prolonged battle of the Fleet to oust Hunter from the JB case. Yawn. Maybe a $5000 paycheck for the producer/journalist. But hey, it might have paid the rent in the funky/artsy LA neighborhood. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 83. "hmmm" Posted by mary99 on 06:58:07 4/03/2001 Betcha there's a few here who would have shared their 'insights' for $. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 88. "Mary99" Posted by JR on 14:05:15 4/03/2001 Not me but I certainly could use the $$. Just rather collect those beer cans. ;O) [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 70. "re: actress-Allison Walker." Posted by Imbackon on 22:55:33 4/02/2001 I am the poster who came up with the allison walker name. Ak point blank said it was not her. I can't remember the show AW was on, but it was a pretty big one, so the washed up part didn't really fit anyway. I can't remember the details of how I came up with AW, but it was from one of the Posters (TAl?) where some other forum he said he was related to the actress from this show and he is also supposedly related to FW. My memory is fading here, because it is one of those things that falls into place over time, then gets moved out of main memory in order to make room for more important trivia in the old brain. But like I said the name was shot down by Ak. Why oh why must everyone be so cryptic. I still can't understand why the 60 minutes person if they are a public figure who interjected themselves in this case, cannot be named. Imbackon [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 75. "Imbackon" Posted by mary99 on 23:57:05 4/02/2001 Thanks very much for confirming that. Ally Walker was related to Richard Sprague, I think, who was related to Tal Jones. Tal Jones, Gemini, has been said to be the poster Pink Freud and also PooperScooper, and a couple other hats I can't recall. It's really just a coinkydink, i think, that Ally's name seemed to fit into the MW/actress rumor, but interesting nonetheless. FWIW, the name is not important (of the faux producer) the issue is hir motive and hir practice of the art of deception. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 72. "hi Imbackon" Posted by Gemini on 23:00:42 4/02/2001 Nice to see you. I'll bet I know how you came up with the name. If my memory isn't deserting me, Allison Walker ("The Profiler"?) is Pooper Scooper's niece. He's posted about her with great pride. At one time, I believe PS was being confused with TJ, but I'm reasonably sure he's a different guy altogether. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 74. "Gemini is correct" Posted by Imbackon on 23:56:25 4/02/2001 Yes, Gem that sounds about right. But wasn't it said that PS was also related to FW? Or is Tal related to FW, but tal is not poop (pun intended). Thanks for shaking the facts loose from the old memory tree. I wish 4 years ago I would have started a little card file with all the trivia indexed so I could go back and get the info. Imbackon, but leaving the net shortly. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 76. "both are true" Posted by mary99 on 00:05:42 4/03/2001 I think some cross-indexing of PS and TJ info prooved they are the same person. But I wasn't there, just read about it later. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 73. "Tempest in a teapot" Posted by FT on 23:10:31 4/02/2001 Having spent several hours today slogging through these 60 Minutes threads, I have an offer. No, a request. Please, somebody, give me the name and phone number of the would-be producer who called mame. Then, provide a list of your questions. I'll call, I'll ask, I'll get answers, and we'll put all this speculation to rest. For goodness' sake, why do you all persist in making mountains out of molehills? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 78. "FT." Posted by Holly on 05:54:58 4/03/2001 Thanks anyway. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 77. "FT" Posted by A.K. on 02:51:19 4/03/2001 That's what I call a productive post. Good for you, and thanks. And thanks to the crowd for correcting me on the "blue eyes." Mea culpa! (That's ONE, fly, LOL!) I'm happy to correct misinformation and really didn't remember typing that. 'Course, as errors go, it doesn't match up to maliciously smearing the reputation of the single most important witness in a murder case, but I'll never be able to compete with some of you in that regard. Someone mentioned that the Ramseys would probably choose mame over me, if they ever grant an Internet interview. I'll have to agree with that too. After all, they've always rewarded the people who help them. Besides, it's really not a ring I'd throw my hat into. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 79. "The Fleet" Posted by Holly on 05:58:46 4/03/2001 is hardly the single most important witness. But he is the single most vexing liability. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 80. "FT" Posted by Morgan on 06:19:01 4/03/2001 Why not call 60 Minutes and ask them which of their stories in the past 2 years they are most ashamed of, involving the unethical conduct of a journalist/freelance producer? I'm sure they're trying to forget their lapse of judgement, but you may get lucky. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 82. "WOW" Posted by RiverRat on 06:55:21 4/03/2001 What was in that drink you gave me Mary99? Kool-aide my arse, but nice try. And why are you refering to MP (Mystery Producer) as hir? Are you so elogantly trying to mumble that Jameson is behind all of this regurgitation? A.K. - I am that certain someone who put 50 bucks on Mame getting the interview with the scamseys, although, I am concerned about the overlap she will encounter with the new lawsuits flying, I mean what with her paying job taking a backseat to internet interviews, but in her famous words - Who Cares?! Holly - anyone can answer if they know but Holly does seem to be all knowing - how many months elapsed between MW coming forward and the Westword piece that let us know that Mame had provided the safe haven needed for MW while she was in Boulder? I laughed and laughed over that good one, remember the interview and the three-way phone call with Callie/Bridget/Nancy from a payphone while in actuality she was sitting next to Mame on the couch the whole time. On the small chance that the Whites have access to our little world here, please e-mail me at the addy listed below. (Side note to the perverts on board - NO, I am not horny or into young girls or pigs in general so leave me off your e-mail list today), I would be your SS anyday. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ EMAIL RiverRat ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 86. "AK" Posted by darby on 07:33:19 4/03/2001 You said: "'Course, as errors go, it doesn't match up to maliciously smearing the reputation of the single most important witness in a murder case, but I'll never be able to compete with some of you in that regard." I honestly don't think anyone tried to malicioiusly smear the reputation of the star Ramsey case witness (if he is that)--I know I didn't. HOWEVER, even if that were true, it wouldn't justify the scam pulled by the journalist. As I said in my first post on this thread, the scam could have had an unintended but devastating effect on the reputation of the Whites. Bottom line--there are very few circumstances under which lies and deception are helpful. That the perceived damage to the Whites caused by forum speculation about MW seems the greater evil to some, this does not justify using intentional fraud in an effort to "help the Whites." Indeed, the tactics used involved a lie that the Whites were proven scum by 60Minutes. I don't think the Whites would appreciate "help" of that sort. In fact, I think they ought to be told exactly what this journalist did. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 85. "Where was it said" Posted by Holly on 07:15:22 4/03/2001 that Nancy was on a pay phone? And if she was, then she prolly wasn't in CO. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 84. "RR" Posted by mary99 on 07:02:54 4/03/2001 'Hir' is a generic term for a sexless creature who is lower than dirt. Whatever the faux producer and the 'other' you refer to have in common is merely coincidence. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 87. "What" Posted by Morgan on 07:37:36 4/03/2001 possible illumination would talking to the scumbag freelance producer who tried to sucker Nancy? What would she say, Oh yes, I am an unethical scumbag and I lied when I said Mike Wallace was eagerly awaiting my interview with Nancy? Would she say, Yep, the posters who guessed I'm a poster or a friend of a poster at JW are right on the money! I DON'T THINK SO! What is to be gained by talking to this producer/journalist? Of course she will deny any wrongdoing and no doubt extoll her credentials. So? Now if FT talks to Mike Wallace and he explains his interest in a Nancy interview and all the dirt they have on FW, then that would be something. Why hasn't this producer turned her alledged information to the authorities? UH, because it's bullshit. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 89. "stealing stationary" Posted by Edie Pratt on 14:15:41 4/03/2001 reminds me of Sante Kimes, lol! She stole some letterhead stationary from a diplomat or senator, don't remember, but that's how she and her husband got into all the A list parties. It's an old gypsy trick, like getting old people to sign their homes over to them... [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ]