webbsleuths crime sleuthing community Crime Links: JonBenet Ramsey Darlie Routier Martha Moxley West Memphis Three [ Main ] [ New Topic ] [ How-To ] [ Search ] "Dixie's Child Stun Gunned II" Table of Contents ................................................................... Dixie's Child Stun Gunned II, Misty, 11:17:00, 8/12/2000 Dammit, maxi, 11:33:19, 8/12/2000, (#1) Misty..., twilight, 11:40:55, 8/12/2000, (#2) great site.., Nandee, 11:46:36, 8/12/2000, (#3) Twilight, Misty, 11:52:08, 8/12/2000, (#4) 10 minutes, TLynn, 12:10:15, 8/12/2000, (#5) Wow..., Willianna, 14:34:46, 8/12/2000, (#6) Misty, lance55, 14:39:53, 8/12/2000, (#7) Of Course..., La Contessa, 14:45:13, 8/12/2000, (#8) I hope she pays for what she d..., Dante, 15:11:44, 8/12/2000, (#9) Another point, cookie, 15:44:02, 8/12/2000, (#10) Getting facts straight, maxi, 15:52:59, 8/12/2000, (#11) Maxi, cookie, 16:17:29, 8/12/2000, (#12) Porno or not, starcrossed, 18:26:11, 8/12/2000, (#13) All the Possibilities, Willianna, 18:49:46, 8/12/2000, (#14) cookie, Webcat55, 19:01:31, 8/12/2000, (#16) Dixie, Blazeboy3, 18:54:37, 8/12/2000, (#15) Blazeboy3, ACandyRose, 20:51:23, 8/12/2000, (#18) Thanks, Blazeboy3, 21:43:07, 8/12/2000, (#20) Pathological Liar, Webcat55, 19:05:34, 8/12/2000, (#17) WebCat, KaaBooo, 21:25:06, 8/12/2000, (#19) "Facts?", Seajaye1, 22:48:00, 8/12/2000, (#22) Seajaye, maxi, 10:30:45, 8/13/2000, (#37) frustrating contradictions, maxi, 22:13:34, 8/12/2000, (#21) Maxi, all of the above is , Maikai, 23:02:10, 8/12/2000, (#23) You know,, Misty, 05:44:50, 8/13/2000, (#24) Starcrossed, lance55, 07:13:50, 8/13/2000, (#25) Lance, starcrossed, 07:41:15, 8/13/2000, (#27) Willianna, lance55, 07:29:15, 8/13/2000, (#26) Seajaye, lance55, 07:51:18, 8/13/2000, (#30) Lance re: facts, Seajaye1, 13:02:59, 8/13/2000, (#40) Wouldn't the Ramseys, CKJK, 07:44:29, 8/13/2000, (#29) Exhume, starcrossed, 07:43:36, 8/13/2000, (#28) WOW, sootygirl, 08:07:18, 8/13/2000, (#32) I couldn't, Blazeboy3, 16:58:07, 8/13/2000, (#42) Starcrossed, lance55, 08:01:22, 8/13/2000, (#31) Hmmmm, CKJK, 08:13:19, 8/13/2000, (#33) Exhumation? , Maikai, 08:33:02, 8/13/2000, (#34) Dixie sets the record straight, Maikai, 08:36:45, 8/13/2000, (#35) re:Dixie sets the record strai..., WiltonJr, 08:52:31, 8/13/2000, (#36) sooty..., wondering, 11:33:40, 8/13/2000, (#38) Lance, Willianna, 12:33:58, 8/13/2000, (#39) Willianna, lance55, 13:51:09, 8/13/2000, (#41) Wondering, sootygirl, 17:22:27, 8/13/2000, (#43) Anyone, Blazeboy3, 22:39:58, 8/13/2000, (#44) I can`t believe, zan, 00:31:11, 8/14/2000, (#45) Lance, Willianna, 06:29:51, 8/14/2000, (#47) Sooty, Misty, 06:25:14, 8/14/2000, (#46) Misty, lance55, 09:28:53, 8/14/2000, (#49) Lance?, starcrossed, 09:35:58, 8/14/2000, (#51) Lance, Misty, 09:31:04, 8/14/2000, (#50) Misty, lance55, 09:36:27, 8/14/2000, (#52) Stun Gun..., RickM, 07:35:18, 8/14/2000, (#48) Misty..., twilight, 10:29:24, 8/14/2000, (#54) Sooty, Midnight_Wolf, 10:23:31, 8/14/2000, (#53) Hey Twilight, Misty, 10:30:51, 8/14/2000, (#55) Hey Misty..., twilight, 21:39:23, 8/14/2000, (#57) Midnight, sootygirl, 21:31:44, 8/14/2000, (#56) Sootygirl #56, twilight, 09:42:47, 8/15/2000, (#59) Sooty, Webcat55, 09:02:46, 8/15/2000, (#58) twilight, Nandee, 10:09:54, 8/15/2000, (#60) Sooty...#43, wondering, 17:17:11, 8/15/2000, (#62) Twilight, sootygirl, 17:04:13, 8/15/2000, (#61) Correcting Misinformation -- J..., Misty, 06:48:08, 8/16/2000, (#63) ................................................................... "Dixie's Child Stun Gunned II" Posted by Misty on 11:17:00 8/12/2000 Include Original Message on Reply Please...can we continue discussion here... Maikai, I was fair to all parties. I always am. If this is nothing, then all is okay. Lance, have you ever looked into the laws behind child pornography? They are very specific. [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 1. "Dammit" Posted by maxi on 11:33:19 8/12/2000 Include Original Message on Reply I tried to combine the Dixie, part two I started with this one, and I lost posts from Makai and me. Makai, what was your post no. 46 about? I don't remember deleting anything, nor moving a post from you to the Parking Lot. One of Lance's posts disappeared earlier. This is getting spooky. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 2. "Misty..." Posted by twilight on 11:40:55 8/12/2000 Include Original Message on Reply I was posting this to the old thread, as I said I would, just as you guys were creating this one, so I will move it here... I support your actions in that I don't see that you had any other choice. However...I will say this... Ahhhhh. Very clever. I see it now. Be sure and keep track of which police department you sent the info to, so that when it is supeonaed, they will have to produce it. There will be so much controversy and red tape tied to these pictures, that when the prosecutor says...'but hey, wait a minute they're not real', s/he will be drowned out in a chorus of pornograph/child abuse issues. And the jury will be left with the impression that there are photos that prove the stun gun exists, and that the 'evil forces of justice' are once again trying to prevent their exposure to the light of day. Very clever. And I thought they'd pink-noted most of their spin team. Guess not. Now, I could be wrong, but it seems to me that all this is very convenient. I hope Misty has not been used to establish 'questionable' evidence for later use. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 3. "great site.." Posted by Nandee on 11:46:36 8/12/2000 Include Original Message on Reply Check this site. It has some very interesting information about the "stun gun" theory.... http://www.webbsleuthss.com/stungun.html [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 4. "Twilight" Posted by Misty on 11:52:08 8/12/2000 Include Original Message on Reply ...I do respect your opinion. Ya gotta remember, I have dealt with much worse. This one just fell into my lap. This one, I got covered. I welcome all rebuttal -- I hope there is an investigation into this. Hey, Twilight...do you play chess? [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 5. "10 minutes" Posted by TLynn on 12:10:15 8/12/2000 Include Original Message on Reply What stands out to me is, I remember the post saying something about the child being strongly affected for about 10 minutes. Then, the post mentions the stun gun marks were approximately 10 minutes old. So, instead of tending to the daughter, it appears she was running for a camera. Do I remember the post correctly re: the ten minutes? [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 6. "Wow..." Posted by Willianna on 14:34:46 8/12/2000 Include Original Message on Reply This stun gun incident is off the wall. I realize that coincidences happen, but here's something to consider. How many people comprise Webbsleuths, Justice Watch, Cybersleuths, Delphi(I hope I have that name right) etc.? How many people post at Jameson's? Of those people who post at Jameson's forum, how many have actively done research on the effects of stun guns on children? Now, it may be a HUGE coincidence, but the fact that Dixie's child would be the "chosen one" is quite odd. I'm not a statistician, but the odds don't look good to me. From another angle, did Dixie know the potentially disasterous effects a stun gun could have on a child? Dixie did her research, folks: http://www.crosswinds.net/~jameson245/37p/37page13.html#33 33 . "Stun3 - emergency medical treatment including cardiac intervention?" Posted by Dixie on Jun-19-00 at 08:36 PM (EST) Can it cause unconsciousness? It can do worse than that. Title Electric shock, Part III: Deliberately applied electric shocks and the treatment of electric injuries. Author Fish R Address Gibson Community Hospital, Illinois. Source J Emerg Med, 1993 Sep, 11:5, 599-603 Abstract Earlier parts of this series have discussed the physics, pathophysiology, and nature of electric injury. This part will discuss deliberately applied electric shocks and the treatment of electric injuries. Electric shocks are deliberately applied to persons during electroshock therapy and with stun guns, shock batons, and electric cattle prods. Electric injuries, whether a complication of deliberate electric shock or due to accidental injury, should be treated to preserve cardiac and respiratory function and to prevent further tissue damage. Safe extrication at the scene, rapid triage, and emergency medical treatment are discussed. Language of Publication English (emphasis mine) [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 7. "Misty" Posted by lance55 on 14:44:23 8/12/2000 Include Original Message on Reply NOTE: Last edited on 14:44:23, 8/12/2000 NOTE: Last edited on 14:42:36, 8/12/2000 Dixie's Child Stun Gunned II" Posted by Misty on 11:17:00 8/12/2000 Lance, have you ever looked into the laws behind child pornography? They are very specific. No, I have not. I am not interested in child porn. It does not turn me on, and I get suspicious of people who do get fixated, and asphyxiated, on it. If it is a crime, if the picture she posted is a violation of a law, then give Dixie the Maxi-mum punishment under the law. String her up by her thumbs, run bamboo shoots under her fingernails and light them on fire, whatever; but please do not do it until after she has been convicted in a court of law. I don't care what happens to Dixie, she can go to Hell and keep it warm for me; but that is another story and this is another case. This message board is about the JonBenet Ramsey murder case, and I am not just whistling Dixie when I say the only thing relavant HERE is that the STUNN GUN LEFT MARKS, JUST LIKE LOU SAID! (Oh, I wish I were in Dixie...) Jez, now someone will probably take that as a nasty pornographic statement. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 8. "Of Course..." Posted by La Contessa on 14:45:13 8/12/2000 Include Original Message on Reply Downs Syndrome. Thanks for stun-gunning the Contessa's synapses. Too many celebrations, lately, too little brain left. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 9. "I hope she pays for what she did" Posted by Dante on 15:11:44 8/12/2000 Include Original Message on Reply Misty, you did a good job on the Dixie stuff. What she did is sick. If her child was truly stun gunned, she should have got her butte (excuse the pun) down to the emergency room with her child and had her checked out. And I agree, what's wrong with her head? getting her camera out instead of checking out her child. Hey, priorities are priorities. Unless of course, she's just full of bull****, then we need a snow plow, and I am talking big snow plow. This is truly disgusting and SICK if you ask me. Misty, thanks for laying the truth right out there on the table. SICKENING!! And the neighbor? what a coincidence! a neighbor who is a cop plus a neighbor who is a pediatrician with a crash cart!! ahh come ON!!! how gullible are we supposed to be?? I hope she gets busted for this one. And Sparrow, what a hero. She stood up for what was right, and was nice and diplomatic about it. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 10. "Another point" Posted by cookie on 15:44:02 8/12/2000 Include Original Message on Reply Another thing to consider when discussing whether or not a doctor should have been consulted is the possibility of a head injury associated with the fall. I don't know whether she "dropped like a rock" as someone had reported or not, but any time a person has a loss of consciousness and falls, there is a possibility of a head injury. This is why we were taught in EMT training to always assume that there has been a head injury and to treat the person as if there were. Simple fainting is not dangerous at all, but the injuries that can be sustained if the head strikes anything, including the ground, can be deadly. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 11. "Getting facts straight" Posted by maxi on 15:52:59 8/12/2000 Include Original Message on Reply Only 40-46% of DS children have congenital heart defects. Seizure disorder occur in some DS children, but not in the majority. Pornography is usually defined as any sexually explicit writing, picture, or other material intended to arouse sexual desire. The old court rulings had the caveat about "socially reedeming value" and the new ones have the "community standards" phrase. The US govt defines child pornography as that which shows "sexually explicit conduct", actual or simulated. Such conduct is: "1. sexual intercourse, includes genital-genital, oral-genital, anal- genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex; 2. bestiality; 3. masturbation; 4. sadistic or masochistic abuse; or 5. lascivious exhibition of the genitals or public area of any person" Different states have extended this definition, with varying results when their laws were tested in the courts. Does anyone here honestly think Dixie posted the pic of her child's bottom as a "lascivious exhibition"? Do we think her intent was to "arouse sexual desire" in posters and lurkers on jams' forum? Some of us may think that Dixie used bad judgement in posting the picture because it might violate her child's sense of modesty or because a passing pedophile might get turned on by the blurry image of a child's bottom. Others think Dixie is exploiting her child by making up a story or by using her child's injury to support the stun gun theory. Like Patsy Ramsey, Dixie may be guilty of bad taste, but bad taste isn't a crime. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 12. "Maxi" Posted by cookie on 16:17:29 8/12/2000 Include Original Message on Reply Thank you very much for the information, and your fair point of view. I didn't see the pictures and didn't read a lot of the conversation about this incident because I only post on this forum. I do agree with what you said in your post above. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 13. "Porno or not" Posted by starcrossed on 18:26:11 8/12/2000 Include Original Message on Reply Pornographic picture or not. I think many of us are upset by the account that Dixie has given. Some posters have accepted it as the truth. Some people have not. I look at the things that Dixie has posted about herself in the past that are unbelievable (The PHD that couldn't have happened, JAG ETC. ETC) and have come to the conclusion that her account is lacking crediblility. Her story grew bigger by the minute. I am so happy that Misty contacted the police, so that they could check on the welfare of Madison. A child is involved here! I have a hard time believing a 10 year old girl would feel comfortable bending over for her mother so she could get a good picture to show on the internet... within 10 minutes of being zapped no less. I don't care what parts the picture didn't show. The fact that it showed skin IN THAT AREA would be enough to humiliate any child her age. The picture may not be pornagraphic (I don't know I haven't seen it!) I'm not about to take Jameson's word that it wasn't. However the account in itself Dixie gives definetly needs to be checked by authorities. Lance, I suggest if you want to see a copy of this picture so bad, why don't you write to Jameson or even Dixie herself? I'm sure Dixie would love to talk and maybe even share the picture of the stun gun marks. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 14. "All the Possibilities" Posted by Willianna on 18:56:01 8/12/2000 Include Original Message on Reply NOTE: Last edited on 18:56:01, 8/12/2000 First of all, I'd like to thank Misty for acting in the best interest of Madison... The matter needed to be looked into for the safety of the little girl involved. If this was an accidental incident, no harm will be done in the long run from an investigation. On the other hand, if this proves to be a hoax (and we may never know for sure) have Dixie and Jameson (READ Ramsey) convinced us that the marks on "Madison's body" equated with the marks on JonBenet's body? Will this add to the "reasonable doubt pile?" IMO, only an exhumation would have proved the stun gun theory beyond a doubt...and we know who said, "No." [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 16. "cookie" Posted by Webcat55 on 19:01:31 8/12/2000 Include Original Message on Reply The EMS in our area follow strict guidelines for injuries. If someone falls by "dropping like a rock", they have to use c-spine precautions in case of c-spine injury when the head hits the ground. So there is not just head injury to consider, there is c-spine injury to consider too. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 15. "Dixie" Posted by Blazeboy3 on 18:57:43 8/12/2000 Include Original Message on Reply NOTE: Last edited on 18:57:43, 8/12/2000 Being unfamiliar with her previous comments (only been involved in this for a week) and missing the photos, my intuition tells me she meant no harm to anyone involved. Is is not true that the body is pretty powerful and will try to heal itself given the time to. I wonder if she was using her motherly instinct. I don't know the answer to that; still have an open mind while reading all info, and learning. I hope that we all try to stay focused on the goal here. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 18. "Blazeboy3" Posted by ACandyRose on 20:51:23 8/12/2000 Include Original Message on Reply You wrote: 15. "Dixie" Posted by Blazeboy3 on 18:57:43 8/12/2000 Include Original Message on Reply NOTE: Last edited on 18:57:43, 8/12/2000 Being unfamiliar with her previous comments (only been involved in this for a week) and missing the photos, my intuition tells me she meant no harm to anyone involved. (snip) I hope that we all try to stay focused on the goal here." ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ In all due respect to be allowed your own opinion, may I suggest that you become familiar with Dixie's previous history for making up stories and her comments regarding her stun gun research regarding small children before you search your intuition to determine that no harm was done to anyone involved. And as far as staying focused on the goal. That is exactly what Misty is doing by reporting this incident to determine the safty of a small child who was reported as being zapped with a stun gun where the mother of that child took videos of the child's naked rear end and posted them on the Internet forum to obviously prove a stun gun theory in direct relation to the JonBenet Ramsey murder investigation. I would say we are right on target with the focus of the subject at hand. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 20. "Thanks" Posted by Blazeboy3 on 16:44:22 8/13/2000 Include Original Message on Reply NOTE: Last edited on 16:44:22, 8/13/2000 NOTE: Last edited on 21:45:31, 8/12/2000 NOTE: Last edited on 21:44:07, 8/12/2000 for your reply. I appreciate all the help I can get. I've read some of her posts, but haven't gotten to the ones your relating too yet. I have no doubt that you are concerned about the safety of her child and did what you FELT you had to do, just as I FELT (not determined) that no harm was meant--I see how it is connected. You have a good heart. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 17. "Pathological Liar" Posted by Webcat55 on 19:05:34 8/12/2000 Include Original Message on Reply PhD wannabe Dixie has proven that she is a pathological liar during the entire time she has been on the forums. It would not surprise me if she made up the entire story and used some makeup or paint to create the stun gun marks. She wanted to show her point that stun gun marks are visible despite what experts say, and I think that was her complete mission. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 19. "WebCat" Posted by KaaBooo on 21:25:06 8/12/2000 Include Original Message on Reply As much as I agree that this incident was tasteless, I must say that according to this test conducted by Paktronics on grown men , atun guns DO leave marks. Who says they don't? Quote: Skin - All twenty subjects exhibited the typical "signature response", specifically a punctate reddening of the skin at 10 minutes post shock limited to a 3-5mm diameter circle directly under each probe. Five out of 20 showed small wheals at the stimulus site. All of these hive-like elevations had disappeared at 1 to 2 hours. Only one case, a man of mediterranean ancestry, showed residual markings at 24 hours and these were gone in 2 days. No burns or other permanent markings were ever noted. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 22. ""Facts?"" Posted by Seajaye1 on 22:48:00 8/12/2000 Include Original Message on Reply Maxi wrote: Only 40-46% of DS children have congenital heart defects. Seizure disorder occur in some DS children, but not in the majority." Since I was the one who posted about heart and neurological problems (never said seizures...maybe someone else did, though), I wish to respond to these facts... First of all...numbers mean nothing to me in this case...although the statistics I've read put the heart problems at up to 50%...that is a *large* percentage! I didn't quote any numbers, just said many kids with DS have heart problems, so I do not feel I was out of line in saying that--it is true. It is a "fact." Perhaps Madison has heart problems, perhaps not...if she were MY child, I would have taken her to the hospital regardless...I would have taken a *healthy* child to the hospital if they were shocked...I'd take my DOG to the vet if it was shocked! Neurological problems does not mean just "seizures"...this encompasses a large realm of disorders, including neuromuscular disorders, mental retardation, even ADD...so, like I said, I never mentioned the word seizures...but you can bet your boots all DS kids have some type of neurological involvement. DS or not...a child hit with a stun gun and "out of it" for 10 minutes needs to be seen in an ER. A child that fell "like a rock" has potential for head injury, spinal injury...The way it was described, she fell HARD. "Home crash carts" do not exist...I was a nurse for 20 years, I believe I learned *something* in all that time...but as a Mom, my common sense would have told me "Get this child checked, NOW" I would never, ever compromise the well-being of my son. Ever. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 37. "Seajaye" Posted by maxi on 10:30:45 8/13/2000 Include Original Message on Reply I mentioned seizures specifically because people with seizure disorders are listed as among those who may encounter complications from being stunned Children with Down Syndrome do not have an increased incidence of seizures. Adults with Down Syndrome do. The only other common specific neurologic difference (excluding developmental delay) in DS people that I am aware of is low muscle tone. I'd have had my kid to an er in a New York minute if she had been stunned. But each parent must decide for him/herself the pros and cons of a hospital trip. Dixie's child was seen by a doc. If Dixie had taken her to the er, an incident report would have been filed, which might have triggered an investigation. That could have traumatized the child more than the stun if she go the impression she had caused trouble. Bottom line is: we weren't there and are just Sunday morning quarterbacking here. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 21. "frustrating contradictions" Posted by maxi on 22:15:17 8/12/2000 Include Original Message on Reply NOTE: Last edited on 22:15:17, 8/12/2000 One stun gun expert says that stun guns leave no marks. Another says they leave burns. Another says they leave punctures. Another says they disrupt the blood vessels under the skin but leave no abrasion or burn. Yet another describes "wheals" (hive-like marks). It's no wonder we're all so confused about the possibility of a stun gun having been used on JBR. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 23. "Maxi, all of the above is " Posted by Maikai on 23:02:10 8/12/2000 Include Original Message on Reply true. It depends on the stun gun. I think it's the taser that has those pointed tips that come out, that can cause an abrasion. On a living person, the stun gun can leave marks. Lou Smit was smart enough to catch it, and THEN do the proper research. He apparently looked at a lot of pictures....consulted with the experts in the field. I tend to burn my hand taking something out of the broiler....the contact with the coils leave a burn in the shape of the coil. It's only logical that where the voltage comes out of the prongs, it could cause at the least burn marks. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 24. "You know," Posted by Misty on 05:44:50 8/13/2000 Include Original Message on Reply since I first started reading at the forums, I've come across some pretty bizarre tales. We all have and we usually just read them, shake our heads and scroll past. What Dixie did to me just reaches to the bottom of the bottomfeeder pile in regard for other human beings. Even if this incident occurred exactly like she said, to then use her daughter in photos to further a point is tasteless. I don't think the pics would be considered nor should be considered child porn. I very much doubt that Dixie is a c.m. However, to exploit her child for the sake of conversation is just well below my standards. I'll call this morning and see whether I can get the details of what happened. To Jameson: Be very careful who you might gave my personal information out to. The police in Dixie's area have my name etc. I did not make an anonymous call. At this point, that is all that needs to have that information. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 25. "Starcrossed" Posted by lance55 on 07:13:50 8/13/2000 Include Original Message on Reply Star said: "Lance, I suggest if you want to see a copy of this picture so bad, why don't you write to Jameson or even Dixie herself? I'm sure Dixie would love to talk and maybe even share the picture of the stun gun marks. Hey, man, I have no desire to see any kids naked butt; and I do not want anyone sending me any pictures that might be considered kiddy porn. I will take everyone's word that the pictures exist and that they SHOW THE STUNN GUN MARKS, LIKE LOU SAID. Of course we have Misty's own words above which say she does not think the pictures were porn, and since she is the only one who has seen them, we are gonna have to take her word for it. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 27. "Lance" Posted by starcrossed on 07:41:15 8/13/2000 Include Original Message on Reply I am confident that Jameson sent the picture to Lou Smit. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 26. "Willianna" Posted by lance55 on 07:29:15 8/13/2000 Include Original Message on Reply 14. "All the Possibilities" .... On the other hand, if this proves to be a hoax (and we may never know for sure) have Dixie and Jameson (READ Ramsey) convinced us that the marks on "Madison's body" equated with the marks on JonBenet's body? Will this add to the "reasonable doubt pile?" With all the doubt that already exists, did they need to create more? I have seen this FEAR expressed by many police supporters over the months, a FEAR that reasonable doubt was being deliberately created by Team Ramsey. Now I realize the pile of FEAR is too high for anyone to have created it. So was this FEAR ever reasonable on the part of the police, or was it paranoia all along, police paranoia designed to block recognition of their own FEAR: that they might be chasing the wrong Killas, a FEAR no one inside could ever admit publically, or even to themselves? >IMO, only an exhumation would have proved the stun gun theory beyond a doubt...and we know who said, "No." Yes, we do know who said No. It was the BPD, and they never asked the Ramseys, nor did they have to ask, as documented in Thomas' book. And the reason BPD or DA decided not to exhume after they had cleared away all obstacles was because the experts told them there was no evidence left which could help the police. And I think once again the BPD decided not to exhume because of the FEAR that the only chance of any evidence left was that there was stunn gun marks on JonBenet's body, which would have been the final blow to the competence of the police. They could not afford to take that chance. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 30. "Seajaye" Posted by lance55 on 07:51:18 8/13/2000 Include Original Message on Reply 22. ""Facts?"" It is a "fact." Perhaps Madison has heart problems, perhaps not...if she were MY child, I would have taken her to the hospital regardless...I would have taken a *healthy* child to the hospital if they were shocked...I'd take my DOG to the vet if it was shocked! And then the gang of well-meaning, but incompetent, social engineers who post here would accuse you of Munchhausen, like they did because Patsy took JonBenet to her doctor 30+ times. You can't win, and neither could Patsy. American mothers are caught in a double bind where any mother can be trashed no matter what she does. I think it is a game the American government plays to insure that all mothers remain on the side of, and responsive to, the needs of the government. The children are merely the tools of control, the means to an end, they are not the real concern. And in their incompetent zeal to be the mother and father of ever kid, the government is responsible for the greatest abuse, even death, of some American children. For an example, I give you the 17 children who were burned to death at Waco, in aggressive actions initiated by the US Government, supposedly to protect those "abused and molested" kids of David Koresh, even though abuse and molestation is not a federal offense. Here is my summary in my words of what happened, leaving out the details in between: "They are molesting the children! Quick, burn the kids to death." >DS or not...a child hit with a stun gun and "out of it" for 10 minutes needs to be seen in an ER. A child that fell "like a rock" has potential for head injury, spinal injury...The way it was described, she fell HARD. "Home crash carts" do not exist... Don't doctors carry a black bag anymore? >I was a nurse for 20 years, I believe I learned *something* in all that time...but as a Mom, my common sense would have told me "Get this child checked, Dixie said a doctor did check the child. >NOW" I would never, ever compromise the well-being of my son. Ever. So are you trying to over rule the decision of a doctor? And tell us we better follow the the "better" expert advice of a lowly nurse? [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 40. "Lance re: facts" Posted by Seajaye1 on 13:02:59 8/13/2000 Include Original Message on Reply I wrote: "...but as a Mom, my common sense would have told me "Get this child checked, NOW" I would never, ever compromise the well-being of my son. Ever." Note...I said *as a Mom*...didn't say "as a nurse" or "as a medical profesional"...said "as a Mom", so you can twist my words all you want, doesn't change what I wrote. Comparing a "black bag" to a crash cart? LOL! You're funny. Really, you are! Oh, btw, I am no longer a 'lowly' nurse. Got in to the IT business, networking administration...much more moola, plus no clueless Doctors and managed care crap to deal with. :) HAND! [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 29. "Wouldn't the Ramseys" Posted by CKJK on 07:44:29 8/13/2000 Include Original Message on Reply have also had the option to exhume? John didn't want that, but he did have the option. It could have put the issue to rest, but NOBODY did it. So the issue is still debatable. We now know that some stun guns do make marks because a wonderful physicist/JAG/bodybuilder just happened to have a daughter who was stunned by a neighbor boy, whose mother just happened to be a doctor with a crash cart at home and a cop and a pediatrican who just happened to have the day off for neighbors. So the neighbor's where this happened, calls to tell her her daughter has been stunned and dropped like a rock for 10 minutes and this wonderful sleuth (who says she also took the video 10 minutes after the incident) runs around looking for her camera expecting a pat on the back from fellow sleuths. Whether the picture is considered porn or not, it is certainly tasteless and makes one wonder what really happened. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 28. "Exhume" Posted by starcrossed on 07:43:36 8/13/2000 Include Original Message on Reply Certainly John Ramsey with his team of experts, and with Smit the ace on Stun guns on his side could have and would have exhumed JonBenet's body. I find it hard to believe that Smit did not suggest this to Ramsey. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 32. "WOW" Posted by sootygirl on 08:07:18 8/13/2000 Include Original Message on Reply Whats going on here? So many candidates jockying for the position of 'morality monitor'.... All who saw the pic agreed it was not pornographic, so whats the problem? Would you have all been so vocal if Dixie had said she took the child to the hospital? Who are you to judge? Dixie is her mother...Dixie would know how best to handle the situation. If your so concerned about ill treated children, why are you spending so much time in here? Why dont you give your fingers a rest, venture outside and go visit your nearest orphanage and try to bring a bit of joy to those children all over the country who dont get a fraction of the love that I'm sure Dixie's child gets. Get over it and get a life! [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 42. "I couldn't" Posted by Blazeboy3 on 16:58:07 8/13/2000 Include Original Message on Reply have said what you said better. Good job! It makes you wonder why things are they way they are. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 31. "Starcrossed" Posted by lance55 on 08:01:22 8/13/2000 Include Original Message on Reply >Certainly John Ramsey with his team of >experts, and with Smit the ace >on Stun guns on his side >could have and would have exhumed >JonBenet's body. I find it >hard to believe that Smit did >not suggest this to Ramsey. Why exhume? they already had the autopsy photos where Lou saw the stun gun marks. Now that is the final definitive evidence, better than anything that could have been exhumed from a decaying corpse. So at that point, for the Ramseys, the best evidence showed there WAS STUNN GUN MARKS OF JONBENET. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 33. "Hmmmm" Posted by CKJK on 08:13:19 8/13/2000 Include Original Message on Reply Why the police didn't exhume according to Lance: "And I think once again the BPD decided not to exhume because of the FEAR that the only chance of any evidence left was that there was stunn gun marks on JonBenet's body, which would have been the final blow to the competence of the police. They could not afford to take that chance." Why the Ramseys didn't exhume according to Lance: "Why exhume? they already had the autopsy photos where Lou saw the stun gun marks. Now that is the final definitive evidence, better than anything that could have been exhumed from a decaying corpse." The police are afraid and the Ramseys didn't need to (even though it could have helped clear them) [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 34. "Exhumation? " Posted by Maikai on 08:33:02 8/13/2000 Include Original Message on Reply Clearly those that think it's an easy decision to just have a loved one's body exhumed have never been faced with that decision. It's an awful thought, to have the body disturbed again....to have the grave dug up, and the coffin yanked out with a crane, and the body taken out and disturbd. The police/DA could have made that decision--they had that right under the law. It is unreasonable to think a family should make that decision. With all the technology we have today, there's no reason the photos taken at autopsy can't give a fairly good indication that a stun gun was used. Proof conclusive of that wouldn't make any difference to those that want to continue to think the Ramseys are involved----they'd say they got rid of the stun gun....just like the cord and tape. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 35. "Dixie sets the record straight" Posted by Maikai on 08:37:25 8/13/2000 Include Original Message on Reply NOTE: Last edited on 08:37:25, 8/13/2000 http://161.58.21.56/dcf/Coffee/592.html#14 [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 36. "re:Dixie sets the record straight" Posted by WiltonJr on 08:52:31 8/13/2000 Include Original Message on Reply And she did a very poor job at it. Her story is one of the most feeble lines of dribble that I've ever read. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 38. "sooty..." Posted by wondering on 11:33:40 8/13/2000 Include Original Message on Reply /All who saw the pic agreed it was not pornographic, so whats the problem?/ Really?...seems I've read different, I did get to see the picture yesterday and I have to agree...tasteless and uncalled for. Taking a picture of a few marks is one thing, showing most of the body of a naked child is another. Now you can twist that anyway you or anyone else wants..but it's wrong and you know it. I don't give a damn what country you're from....it was wrong regardless. BJ and Misty...excellent points. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 39. "Lance" Posted by Willianna on 16:18:06 8/13/2000 Include Original Message on Reply NOTE: Last edited on 16:18:06, 8/13/2000 You must be misinformed. John Ramsey, stated that "as her father" he could not bring himself to exhume JonBenet's body. This is a matter of public record. Perhaps is was John Ramsey who was afraid...something to think about. Does reasonable doubt frighten me sometimes? You bet it does...because sometimes Lance, it means a person who is guilty gets off scott free. Reasonable doubt is about the letter of the law and not always about guilt or innocence. Why else would O.J. Simpson be toting golf clubs and raising children?? [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 41. "Willianna" Posted by lance55 on 13:51:09 8/13/2000 Include Original Message on Reply >You must be misinformed. I probably am misinformed about many things but not about who decided not to exhume. Read Thomas' account in his book. It was NOT the Ramseys, and they had nothing to say about it. It was legally set up, and they had a backhoe ready when a consensus of opinion by BPD and DA decided not to take the chance that any evience would not support their theory. >John Ramsey, > stated that "as her father" >he could not bring himself to >exhume JonBenet's body. This is >a matter of public record. So what, that was his decision as a private citizen, a father; but the public decision was not his to make. We discussed this and put it to rest on an archived thread about a month ago. There were quotes from Thomas' book. So if I am misinformed, Thomas was the one who misinformed all of us. >Does reasonable >doubt frighten me sometimes? You bet >it does...because sometimes Lance, it means >a person who is guilty gets >off scott free. And that scares you more than convicting, punishing, maybe executing an innocent person? If so, your need to punish is sick. If the state executes one innocent person, the state becomes a criminal, a murderer; and I do not care if all the "i" are dotted and all the "t' crossed and all the appeals rubber stamped with "execute him whether he did it or not!" The grave danger for the state in executing even one innocent person is that the criminal state has then justified a revolution, and justified revolutions usually mean death to the criminals in power who would even take the chance of executing innocent people to create the fear designed to make The People submit to the authority of the state. The concept of reasonable doubt is a safety net for the state, not for the criminals! If you take away that safety net, even the US Government will fall when the time is right; and hanging OJ is not worth that price! >Reasonable doubt >is about the letter of the >law and not about guilt or >innocence. No, it is about guilt and innocence; and about the extremely incompetent system which allows even the possibility to convict innocent people. >Simpson be toting golf clubs and >raising children?? Because someone tried to plant evidence, lie under oath, and got caught! The fact OJ is free is a testament to what is right about our system. The system worked, even if the criminal cops failed to convict. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 43. "Wondering" Posted by sootygirl on 17:22:27 8/13/2000 Include Original Message on Reply Was there any genitalia showing? was there even any crack showing? Wasnt the pic of her hip? My god woman, if your so offended by naked flesh...dont turn on your TV, dont open a magazine, dont surf the net and never never ever go to the beach! Best that you stay holed up in your own little morality bubble so as not to be offended by the real world! The only thing that this thread has proven is that be borgs have reached the bottom of the barrell.... [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 44. "Anyone" Posted by Blazeboy3 on 22:40:29 8/13/2000 Include Original Message on Reply NOTE: Last edited on 22:40:29, 8/13/2000 borne w/clothes on? Probably because the sole has no color. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 45. "I can`t believe" Posted by zan on 00:31:11 8/14/2000 Include Original Message on Reply ...what I am reading. I saw this topic yesterday and just scrolled past it, because I saw "Dixie...her child...stun gun" and thought, oh no, some poster has lost her mind, purchased a stun gun, and shot her child....unbelievable!! So, today I decided to read it, and my first hunch was right. Her story is unbelievable, and undebatable...I hope she`s learned a lesson by being reported. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 47. "Lance" Posted by Willianna on 06:29:51 8/14/2000 Include Original Message on Reply you write: And that scares you more than convicting, punishing, maybe executing an innocent person? If so, your need to punish is sick. If the state executes one innocent person, the state becomes a criminal, a murderer; and I do not care if all the "i" are dotted and all the "t' crossed and all the appeals rubber stamped with "execute him whether he did it or not!" My answer is no. That's why if I was ever called to be a juror I would vote within the letter of the law. That would be my duty as a juror and I would take that duty seriously. It would mean if I was 99% sure a person was guilty I would have to vote, "not guilty," for that 1% of reasonable doubt...but I assure you I would not have another peaceful night's sleep. As I said before, reasonable doubt sometimes scares me...and to bring my post back to topic, the thought that some might be trying to fabricate "evidence" of reasonable doubt gets me even more worried. I would be equally worried about fabricated evidence from both sides of the fence. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 46. "Sooty" Posted by Misty on 06:26:43 8/14/2000 Include Original Message on Reply NOTE: Last edited on 06:26:43, 8/14/2000 There were two pictures. One is a blurry cropped photo of could be stun gun marks. I honestly can't tell that good. The picture is so blurry. The first picture looks to be a person (child?) with long blonde hair (waist length) on all fours. The back-end is toward the camera and it looks like we're seeing bu*t cheek, not a hip -- but the pictures are blurry. Now, by some standards, yep, we got a problem here. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 49. "Misty" Posted by lance55 on 09:32:17 8/14/2000 Include Original Message on Reply NOTE: Last edited on 09:32:17, 8/14/2000 > There were two pictures. >One is a blurry cropped photo >of could be stun gun marks. > I honestly can't tell that >good. Then, it looks to me like you have to post the photos so the rest of us can see and judge for ourselves. Unless, of course, your purpose is to obscure this "evidence" of stunn gun marks? "Trust us. We are honorable people." Those words were spoken to Congress by a Dirctor of Central Intelligence, just after the CIA was exposed by a former DCI, William Casey, doing all kinds of ugly criminal things in every corner of the world, including America. Now, do I hear you saying "Trust Misty, she is honerable?" And if so, do you think I am going to buy that anymore than I, or Congress, bought the self-serving CIA prapaganda statement? > > Now, by some standards, >yep, we got a problem here. > Definitley you have a problem, because if you do not now post the pictures, YOU have created reasonable doubt. so it looks to me like YOU have put yourself in a position where you must now choose the lesser of two evils. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 51. "Lance?" Posted by starcrossed on 09:35:58 8/14/2000 Include Original Message on Reply Lance above you posted that "Hey, man, I have no desire to see any kids naked butt; and I do not want anyone sending me any pictures that might be considered kiddy porn. I will take everyone's word that the pictures exist and that they SHOW THE STUNN GUN MARKS, LIKE LOU SAID." So... do you, or do you not want to see the picture? I don't think Misty is "obstructing justice", she is doing what she thinks is right. I'm sure Smit already has a copy of the photo. Is she obstructing justice by not showing US the photo?? Hardly. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 50. "Lance" Posted by Misty on 09:31:04 8/14/2000 Include Original Message on Reply Why don't you just meet me over in the Parking Lot and we can duke it out. What I have to say to you Maxi is just going to put there anyways. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 52. "Misty" Posted by lance55 on 09:36:27 8/14/2000 Include Original Message on Reply I will meet you in the Parking Lot, or any church where we can duke it out. I do not fear a battle of wits with any girl. Fools rush in where angels fear to tread, and I am foolish enough to get into it with a bright female. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 48. "Stun Gun..." Posted by RickM on 07:35:18 8/14/2000 Include Original Message on Reply Well I for one dont buy the stun gun theory. That JBR was shot with one. What I dont get is that after reading the autopsy I dont recall mention of 'Stun Gun' markings. There may have been marking but I see no 'PROOF' it was a stun gun. I mean I have kids and they come home from school and at play with scratches, cuts and bug bites. So how can one post here that there is proof of stun gun marks. I understand perhaps one may speculate the marks found were made by a stun gun but thats far from being proof....JMO [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 54. "Misty..." Posted by twilight on 10:29:24 8/14/2000 Include Original Message on Reply Life IS a game of chess !! [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 53. "Sooty" Posted by Midnight_Wolf on 10:23:31 8/14/2000 Include Original Message on Reply Pornographic or not. What parent in their right mind takes a picture of their injured child and posts it on the internet? You can make all the excuses you like but this is NOT RIGHT! [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 55. "Hey Twilight" Posted by Misty on 10:30:51 8/14/2000 Include Original Message on Reply I'll trade ya my copyright queen decoder ring to know how you made that face.... [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 57. "Hey Misty..." Posted by twilight on 21:42:29 8/14/2000 Include Original Message on Reply NOTE: Last edited on 21:42:29, 8/14/2000 Call Ivy. She taught me how, but right at the moment I am borrowing her faces, because I can't get my own face storer going. But I'm trying and if I can get it working I'll let you in on all the secrets. I can let you in on one right away. :::Twilight is technologically challenged::: ...and I don't say this in a nice way. edited to add nothing. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 56. "Midnight" Posted by sootygirl on 21:31:44 8/14/2000 Include Original Message on Reply What the hell does it have to do with you or anyone else in this forum, what others choose to do on the internet? Correct me if I'm wrong, but isnt this forum about JBR and who killed her? If other peoples habits bother you so much, go to your search engine...type in 'moral crusade' and go join a forum that thrives on throwing stones.... [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 59. "Sootygirl #56" Posted by twilight on 09:42:47 8/15/2000 Include Original Message on Reply You forgot to post your url. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 58. "Sooty" Posted by Webcat55 on 09:02:46 8/15/2000 Include Original Message on Reply You should probably realize that there are very few new things to hash around in the way of clues or information in the Ramsey case. If you weren't such a "newby" to the case and forums, you would realize this. You need to consider that the majority of posters have been here and followed the case for at least a couple of years. For instance,posting and reading about the basement window does lose it's thrill when it has been rehashed for the 500th time. So therefore, you have no right to criticize someone for posting a little interesting diversion once in a while. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 60. "twilight" Posted by Nandee on 10:09:54 8/15/2000 Include Original Message on Reply OK.... go over to the How To thread..... and spill your guts...... [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 62. "Sooty...#43" Posted by wondering on 17:17:11 8/15/2000 Include Original Message on Reply /Was there any genitalia showing? was there even any crack showing? Wasnt the pic of her hip?/ I saw the kneeling on all fours, thank you. / My god woman, if your so offended by naked flesh...dont turn on your TV, dont open a magazine, dont surf the net and never never ever go to the beach!/ Naked flesh doesn't offend me, I shower often..*S*...with the events of this case over the years, this one takes the prize. / Best that you stay holed up in your own little morality bubble so as not to be offended by the real world!/ The real world like yours? Morality bubble? *LOL*...which one is that, where I find offense at the mistreatment of children or where one ignores it? / The only thing that this thread has proven is that be borgs have reached the bottom of the barrell..../ The Borgs didn't post the picture. [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 61. "Twilight" Posted by sootygirl on 17:04:13 8/15/2000 Include Original Message on Reply any crusade I joined would be in the interests of the innocent. I doubt you would be a contributor..... [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ] 63. "Correcting Misinformation -- Jameson" Posted by Misty on 06:48:08 8/16/2000 Include Original Message on Reply Posted by jameson on Aug-16-00 at 00:25 AM (EST) I don't kow if this was a hoax or not, but in my heart, affter reflecting on this for a few days, I want to say I think it was a hoax. The photo was blurry and could have been "computer art". The cops told Misty not to believe everything she reads on the net... Sorry, I just am not sure this happened and without going out there and questioning everyone involved, there is no way to know the truth. Jameson: Do not try and twist my words. The cops didn't say "don't believe everything you say on the internet." The cops said to ignore Dixie's innuendos. Don't try to cover this up as a hoax. Misty [ remove ] [ alert ] [ edit ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY w QUOTE ] [ MAIN ] [ LOBBY ]