Justice Watch Support JW "Dear Mame" [ Main ] [ Post New Thread ] [ Help ] [ Search ] Table of Contents ................................................................... Dear Mame, ibnora, 00:12:20, 9/28/2000 Does this help?, Holly, 06:04:40, 9/28/2000, (#1) A simple request..., Florida, 07:45:43, 9/28/2000, (#2) More thoughts..., Holly, 08:23:22, 9/28/2000, (#3) A note to pybird., Holly, 08:41:11, 9/28/2000, (#4) Holly, pybird, 08:49:05, 9/28/2000, (#5) Py, Holly, 08:53:27, 9/28/2000, (#6) sloppy reference?, fly, 11:00:20, 9/28/2000, (#8) Jeanne Adams, maxi, 10:56:56, 9/28/2000, (#7) Thanks for the links, maxi..., LurkerXIV, 10:12:56, 9/29/2000, (#13) Thanks, Holly, Cassandra, 11:05:02, 9/28/2000, (#9) Just popped in...., Country Girl, 20:48:50, 9/28/2000, (#10) i just got home, mame, 21:06:02, 9/28/2000, (#11) My Comment, Colorado Babe, 09:44:21, 9/29/2000, (#12) Colorado, Ruthee, 11:13:03, 9/29/2000, (#14) Ruthee, Colorado Babe, 13:36:01, 9/29/2000, (#15) CoBabe, FYI, ibnora, 23:26:49, 9/29/2000, (#24) Babe, v_p, 15:24:12, 9/29/2000, (#18) Ruthee, Scully, 13:51:49, 9/29/2000, (#16) Hello Ruthee., Twitch, 13:59:41, 9/29/2000, (#17) Miss Ruthie, Lacey, 17:24:06, 9/29/2000, (#20) Just want to make it clear..., Colorado-an, 16:51:55, 9/29/2000, (#19) heh...., Pedro, 18:55:50, 9/29/2000, (#22) Ruthee's Post, Leigh, 18:49:30, 9/29/2000, (#21) Ibnora , rico, 22:33:54, 9/29/2000, (#23) Manuals?, canadiana, 23:34:14, 9/29/2000, (#25) I'd tell her to stuff a sock in it..., A.K., 04:00:48, 9/30/2000, (#26) Promises, Promises, Gram, 05:48:02, 9/30/2000, (#27) Dear Ibora, mame, 14:25:26, 9/30/2000, (#28) mame.., Dianne E., 14:39:57, 9/30/2000, (#29) mame, hareen, 14:47:06, 9/30/2000, (#30) Dianne E., mame, 15:00:48, 9/30/2000, (#31) Well Done, Mame, Paralegal, 16:20:14, 9/30/2000, (#32) With all, rico, 16:55:47, 9/30/2000, (#33) Mame,, Florida, 17:07:41, 9/30/2000, (#34) Florida, Real Stormy, 17:32:02, 9/30/2000, (#37) florida, mame, 17:20:34, 9/30/2000, (#35) rico and dianne e., mame, 17:25:20, 9/30/2000, (#36) mame.., Dianne E., 17:42:45, 9/30/2000, (#38) It seems to me, Ribaldone, 19:03:27, 9/30/2000, (#40) FW , rico, 18:57:26, 9/30/2000, (#39) not self absorbed, mame, 19:46:58, 9/30/2000, (#42) Gawd Awlmighty, Lacey, 19:43:39, 9/30/2000, (#41) Lacey, Abby, 21:24:49, 9/30/2000, (#56) Lacey, pat, 20:05:03, 9/30/2000, (#45) Good citizen, rico, 19:53:53, 9/30/2000, (#43) A few more ?'s, Florida, 20:05:32, 9/30/2000, (#46) rico, mame, 19:58:22, 9/30/2000, (#44) IOW.., rico, 20:12:17, 9/30/2000, (#47) Legal Advisors?, Real Stormy, 20:32:50, 9/30/2000, (#49) We Can't All, Lacey, 20:29:00, 9/30/2000, (#48) Lacey, Real Stormy, 20:35:08, 9/30/2000, (#50) lacey, pat, 20:51:22, 9/30/2000, (#51) Pat , rico, 21:10:02, 9/30/2000, (#53) Grand Inquisitor?, Real Stormy, 20:53:20, 9/30/2000, (#52) Heh..., Pedro, 21:23:57, 9/30/2000, (#55) Restless Natives?, canadiana, 21:22:03, 9/30/2000, (#54) Just Wondering...., LurkerXIV, 21:24:50, 9/30/2000, (#57) Lurker...., Pedro, 21:32:12, 9/30/2000, (#58) Please, LizzieB, 21:42:31, 9/30/2000, (#59) Lizzie..., LurkerXIV, 22:12:23, 9/30/2000, (#61) Lizzieb...., Pedro, 21:46:42, 9/30/2000, (#60) KISS, v_p, 22:17:47, 9/30/2000, (#62) well, well, well..., mame, 00:17:03, 10/01/2000, (#63) ................................................................... "Dear Mame" Posted by ibnora on 00:12:20 9/28/2000 I have consolidated a number of posts from yesterday's Daily thread that comment on and ask you to clarify a couple of statements you also made on that thread. The unedited posts follow. Perhaps you would be so kind as to bring us up to speed. Obviously some of us have missed what could be some important facts regarding Fleet White. Thank you very much, ibnora *** http://www.justicewatch.com/jw/jonbenet/280.html "Wednesday, JonBenét, Day #1372" 13. "a tribute to me?" Posted by mame on 08:34:40 9/27/2000 are you out of your mind? the tribute was meant for all seekers of cyber justice. those who know me...know i have NEVER sought the limelight...never will. i am NOT defined by posts on an internet forum...i have enough admiration and love in my life to last a lifetime. those i have grown to respect and love here mean an enormous amount to me and my life...but, those who spit and spew mean nothing. i apologize if my wording in my post yesterday led anyone to believe it was about ME...it wasn't...and isn't. i've chosen to NOT skip on over to cybersleuths to read the posts by the little pack of theives there. it takes courage and a pure seeking of truth to stand behind the work any of us do in our lives. it can be lonely and cold. i stand tall...i've seen pure goodness and courage....and little people...with little minds cannot and WILL NOT have any effect on me. there are dozens of fine posters who have written me... who once loved coming here. they won't come here anymore...i'm about done here too. i wanted to leave the day darby left...she was a huge loss to this forum and jonbenet ramsey. however, i stay because i won't let darkness win. guess ol' fleet white got his wish...divide and conquer...we'd been warned he had his brother in law (a lawyer) were spending tons of money to discredit and divide. well la de da... the work toppcat, plasket, panico and i did was good work. hell, we don't deserve a tribute...and i would NEVER suggest one. i did suggest a tribute to the CYBER QUEST FOR JUSTICE! that means all of us. i hoped it might bring some of our beloved posters back into the fray...heal some wounds...help us refocus. no, lacey i'm not seeking the limelight. if i'd sought that i would have walked by the tough stories...and given the natives some more patsy bashing, hate stories...that's how you become the darling here. i chose not to do that...thank goodness. 23. "Huh?" Posted by Florida on 09:17:29 9/27/2000 "guess ol' fleet white got his wish...divide and conquer...we'd been warned he had his brother in law (a lawyer) were spending tons of money to discredit and divide. well la de da..." Warned by ???, and who were they spending money on to "discredit and divide"? Lacey, WY, VP - did you guys get any of the "tons of money" and not tell me??? I want my share!!! Send it in an oversized attache to.....Florida :-) 22. "no feeding frenzy" Posted by mame on 09:16:23 9/27/2000 hell, he cared enough to have his minions work their ways here and leave phone messages with tons of threats...ha.. AND, as far as journalistic flames...a highly repspected media watch dog group and professors and grad students from a top notch journalism school have read here for some time...they are doing a study on "grassroots" journalism, it's pureness...AND the misunderstanding of what a journalist's job is...hell, they think it's outrageous that you would suggest NOT covering a story in which a witness comes forward in a murder case...you might think you're GOD but i don't. it's not my job to say "hey, i don't like this broad...guess i won't cover this story..." get real..and find your manners... 64. "For the record" Posted by LizzieB on 18:11:49 9/27/2000 Mame, in post #22, you said this: "AND, as far as journalistic flames...a highly repspected media watch dog group and professors and grad students from a top notch journalism school have read here for some time...they are doing a study on "grassroots" journalism, it's pureness...AND the misunderstanding of what a journalist's job is...hell, they think it's outrageous that you would suggest NOT covering a story in which a witness comes forward in a murder case...you might think you're GOD but i don't. it's not my job to say "hey, i don't like this broad...guess i won't cover this story..." Mame, I think you are blowing smoke here. Nobody has EVER said you shouldn't have covered this story. Of course a journalist should cover the story of a witness coming forward in a murder case! The issue is that a journalist should cover the story with objectivity, and not advocacy. 28. "Mame" Posted by pybird on 09:48:59 9/27/2000 Mame says "hell, he cared enough to have his minions work their ways here and leave phone messages with tons of threats...ha." What phone threats? Is this what you were referring to when you said your kids have been threatened? I don't recall any of this being discussed on THIS forum, just that you thought your phone was bugged. Please enlighten me. Thanks, Py 33. "morning, everybody" Posted by fly on 10:15:19 9/27/2000 mame - How about providing some info of just who are FW's "minions" that he has arranged to fight his battles and discredit the good guys? Report the real facts, not more unsubstantiated allegations, please. If FW planted somebody to work for him here, by all means out that person and provide the evidence that what you say is true. 39. "Echoing..." Posted by ibnora on 11:03:25 9/27/2000 Dear Mame: As Florida has questioned above, I too am intrigued by your statements: Post #13 "guess ol' fleet white got his wish...divide and conquer...we'd been warned he had his brother in law (a lawyer) were spending tons of money to discredit and divide. well la de da..." 1) Could you guide me to published information that tells "us" that Fleet White was wishing to 'divide and conquer'? Divide and conquer whom? For what purpose? 2) Who is Fleet White's brother in law (lawyer) and when did he warn "us"? What did the warning say? His warning came to us in what form? 3) Spending tons of money? How much and on what exactly? Who has been the recipient of the money? Post #22 In reference to Fleet White: "hell, he cared enough to have his minions work their ways here and leave phone messages with tons of threats...ha.." Perhaps you could expound upon the above statement a little? Who are his minions? It would be interesting to see the phone messages transcribed. Thank you in advance, ibnora [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 1. "Does this help?" Posted by Holly on 06:04:40 9/28/2000 Here is a portion of the May transcript from the Toppcat/mame interview with Mystery Woman/Bridget. As I understand it, there was a detective hired to investigate MW and the money behind that investigator and the investigator were waiting for her to return to Boulder. There is also an inference that they have an "in" with the BPD and that she is going to be arrested. mame hastens to note that the information regarding the claimed "in" had not been verified. Mame: And, people close to you were receiving more frequent messages. Bridget: Right. And, they were about, that when I did go back to Boulder I was going to be arrested by The Boulder Police Department for filing false allegations. Mame: And, that was always a fear of yours? Bridget: And, I was told that I was going to be going to prison. Mame: And you were also told that, and we don't know if this is true or not, messages got to you, through other people close to you that you that they had an "in" with the Boulder PD. Bridget: Right. Mame: Now, we and I want to make that clear, we are not saying, and we have not verified that, but, that's what they were dishing out. Bridget: Right, and that one of the people close to this case, had hired a private detective/investigator to go after me. Mame: Right. And they went so far as to say, that, that detective, and the money behind it, were in town...were in Boulder. Bridget: That's true. And that was just a couple of days before I went back to Boulder. Mame: So, whether it was your birthday, or any day, coming back here, and knowing full well...at least from your initial discussions and interview with the police, and the few conversations you had over these weeks. You didn't think, none of us thought anything would come of this? Bridget: That's correct. I felt that more of their investigation, the Boulder Police Department's investigation, was centered around trying to discredit me, as opposed to looking [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 2. "A simple request..." Posted by Florida on 07:45:43 9/28/2000 If you are going to throw this stuff out, Mame, at least have the decency to back it up with the facts. Who was paid "tons of money" and who are the minions who worked their way in here? Show us the money! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 3. "More thoughts..." Posted by Holly on 08:23:22 9/28/2000 A nod to the Jameson forum for preserving the transcript. What I got from the interview was that Nancy (her first name appears on the Boykin docs) returned to Boulder despite warnings sent to a close friend/s that the BPD with whom they (the threatening people)had an "in", was about to arrest her for false allegations. She was accompanied by two victim advocates, Linda Redd and Jeanne Adams. These women provide workshops for the advocacy/law enforcement community and volunteered to assist Nancy with her meeting. They are experts in ritual abuse. Prior to Nancy's return, a close friend of hers received phone messages saying that a case related person in Boulder (I guess we can make an assumption on who that is) was prepared with an investigator or lawyer or maybe both (I'm not sure) with plenty of money to spend and an in with the BPD. This morning mame added some details to explain her statement. The threatening calls to Nancy's friend were taped and offered to the police for investigative purposes, which is all she can say. Hope this helps. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 4. "A note to pybird." Posted by Holly on 08:42:05 9/28/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 08:42:05, 9/28/2000 You mentioned not recalling any of this "threat" stuff ever being mentioned on THIS forum, on the Wednesday thread. The original Toppcat/Mame/Bridget interview of course, appeared at this forum and was found transcribed in the Jameson archives. I tried to provide some context, but you might want to take some time to read the whole interview. There's more information about the BPD investigative process, if you can call it that, in the rest of the interview. Bottom line is that despite your lack of recall, it appeared first at JusticeWatch. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 5. "Holly" Posted by pybird on 08:49:05 9/28/2000 Yes, I recall the phone threats to MW discussed here. For some reason when Mame commented yesterday about phone threats, I thought she was referring to her statement before about her children being threatened. I believe she stated that on the "So Sue My Bloody Ass" thread. Thanks for the reply. We are just talking about two different things. I'm sorry I wasn't clear in my post. Py [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 6. "Py" Posted by Holly on 08:53:27 9/28/2000 :-). I'm glad you caught this. Thanks for the reply. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 8. "sloppy reference?" Posted by fly on 11:00:20 9/28/2000 So you're saying that mame was rather sloppy in her use of "here" or other location referents and meant "Boulder," rather than "the forums?" [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 7. "Jeanne Adams" Posted by maxi on 10:56:56 9/28/2000 I was curious about the experts who were involved with MW. Here's what I found: http://www.ineworld.com/mrlight/ http://www.ineworld.com/mrlight/summary.htm http://members.aol.com/smartnews/Sample-Issue-33.htm I think Betsy might be particularly interested in this last article. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 13. "Thanks for the links, maxi..." Posted by LurkerXIV on 10:12:56 9/29/2000 ....they help us to get a handle on MW's new mentors. What a coincidence that MW's childhood experiences sound so similar to Jeanne Adams' reminiscences of her own childhood! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 9. "Thanks, Holly" Posted by Cassandra on 11:07:14 9/28/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 11:07:14, 9/28/2000 I've never heard Mame's interviews. I'll read them in the Swamp one of these days. Also thanks to maxi just above for those links. I'll check them out, too. Cassie [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 10. "Just popped in...." Posted by Country Girl on 20:48:50 9/28/2000 to see if mame had posted her reply. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 11. "i just got home" Posted by mame on 21:06:02 9/28/2000 from a long day and my first annual meeting and elections for our board at the station. had to give a big ol' speech and fortunately for the station...the right board members won the election. i will post tomorrow...i promise. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 12. "My Comment" Posted by Colorado Babe on 09:44:21 9/29/2000 Why don't you all just shut up and stop this childish behavior. I personally think that you are all acting like elementary kids. Take it to a Forum that really cares. If I were you Mame I wouldn't waste my precious time on these people. Colorado Babe [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 14. "Colorado" Posted by Ruthee on 11:13:03 9/29/2000 And round and round and round we go. Haven't we been there before. It's too early for Groundhog Day? What ever happened to learning on the job. Nobody starts out at their profession or hobby with perfect results. But: You'll never learn if every suggestion is taken as a criticsim. When did we forget to say, "Thank you for your input, I'll consider your suggestion." Mame provides invaluable insight into the workings of Boulder. My problem with listening to her interviews with Jane Doe is that I learned more about Mame than I did Jane. Who knows what additonal information we may have learned if Mame allowed Jane to tell her own story in her own words? And then we had, "Who wants to interview Mame?" There were no takers, and eventually Holly was seleted. I was disappointed. I had hoped it would be the other way around. I would have rather learned more about Holly. Don't shoot the messanger only applies when the messanger is NOT the message. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 15. "Ruthee" Posted by Colorado Babe on 13:36:01 9/29/2000 Get a life. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 24. "CoBabe, FYI" Posted by ibnora on 23:26:49 9/29/2000 The questions originally posed to Mame on this thread were asked in the spirit of good faith and honesty by a number of respected and serious case followers. Mame seems to understand that and has promised that she will address the questions. I have no reason to doubt Mame's word that she will do just that. In the meantime, I would ask you Colorado Babe, and anyone else who feels the urge to hamper or dismiss the opportunity for a dialog and discussion of the facts in the JonBenet Ramsey case to please take your spurious comments, your slurs, and your nasty attitudes elsewhere. This is not a party and it is not a game. There are currently 183 other active threads in the JusticeWatch Community of forums. Perhaps you will be able to find one that better suits your own interests. Thank you. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 18. "Babe" Posted by v_p on 15:24:12 9/29/2000 You wrote: >>>>Why don't you all just shut up and stop this childish behavior. I personally think that you are all acting like elementary kids.<<<< Then Ruthie writes a very diplomatic and insightful response...not at all petty or rude, and you respond with: >>>Get a life.<<<< What grade are you in? Ruthee deserves a lot more respect than you gave in your response. Besides, mame thinks all this is funny...hillarious even, she says so herself. Maybe some of the rest of us should take it all as lightheartedly as she does. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 16. "Ruthee" Posted by Scully on 13:51:49 9/29/2000 Your post was wise and full of insight. Thanks. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 17. "Hello Ruthee." Posted by Twitch on 14:02:39 9/29/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 14:02:39, 9/29/2000 It's always good to read your common sense perspectives as well as your intuitive insights. I know you work hard on this case. Thanks. Edited to say I think I subconsciously stole Scully's post. :) [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 20. "Miss Ruthie" Posted by Lacey on 17:24:06 9/29/2000 Your post was wise and full of insight. Thanks. PS - Scully stole my post. Lacey . [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 19. "Just want to make it clear..." Posted by Colorado-an on 16:51:55 9/29/2000 that I am not Colorado Babe, there are two of us with similar hats. I would never tell Ruthee or any of my friends at Justice Watch or anywhere else to shut up! Thanks, Colorado [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 22. "heh...." Posted by Pedro on 18:55:50 9/29/2000 ....heh and heh. have avery nice day !!!! Pedro. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 21. "Ruthee's Post" Posted by Leigh on 18:49:30 9/29/2000 I was beginning to wonder what-in-the-world-is-going-on and then Ruthee posted and said what I was thinking. Ruthee made sense only to be shot down with a ridiculous "Get A Life" remark that wasn't worth the space it took to post it. I bet Ruthee has more of a life than you know who! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 23. "Ibnora " Posted by rico on 22:33:54 9/29/2000 You've been put on hold while the FW super-sleuth 'minions' convene a special strategy planning session at their private forum. Meanwhile, you'll just have to accept the new info regarding this sinister plot as the unimpeachable truth...cause you can't disprove it anyway, so there. Find your own secret forum and stop spoiling others fun! BTW Ruthee, what Lacey and Sculley said. Off to go look for my 'divide and conquer' manual.... JfJBR rico "tons of money"...are we talking US or pesos here? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 25. "Manuals?" Posted by canadiana on 23:34:14 9/29/2000 Rico, could you please email me a copy of that manual? I could use some information. And...what Ruthee, Lacey and Scully said. And....ibnora [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 26. "I'd tell her to stuff a sock in it..." Posted by A.K. on 09:19:48 9/30/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 09:19:48, 9/30/2000 ...but what good would it do? Edited because I took a walk and feel much kinder now. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 27. "Promises, Promises" Posted by Gram on 05:48:02 9/30/2000 11. "i just got home" Posted by mame on 21:06:02 9/28/2000 from a long day and my first annual meeting and elections for our board at the station. had to give a big ol' speech and fortunately for the station...the right board members won the election. i will post tomorrow...i promise. Mame, did I miss your post? Tomorrow was yesterday. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 28. "Dear Ibora" Posted by mame on 14:48:31 9/30/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 14:48:31, 9/30/2000 correction...Ibnora... This is the first chance I've gotten to respond to your post. I run a public radio station these days so my time is limited. We are just beginning our fall membership drive. If there are questions anyone has I will be glad to answer them to the best of my ability. THE WITNESS: 1) I have not covered the "Mystery Woman" story for over six months. While we have had contact from time to time throughout these months I am not in contact with her at this time. Due to security issues she is now in hiding and does not have access to phones, computers or mail. 2) Nancy has never once said or felt she could solve the JonBenet Ramsey murder case. As with most witnesses, except eyewitnesses, she has information requiring the power and skill of state and federal authorities to determine their merit. She quietly came forward with information requiring a FULL INVESTIGATION. 3) Nancy is a lovely, quiet, intelligent woman who has never sought fame or media attention. 4) Nancy's information does NOT exculpate the Ramsey's in any way, shape or form. 5) Nancy is NOT a member of the screen actor's guild, nor has she ever been one. She is not connected in any way to any such blond aging actress. 6) Nancy has never received protection from any agency except the Denver Safehouse who housed her, provided emergency medical care, and fully supported her efforts. To keep her safe they hired police protection to guard her private room in a hotel. They protected her until it was clear the media interest could put other's in jeopardy. 7) To Nancy's knowledge she has never met either John or Patsy Ramsey or their attorney's. She did meet with Lou Smit in my home for several hours. She has chosen to not work with, or release any information to ANYONE who is on the Ramsey payroll. 8) Nancy's stay at my home was meant to be for only a few days while other protection was found. Unfortunately, our visits, meetings and calls around Denver/Boulder brought no protection through traditional agencies. Meetings were held with Colorado Attorney General Salazar down to local Boulder victim agencies, in an effort to find appropriate protection for her. THE STORY 1) I have never said, privately or publicly Nancy's allegations could be linked or proven. I have asked over and over for a full and complete investigation. While I'm told some laugh at my "full investigation" mantra.....it's a basic need in ANY investigation. It was not done in this case. Interviews were quick and cursory. Phone records showing an increase of calls with dates and times alleged were never looked at. 2) I have never named names except with reference to the White criminal libel suit and this week when I mentioned phone threats of discrediting which have been referenced here already. Copies of those tapes exist and were offered to detectives when Nancy met with them the second time. 3) I reported, as any good reporter should, the story of a witness who came forward in a murder case. It is not my job to decide the merits of such a witness. The police and FBI have that burden. Most of the reporter's who covered her story reported what she said directly and the actions and statements by officials. There is NO journalistic libel in doing so. If I had chosen to do an investigative piece on Nancy and her claims, I would then be subject to a level of proof. I KNOW SOMETHING YOU DON'T.... I have been told over and over that I'm charged with having knowledge that I refuse to release. There isn't a reporter on this story...or most stories...who does not have information that has never been printed or discussed. In Nancy's case I certainly had access to anecdotal and background information that has never been released or written. However, I do not have ANY information necessary to the public good OR information not in the hands of the police and the FBI and private investigators and investigative journalistics. I chose to not post documents, photos or anecdotes for public consumption. I chose NOT to drop random information here or in news reports. I felt then, and feel now, that I was NOT the person with the journalistic skill to do an investigative dig into her claims. Her legal team in Colorado and California advised journalists of the danger involved in digging into this story. I Outstanding, noted journalists have stepped forward and I continue to feel confident her story will be told. While her documents and evidence are compelling, there is no one piece of information that is a smoking gun. I have never wanted to be part of the dog and pony show. I could have tried to dazzle you with bits of information over these long months...dropping crumbs along the way. That's NOT my style. I await results of public and private investigations just like anyone else. My second interview with Nancy was obviously not a great interview. Her words and comments were fine. I was overly emotional from witnessing the day's events and being part of a several week quest for protection and support for a woman clearly in danger. I entered into an area of journalism referred to as "advocacy journalism". While entering such an area can be problematic, I feel more good than bad has resulted. My trip to Maryland was not made to further Nancy's story. Some comments here about that trip and the content of my discussions are clearly off base. Each and every comment I made was followed by "If this information can be linked."...I continue to feel that Fleet White and Nancy deserve the same amount of protection and respect. If any public official can prove that her information is wrong or false I ask them to step forward to clear Mr. White. If she is so clearly delusional, then let's find a way to rule out her story. If I were charged with similar acts and they were false I would be in a courtroom meeting the person head on. Why aren't we seeing that happen? Criminal libel is a sneaky way around libel charges. It will only bring media lawyers and journalists into a courtroom to fight freedom of the press issues. Why not go directly after Nancy? Why is there such fear in facing her? I welcome criticism when it is specific and respectful. The majority of recent criticism has been nasty and mean spirited. I feel that a full investigation protects EVERYONE and keeps a path to justice clear and truthful. Nancy was told that a FBI investigation could take over a year. Ruling out is as important as ruling in. I do NOT have a theory as to what happened the night of JonBenet's death. I do feel there is information still to be looked at. I also believe the police and DA's are as split in opinion as deeply as this forum. I am told that recent forensic tests bring us no closer to an arrest than before. Also, I'm told the case is basically on a shelf waiting for information or newly developed DNA tests. The Ramsey case is deep and twisted. I'm confident there is forensic and other evidence not known to the public. There are witnesses who have never been heard. My deepest hope is that one-day every piece of information and evidence in this case will find it's way into an American courtroom [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 29. "mame.." Posted by Dianne E. on 14:39:57 9/30/2000 ..this is perhaps where I have a problem with the entire MW saga. "If any public official can prove that her information is wrong or false I ask them to step forward to clear Mr. White." It is this very thinking that is quite disturbing in this entire Internet Salem Hunt gone too far. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ EMAIL Dianne E. ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 30. "mame" Posted by hareen on 14:47:06 9/30/2000 I can't tell you how much I appreciate your speaking in a straight-forward way about this. Thank you. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 31. "Dianne E." Posted by mame on 15:00:48 9/30/2000 It is our public officals job to fully clear suspects. So called "witch hunts" and ego driven opinion only happen when our public servants fail in seeking truth. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 32. "Well Done, Mame" Posted by Paralegal on 16:20:14 9/30/2000 As always, you continue to prove yourself a lady of great class and distinction! I appreciate your post and have, like you, been publicly calling for a full investigation of the MW/FW issues in this case. I do not trust the BPD and other authorities in Boulder to render judgment on this issue anymore than I trust them to solve this case. If FW is not connected in any way to this issue, it will all come out in the wash. We just need to take the laundry to the right machine.... [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 33. "With all" Posted by rico on 16:55:47 9/30/2000 due respect mame, you have not answered the questions ibnora politely asked. Yes paralegal, it will all come out in the wash and hopefully someone will be hung out to dry. BTW para, do you think LS would be a reliable investigator for the MW/FW case? He certainly had the chance. I agree with Dianne: it's quite disturbing that public officials or anyone else need to come forward to clear a man whom sensible people do not suspect of any wrongdoing. That's the problem many on this forum and others have with mame's tactics and when challenged, we're just being nasty and mean-spirited. Nora and others asked nicely for clarification on charges that FW has spent tons of money, his attorney, his minions, discrediting..dividing and conquering etc. etc. Typically, no real response to ibnora's legitimate questions. No disrespect para, but if there is compelling evidence here that has been ignored by the BPD, mame or someone else would have made it public by now JMO. Allegations, innuendo, speculation don't make FW a suspect who needs to clear his name. MW, mame, LH, MB, etal brought this home and it's their burden to prove. If that logic eludes them, then so will justice. Waiting for ibnora's questions to be answered... JfJBR rico [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 34. "Mame," Posted by Florida on 17:07:41 9/30/2000 please answer the questions we asked earlier. "I continue to feel that Fleet White and Nancy deserve the same amount of protection and respect. " You have a strange way of showing the same amount of respect. "guess ol' fleet white got his wish...divide and conquer...we'd been warned he had his brother in law (a lawyer) were spending tons of money to discredit and divide. well la de da... " Do you have specific information that Fleet White and his brother-in-law were spending tons of money to discredit and divide" Discredit Nancy? Divide who? Who and what did they spend the money on? Where did you get this information? How do YOU personally know it is true? "hell, he cared enough to have his minions work their ways here and leave phone messages with tons of threats...ha.." Who are Fleet's minions and to whom did they leave the phone messages with tons of threats? 2) I have never named names except with reference to the White criminal libel suit and this week when I mentioned phone threats of discrediting which have been referenced here already. Copies of those tapes exist and were offered to detectives when Nancy met with them the second time. Were the two tapes to the therapist all or part of these tapes? "If I were charged with similar acts and they were false I would be in a courtroom meeting the person head on. Why aren't we seeing that happen? Criminal libel is a sneaky way around libel charges. It will only bring media lawyers and journalists into a courtroom to fight freedom of the press issues. Why not go directly after Nancy? Why is there such fear in facing her? Since the truth is an affirmative defense - why not do it this way? Seems to me he is begging the newspaper's lawyers to prove what was printed is true. A civil case against Nancy? It's obvious she has mental problems and doesn't have a dime to her name. I don't think it is fear - more likely it's pity. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 37. "Florida" Posted by Real Stormy on 17:32:02 9/30/2000 I agree with you. A decent person would not add further to the problems an obviously mentally ill person such as Nancy has. And I believe that those who call themselves her friend, have done just that. So much for being fair and even handed: Nancy is quiet, dignified. FW has spent tons and tons of money, is responsible for threatening phone calls, has his minions and brother-in-law out doing sculdugery against poor,quiet,Nancy. Oh, that's right, Nancy can answer most Jeopardy questions. That puts a different light on the matter. Further, it is your mantra, Mame: "A full and complete investigation." IMO such an investigation has been completed, but you and your "minions" will only accept an investigation which reaches your most favored result. Dog and pony show, indeed. Hogwash. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 35. "florida" Posted by mame on 17:22:23 9/30/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 17:22:23, 9/30/2000 1) not sure if you are reading the same constitution as i am...BUT, a journalist is not, does not pick stories based on an internet forum's deemed respect of a person. 2) threats and minions...the tapes do not include the therapists tapes. phone messages were left for weeks threatening nancy using fleet whites name and money as well as a former poster, tal jones. 3) criminal libel does not in my opinion go direct to the person alleged to be committing libel. nancy is strong and intelligent and more than able to meet anyone in a courtroom. pity as an excuse for not seeking a day in court directly with this possibly libelous woman is not a strong defense against civil libel charges. i've spoken with scores of lawyers and legal experts about this...this is a crafty way to appear to have strength against nancy. however, there is little chance this will move forward from gus sandstrom...if it does fleet white will never have to go into a courtroom. very sneaky... [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 36. "rico and dianne e." Posted by mame on 17:25:20 9/30/2000 in our country and in our constitution the burden for justice is with our justice system. until they rule in or rule out a suspect...we are left to our own thoughts and opinions as to who is guilty and innocent. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 38. "mame.." Posted by Dianne E. on 17:42:45 9/30/2000 ..perhaps you might give IB's questions a whirl, I am whirling over your answers to me. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ EMAIL Dianne E. ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 40. "It seems to me" Posted by Ribaldone on 19:04:47 9/30/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 19:04:47, 9/30/2000 that the role of investigative authorities was to investigate MW's claims about FW to see if they were valid. It was determined that her claims were not valid and their investigation yielded nothing suspect about FW, according to Mark Beckner. And no evidence that MW's claims had any connection to the Ramsey murder. Their job was NOT to clear FW. The Whites had been cleared by the BDP long ago. The only person who suspected FW or anything was MW. And she was proven wrong. Deal with it. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 39. "FW " Posted by rico on 18:57:26 9/30/2000 is not a suspect for the justice system to "rule in or rule out". No one of any official consequence suspects FW of any crime. And the suspicions of MW's minions and their morally-challenged sensibilities DO NOT add up to FACT. FW "crafty" and "very sneaky"? You must have him confused with someone in the DA's office. All this guy wanted was JfJBR. You obviously are too self-absorbed to be on that same track mame. Unfortunate. JfJBR rico Yes, please do give ib's questions a whirl. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 42. "not self absorbed" Posted by mame on 19:46:58 9/30/2000 i have the guts and wisdom to question the boulder police department. while i believe there are some outstanding police in the department...there is a reason they are commonly in jay leno's monologue...their actions and inactions are outrageous for the most part. nope, can't just take their word for it. because even if nancy's claims can't be linked...they better know every little thing that could come out on the stand by anyone. that's not self absorbed...it's called being a good citizen and caring about how my public officials to their jobs. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 41. "Gawd Awlmighty" Posted by Lacey on 19:43:39 9/30/2000 From Holly Demented Regimented's mouth to Mary Suma Cum Louder's ear. Mame, have you like, EVER have an original thought in your life, or like, what? Please stop referring to yourself as a "grass roots journalist!" You even give grass and roots a bad name with that nomenclature. Answer the questions. If you dare Lace . [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 56. "Lacey" Posted by Abby on 21:24:49 9/30/2000 You are a jealous spiteful witch with a foul mouth!! I hope you don't talk in front of your kids like that! If I were Mame I would not even bother with this forum. She has more on the ball than you ever thought of having. Do you really think Mame is making this stuff up?? You need your head examined if you do. I think your problem and others is just plain jealousy. You feel you have been left out of the loop and now are doing everything to discredit Mame. Why don't you just knock it off. You ask her for information, she responds, then you attack her if it's not what you want to hear. It's very possible that she cannot tell you everything she knows. GROW UP and SMELL THE COFFEE YOU FOUL MOUTHED WHATEVER YOU ARE. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 45. "Lacey" Posted by pat on 20:05:03 9/30/2000 That was just about the ugliest message I have seen posted on this board. That kind of namecalling won't get anyone anywhere here. Have lurked here and it seems to me there needs to be a thread split if this continues. You critics of mame have made your points. Why continue to belabor them. So you can feel better? I haven't seen anything like this before and wish you all could just end your discussion. It is getting nowhere but ugly. Mame, I suggest you ignore all this hatefulness. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 43. "Good citizen" Posted by rico on 19:53:53 9/30/2000 please answer ib's questions. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 46. "A few more ?'s" Posted by Florida on 20:05:32 9/30/2000 1) not sure if you are reading the same constitution as i am...BUT, a journalist is not, does not pick stories based on an internet forum's deemed respect of a person. Mame, you said ..."I continue to feel that Fleet White and Nancy deserve the same amount of protection and respect. " You've bent over backwards to protect and respect Nancy while doing the best you can to destroy FW by innuendo and now, outright accusations. 2) threats and minions...the tapes do not include the therapists tapes. phone messages were left for weeks threatening nancy using fleet whites name and money as well as a former poster, tal jones. Who got these messages - whose phone were they left on? Who made the calls and how did they use Fleet's money? Was she threatened with bodily harm? DID FLEET WHITE HIMSELF EVER MAKE A THREATENING PHONE CALL TO NANCY K? I don't understand what you mean by "as well as a former poster tal jones. Did Tal/Spade make phone calls in Fleet's name? If Nancy has tapes of threats by Fleet White then why doesn't Nancy go down and file a CRIMINAL complaint? "nancy is strong and intelligent and more than able to meet anyone in a courtroom." Why didn't Nancy file a CRIMINAL complaint against the person or persons that abused her right before she showed up in Boulder? Surely if the beatings and abuse were as serious as she's claimed there must have been some DNA evidence. Did she go to a hospital when it happened and have a rape kit done? Are her CO or CA legal teams going to go to the appropriate district attorney and do that? Why hasn't Nancy filed CIVIL complaints against FW, Jr and Sr, her mother, etc., etc., - all those people who abused her all those years? Are her CO and CA legal teams going to do this? Her legal team in Colorado and California advised journalists of the danger involved in digging into this story. What is the danger involved in pursuing this story? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 44. "rico" Posted by mame on 19:58:22 9/30/2000 i answered her questions within the constraints of legal advisors. i knew when i posted it would keep the restless natives busy for the night.. have fun..i'm off to a movie with my kids... [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 47. "IOW.." Posted by rico on 20:12:17 9/30/2000 your bluff has been called again and you fold as usual. Glad you cleared that up "good citizen". Back to reality... JfJBR rico [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 49. "Legal Advisors?" Posted by Real Stormy on 20:32:50 9/30/2000 Under these circumstances, I believe good legal advice would be to not make accusations against FW on the internet. In fact, in this case the best advice would be to stay away from the internet altogether. If anyone believes that an attorney advised Mame to make the assertions she has made on this thread, I'm sorry that the Brooklyn Bridge is sold, but I can show you a nice bridge in San Francisco you that might be able to pick up cheap. IMO, the accusations Mame has made tonight are out and out statements that Fleet White has used "tons and tons" of his money, in collusion with his attorney brother-in-law, to attempt to intimidate Nancy into not testifying against FW; Obstruction of justice, among other infractions. That is illegal. Therefore, it appears that Mame has accused FW of illegal actions. Her "legal advisor" gave her the go ahead to post this? Yeah, when pigs fly. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 48. "We Can't All" Posted by Lacey on 20:29:00 9/30/2000 just get a loan, can we. (thank you, WY :) You know what Pat? Who the hell are you. Who died and left you hall monitor. For the Record: I never said shit about any of this speculation until the BPD released the results of their eleven-week investigation and the Mystery Woman Society decided to continue with their libelous innuendo anyway. This stuff is crap and when I see it I stop it. Or at least, I try to. I was silent for too long. Whatever. Nevermind! It doesn't do any good to tell any of you that what you have done and are doing is wrong! Fleet White is kicking butt and taking names and you can deal with that instead. I will wait and watch for the Excrement to hit the Air Circulation Device............. Lacey Over and Out . [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 50. "Lacey" Posted by Real Stormy on 20:35:08 9/30/2000 You do have a way with words. You're not a grass-roots journalist, are you? LOL [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 51. "lacey" Posted by pat on 20:51:22 9/30/2000 I was appointed Hall Monitor by the same person that appointed you Grand Inquisitor. Girl, you need something to chill you out. You made your points so why keep banging and banging? Need someone to blame for something I guess. I've been around here forever but quit posting when the fleet/MW controversy erupted. Just seems to get uglier and uglier. But the rudeness can stop if the people here wish. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 53. "Pat " Posted by rico on 21:10:02 9/30/2000 rudeness doesn't begin to account for the outrageous (new) lies that have been posted on this forum regarding FW. If slander and defamation of character don't qualify as "nasty" and "mean-spirited" then you couldn't possibly object to Lacey's posts. This is about JfJBR, not a soapbox for an "ego-driven" wannabe reporter. If you missed that point, keep lurking. JfJBR rico [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 52. "Grand Inquisitor?" Posted by Real Stormy on 20:53:20 9/30/2000 That isn't exactly the height of courteous behaviour, is it? Sounds rude to me. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 55. "Heh..." Posted by Pedro on 21:23:57 9/30/2000 ....heh and heh (Bis) Pedro [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 54. "Restless Natives?" Posted by canadiana on 21:22:03 9/30/2000 Isn't that a bit condescending? I am not a 'restless native', I am Canadian. We don't have a 'Constitution' here, we have a 'Charter of Rights and Freedoms' so I am not reading the same 'constitution as you, hence you will have to bear with me. You said...."I continue to feel that Fleet White and Nancy deserve the same amount of protection and respect." You state you feel that way, but your posts/accusations about Fleet White belie those stated feelings. Many posters have asked several questions regarding FW and the 'threats'. I would think legal advisors would advise backing up accusations. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 57. "Just Wondering...." Posted by LurkerXIV on 21:24:50 9/30/2000 how many others who post here have had to "lawyer up". [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 58. "Lurker...." Posted by Pedro on 21:32:12 9/30/2000 ..only the ones who s**** up badly :-) Pedro [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 59. "Please" Posted by LizzieB on 21:42:31 9/30/2000 Will somebody explain to me why some think it's okay for Mame to make unsubstantiated accusations against an individual, and yet it is mean-spirited for people to ask her to corroborate her statements? I don't understand and would genuinely like an explanation. Thank you. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 61. "Lizzie..." Posted by LurkerXIV on 22:12:23 9/30/2000 ...these are the same people who can't tell their arse from their elbow. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 60. "Lizzieb...." Posted by Pedro on 21:46:42 9/30/2000 ....some had follow MW's so fanatically, that they don't know now how to get out of it. Pedro [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 62. "KISS" Posted by v_p on 22:19:39 9/30/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 22:19:39, 9/30/2000 Listen, it's as simple as this...FW filed a libel suit and also wrote the war and peace of pleadings to have this case investigated, all the while spending a ton of money, (paying off minions or some such thing), and making threatening phone calls via an internet poster who goes by the name of Spade (???) To think he or his father or anyone else with an ounce of class is involved with nutty woman is ridiculous ... Lacey, I think you're quite eloquent and creative...not quite as creative as some though, I'm afraid, but then you are not a creative..errr, I mean, a bona fide journalist, are you. Mean, in my opinion, is calling someone a "witch." [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 63. "well, well, well..." Posted by mame on 00:17:03 10/01/2000 just came back from seeing "a hard day's night" with my kids at the aspen filmfest...guess it could be a title for this thread. i laughed and sang with my kids and realized justice watch is not a place i want to be anymore. i stayed around because i'm tough and i care...in addition the mean words here don't hurt me. you can feed on each other now i'm going off to join other fine posters and open minded folks who also have chosen to step away. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ]