missing bride is a hoax

LWR VENTURES · Post by **LWR VENTURES** » Tue May 03, 2005 8:58 pm

Of course it is apples and oranges. ThatÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s because IÃ¢â‚¬â„¢m making two

different points. At least that is what IÃ¢â‚¬â„¢m trying to do, LOL. But alas my writing skills are not the best. Point one. Although she broke the law by Ã¢â‚¬Å“lyingÃ¢â‚¬Â to officials. I donÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t think they would be going after her legally if it wasnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t for the national attention. Point two, much to do about nothing. A good stiff find for the lie, should be sufficient. I donÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t think she should be liable for the search. Just my opinion.

lady cop · Post by **lady cop** » Tue May 03, 2005 9:14 pm

since nobody else seems to be around we can argue all night! or until i have to go to sleep....liable for search expenses is civil. hell yes she is liable and her family will probably pay out the arse. and your writing is fine! i just know this, many civilians don't get the distinction between criminal and civil. the media went for it, ok, but that has absolutely no bearing on what she did to BREAK THE LAW! SHE BROKE THE LAW! SHE COMMITTED A CRIME. filing a false report with the police is a serious thing. we had a fake 911 call last year and my brother officer who answered it was killed on a rain-slicked road. KILLED. DEAD. 21 years old. his name is Josh Blyler. it's not unimportant stuff. what if just one of those searchers had been hurt? what then? is she liable? hell yes.

lady cop · Post by **lady cop** » Tue May 03, 2005 9:23 pm

P.S.....nobody in the history of the universe has ever won an argument with me. :yh_rotfl :yh_bigsmi :yh_laugh :yh_rotfl

LWR VENTURES · Post by **LWR VENTURES** » Tue May 03, 2005 9:23 pm

If the search had been a result of the lie she told, then absolutely! They may be facts IÃ¢â‚¬â„¢m not aware of. But I donÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t think the search had any thing to do with the lie. Is it our position now, that one is not free to travel, unless they check in with someone first. The lie was illegal. But the search was not the result of any criminal behavior. Unless I missed something.

lady cop · Post by **lady cop** » Tue May 03, 2005 9:34 pm

LWR VENTURES wrote: If the search had been a result of the lie she told, then absolutely! They may be facts IÃ¢â‚¬â„¢m not aware of. But I donÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t think the search had any thing to do with the lie. Is it our position now, that one is not free to travel, unless they check in with someone first. The lie was illegal. But the search was not the result of any criminal behavior. Unless I missed something.the search WAS a direct result of the de facto lie she told, after the fact. as i said, she was free to go anywhere on earth. you said it, the lie was illegal. case closed. she was not in violation of any law until she lied to the police chief. i don't care if she went to tibet, that's her familiy"s problem. when she filed a false report with the police chief she became a criminal. she ought to be penalized. or don't we charge 32 year old anorexic rich girls with scary eyeballs?

LWR VENTURES · Post by **LWR VENTURES** » Tue May 03, 2005 9:46 pm

LOL, Those eyes are a bit scary! I will have to check the timeline. I was under the impression that they were already searching prior to the lie. If they were. Then the lie did cause the search. I donÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t think we disagree that lying to the authorities is illegal. But we do same to disagree with her degree of liability. As much as IÃ¢â‚¬â„¢m enjoying posting with you I am tired. You have a great night Lady Cop!!

lady cop · Post by **lady cop** » Tue May 03, 2005 9:55 pm

you too, GOODNIGHT!

we can solve the world's problems tomorrow! nighty-night!

lady cop · Post by **lady cop** » Sat May 07, 2005 11:55 am

well now we hear she told the police she was RAPED by the fictional hispanic man. she needs a boot in the arse among other things. oh, and now there's news reports that she ran away because her fiance wasn't bedding her, he took a celibacy vow as a born again christian....so the whole ordeal is based on sex it seems. well i hope the DA gives her the f***ing over she wants.

capt_buzzard · Post by **capt_buzzard** » Sat May 07, 2005 11:56 am

lady cop wrote: P.S.....nobody in the history of the universe has ever won an argument with me. :yh_rotfl :yh_bigsmi :yh_laugh :yh_rotfl Not Yet!

LWR VENTURES · Post by **LWR VENTURES** » Sun May 08, 2005 6:28 am

Hum, In my opinion, she can tell the police she was kidnapped my aliens if she chose too. What she tells the police now does not interfere with an investigation or prompt an expensive search and rescue. Her actions obviously make her responsible. But her actions were not criminal. I think in this case, the law should butt out. Unless it is the DAs position to start prosecuting all liars. Sounds to me like she might be suffering from Bipolar or some other disorder.Lady Cop do you still contend that what she says now makes her criminally liable for the actions taken by others earlier?

lady cop · Post by **lady cop** » Sun May 08, 2005 7:03 am

Hi LWR~~~we had this conversation! yes, she committed a crime lying to a police official in the course of an investigation. she told the rape story when she told the sheriff she was a kidnap victim. and you are probably correct, she's mad as a bag of frogs. that can be her legal defense.

LWR VENTURES · Post by **LWR VENTURES** » Sun May 08, 2005 7:30 am

Had this conversation. Yes, indeed! But the thread was not locked. And I do so, enjoy arguing, with intelligent people. No argument in the fact the lying was illegal. Hum, I same to be repeating myself, LOL. My argument. From the beginning. Is that the lying does not make her legally, or financially, responsible for the search efforts prior to her being found. Prior to her being found, she broke no laws. So charge her with being a lair. IÃ¢â‚¬â„¢m not convinced that she interfered with an investigation. Sames to me the investigation was over when they found her. If however the investigation, or search, continued as a result of the lie. She should be held liable for that.

lady cop · Post by **lady cop** » Sun May 08, 2005 7:38 am

LWR VENTURES wrote: If however the investigation, or search, continued as a result of the lie. She should be held liable for that. YES YES YES!!! you're making me crazy! the investigation did continue after she was "found", they were stopping every blue van on the roads! similar to susan smith saying a black man took her kids. it's sunday morning! i haven't had my english breakfast tea yet! you live to torture me! :wah:

LWR VENTURES · Post by **LWR VENTURES** » Sun May 08, 2005 7:46 am

LOL, IÃ¢â‚¬â„¢m really sorry. I will drop it for now. Have to go cut some grass anyway. You have a great day !

lady cop · Post by **lady cop** » Sun May 08, 2005 7:58 am

LWR VENTURES wrote: LOL, IÃ¢â‚¬â„¢m really sorry. I will drop it for now. Have to go cut some grass anyway. You have a great day !yeah, but you'll be back! you have a good day too! :-6

LWR VENTURES · Post by **LWR VENTURES** » Sun May 08, 2005 8:02 am

But of course! (French accent)

lady cop · Post by **lady cop** » Sun May 08, 2005 10:18 am

HA! now we find out miss bride has done jail time for shoplifting! $1700. worth in one instance. that is not small potatoes. welcome to felony land! grand theft! hoohaa http://www.news4jax.com/news/4463954/detail.html

LWR VENTURES · Post by **LWR VENTURES** » Sun May 08, 2005 4:39 pm

LOL, OK! But how does that change anything? She is a bad person, and probably deserves to be in jail. But none of this makes her legally or financially liable for the initial search. What really worries me about cases like this, is that, some how, some where, some one, will think it is a good idea to make it illegal for adults to freely travel at will. She broke no law when she left.

lady cop · Post by **lady cop** » Sun May 08, 2005 4:54 pm

*sigh* i didn't say she broke the law by leaving.

BTS · Post by **BTS** » Sun May 08, 2005 10:50 pm

lady cop wrote: P.S.....nobody in the history of the universe has ever won an argument with me. :yh_rotfl :yh_bigsmi :yh_laugh :yh_rotfl There is ALWAYS a first time for everything.......

Don't ever underestimate your fellow humans!!

lady cop · Post by **lady cop** » Sun May 08, 2005 11:01 pm

BTS wrote: There is ALWAYS a first time for everything.......

Don't ever underestimate your fellow humans!!which would include YOU??? :wah:

LWR VENTURES · Post by **LWR VENTURES** » Mon May 09, 2005 7:02 am

Great! Then if she did not break the law. Then she can not be held financially liable for law enforcement actions. I think you stated the cost was one million. Which is the only position I have disagreed with on this thread. Which means I now have to find something else to argue about, LOL. Good debate Lady Cop, thanks!

lady cop · Post by **lady cop** » Mon May 09, 2005 11:32 am

LWR VENTURES wrote: Great! Then if she did not break the law. Then she can not be held financially liable for law enforcement actions. I think you stated the cost was one million. Which is the only position I have disagreed with on this thread. Which means I now have to find something else to argue about, LOL. Good debate Lady Cop, thanks!a news agency reported one million $$, but it was erroneous...so i was wrong....however, i look forward to our next argument! she did break the law!! she lied to LE in an investigation! aagggghhhhh!!!!no, you disagreed that she broke the law. she did. and she's a shoplifting little cow too. i spent years undercover busting shoplifters, sneaky little creeps. come back and let's argue something else! it's been fun.

minks · Post by **minks** » Mon May 09, 2005 12:02 pm

lady cop wrote: a news agency reported one million $$, but it was erroneous...so i was wrong....however, i look forward to our next argument! she did break the law!! she lied to LE in an investigation! aagggghhhhh!!!!no, you disagreed that she broke the law. she did. and she's a shoplifting little cow too. i spent years undercover busting shoplifters, sneaky little creeps. come back and let's argue something else! it's been fun.

You know I think this doe eyed, attention seeking, budding criminal should be locked up. And all attention that has been focused on her stopped. She behaves like a child, "negative attention is still attention" We have heard enough of her. And we are in Canada ahahaha I can't imagine what the rest of you are getting to the south of us.

But enough already she made her 15 min of fame.