How will Jaycee heal?

[kbl8201]

beena your talking to someone who has theorized that jaycee just showed up at phils house one day on her own

 

[jazerelle]

beena your talking to someone who has theorized that jaycee just showed up at phils house one day on her own

yes I remember that person and that theory which was totally knocked out of the water by both Phil and Nancy when they admitted to the parole agents that they kidnapped Jaycee.

 

[jazerelle]

It is very fortunate that the law says "REASONABLE doubt" The only way a certain person on this forum will ever believe in the guilt of P and N is if someone other than the parties involved actually video taped the kidnapping, rapes, births and signed a sworn affidavit saying it happened. Not very reasonable IMHO.

 

[Tizzle]

To be fair, IIRC, it was only said that they could say she just showed up there as an example of what the G's attorneys might try to pull and not because the poster actually believed that she went there of her volition. Obviously, she didn't and everyone knows it. P&N admitted it, themselves.

I'm just sayin'.

 

[jazerelle]

Ok blond roots starting to show, what is IIRC.

waves to Tizzle

 

[kbl8201]

Ok blond roots starting to show, what is IIRC.

waves to Tizzle

IIRC=if i recall correctly

 

[Tizzle]

If I Recall/Remember Correctly

Waves back:wave: Hello

 

[kbl8201]

It is very fortunate that the law says "REASONABLE doubt" The only way a certain person on this forum will ever believe in the guilt of P and N is if someone other than the parties involved actually video taped the kidnapping, rapes, births and signed a sworn affidavit saying it happened. Not very reasonable IMHO.

well i seem to remember another poster who claimed two weeks ago that jaycee 'fired' mcgregor scott cause she 'wants to contact the garridos' :waitasec:

im confused as to why we need to hear things in the media, or court documents, without them already being self evident....

im particuarly confused as to why we need validation from the two Or there lawyers to know they are guilty.......

 

[jazerelle]

I don't remember anyone saying that she fired them because of wanting to see them. Maybe they were just doing a "maybe she because" sort of thing. And the DA's office has stated she doesn't want to talk to them.

Anyway, I think the dates of birth have to do with severity only. It is obvious she was kidnapped and raped. The G's even admitted to it. So I guess they are trying for the difference between life with no chance of parole, life with chance of parole in x number of years, or x number of years with chance of parole after x number of years.

I vote for first option.

 

[FlaJohn]

To be fair, IIRC, it was only said that they could say she just showed up there as an example of what the G's attorneys might try to pull and not because the poster actually believed that she went there of her volition. Obviously, she didn't and everyone knows it. P&N admitted it, themselves.

I'm just sayin'.

Natal posted that he/she believes that NG should basically get a slap on the wrist for her part in this horrific crime. I have no idea why he/she has sympathy for either of the G's, I just hope that he/she's trolling and doesn't really believe some of the things he/she's posted.

 

[Tizzle]

Natal has never personally attacked anyone here, yet, Natal is constantly being attacked and I think it's time to stop. Just use the ignore option if you don't like what he has to add to the discussion. I personally don't have a problem with what Natal has to say, he is free to think and to communicate what he wishes. If a moderator doesn't feel that what he has to say is out of line, I don't see what the problem is. We are all adults and should behave as such by respecting each others ability to think freely. JMO

 

[Tizzle]

Yeah? And how do you know that the thread was removed because of him? It could have been removed because of me.

What I am saying is, it isn't our job to "correct" Natal. It is the job of a moderator, like .

Personal attacks on other posters are against TOS and this has clearly been happening way more than it should be.

ETA: Just because felt something was out of line, IF he did, it doesn't mean that we have permission to go bat$#!t crazy on someone.

 

[kbl8201]

attacking the victim is a tos too isnt it?

i give up

 

[Tizzle]

Except he's never attacked the victim. He says things that you might not like about what strategies the defense might try to use. But he has never, EVER attacked JC or her girls and has actually expressed his dislike and disgust for the G's, more than once.

And, again, just because another poster does something that, possibly, they shouldn't be doing, it doesn't mean we have permission to go crazy on them. Either ignore him OR report the post you think is in questionable. Period. No point in arguing about it. It's quite simple.

 

[kbl8201]

well i promised i wouldnt respond to his posts anymore and that lasted all of 15 minutes. i think i better heed my own advice from now on and ignore him. it's not worth my aggrivation

 

[songline]

Ok blond roots starting to show, what is IIRC.

waves to Tizzle

You are no dumb blond Jazerelle... If you are blond, then "blonds have more fun"

He continuously stands up for the Gs, or in thier defense - I am clueless as to what is anyones investment in doing that all the time. Does anyone need to help the perps attorney? does anyone need to give them more ideas? I Dont think so.....

: even one who plays devils advocate is not doing so continuously. :no: I sometimes play devils advocate but not all the time, only on occation. I found it strange right from the very start. :innocent:

The fact that he is not attacking JC or the girls is no kudos for him...he'd only accomplish getting in trouble by doing that. AND I found it also strange that someone would stick up for him so often.

I am glad that read here and put his :twocents: to it. Basically in agreement with the fact that the perps are perpes.
As far as I am concerned the Gs can kiss where the sun don't shine.

 

[songline]

While it may not "prove" the girls' ages, it will certainly give credence to Jaycee's testimony. The fact of the matter is that PG/NG implicitly (if not explicitly) accepted the ages as listed on the birth certificates. Prosecutors will likely call psychological experts to the stand to attest to the amount of control the Garridos had over Jaycee, control that would have made it impossible for her to totally override them when it came to raising the girls. If she was not allowed to tell them that she was their mother, then it follows that she was not allowed to lie to them about their ages. Like I mentioned in my previous post, PG did not correct the girls when they said that they were fifteen and eleven, strongly implying that they were told those ages by PG/NG as well. You wrote that PG/NG would have had a reason to lie about this, but why would they lie and say that the girls were fifteen and eleven when it would have been in their best interest to tell them they're younger than they actually are? IMO, the jury will have no reason to doubt the girls' ages as listed on the birth certificates since all parties (Jaycee, PG, and NG) seem to have been in agreement on this during Jaycee's captivity.

And like songline noted, there are other tests -- e.g., physiological and dental tests -- that can be done to corroborate Jaycee's testimony regarding the girls' ages. Not only that, but judging from the photographs I've seen of their property, PG was a major hoarder. It seems likely that there'd be photographs with dates on them, receipts, etc. Even the manufacture and/or purchase dates of baby/child clothing and toys could be used to construct a timeline. We all know Jaycee kept a journal, and IIRC, forensic scientists can even run tests to determine the age of the ink.

All that being said, I think it will come down to common sense. I understand that you often take the devil's advocate approach, but do you honestly believe that the dates on the birth certificates aren't correct and that Jaycee would have any reason to lie about this? I doubt that anyone here, including you, really believe they're younger than they are or that Jaycee would lie. IMO, the jury will likely feel the same way.

I basically don't know what the point of this is? But I too was trying to convince and there is no use.

PG and NG abducted JC when she was 11 raped her and held her captive or 18 years, she came home with 2 kids.that she had while she was a kid.
her childhood was stolen, her education was nixed, her contact with her family was torn...
WHAT IS THE POINT of this trying to prove anything, why are we having this Kind of talk? and I mean ME TOO....... we know what happened if someone has questions let them read,,, it is all here on these threads.:innocent:

 

[kbl8201]

im trying to worry more about the hearing then this right now.

 

[BeenaBobba]

I basically don't know what the point of this is? But I too was trying to convince and there is no use.

Hey, what can I say? I enjoy debating. :crazy:

 

[Delrod]

You are no dumb blond Jazerelle... If you are blond, then "blonds have more fun"

He continuously stands up for the Gs, or in thier defense - I am clueless as to what is anyones investment in doing that all the time. Does anyone need to help the perps attorney? does anyone need to give them more ideas? I Dont think so..... QUOTE ends here

The defense attorneys aren't reading this board looking for ideas.
But if they were then it would certainly be cause for concern because it could be used as grounds to dismiss any convictions of the Gs on the grounds that they didn't have competent legal representation.