DairyGirl
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2009
- Messages
- 5,205
- Reaction score
- 42
That is my understanding; TS stated this though
This is true. She may not have her stories straight.
That is my understanding; TS stated this though
Dairy...when did TS post this? Is it recent?Ok, I am confused. I just read on TPS's Facebook where she said that LM is the one that told her how to get in touch with EJ in San Antonio. Didn't she say before that she is the one that told LM how to get in touch with EJ in San Antonio? Does anyone remember? Because she had a new cell phone that she got in San Antonio and after EJ called her she called LM and gave him the number?
Dairy...when did TS post this? Is it recent?
I'm saying that yes, her bail is too high. She has not been charged with murder, that I know of.
In fact, the only thing she is obviously guilty of is custodial interference, everything else is speculation at this point. Because they don't know where the baby is, and mom isn't talking, they are attempting to keep her in jail with a high bail for not cooperating with them, imoo.
ETA;
My anger, and concern is that judges are doing this more and more. The common man cannot possibly attain that amount. The purpose of the high bail is to keep her in jail as if he judged her with no bail. So then why didn't he? Because by law her couldn't with the charges and evidence against her.
It's an abuse of power, and The Constitution set safeguards in place to protect the common man from such abuses. More and more judges are not respecting The Constitution, therefore, we should all be concerned.
Here's some history as to why our Constitution set these safeguards in place.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eighth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution#Excessive_bail
I'm sorry for this being o/t. I'll not bring it up again in this thread.
I'm saying that yes, her bail is too high. She has not been charged with murder, that I know of.
In fact, the only thing she is obviously guilty of is custodial interference, everything else is speculation at this point. Because they don't know where the baby is, and mom isn't talking, they are attempting to keep her in jail with a high bail for not cooperating with them, imoo.
[snip]
Ok, I am confused. I just read on TPS's Facebook where she said that LM is the one that told her how to get in touch with EJ in San Antonio. Didn't she say before that she is the one that told LM how to get in touch with EJ in San Antonio? Does anyone remember? Because she had a new cell phone that she got in San Antonio and after EJ called her she called LM and gave him the number?
Oh brother...she said she got EJ's number when EJ called HER. She then called Logan and gave him the number....IIRC
Ok, I am confused. I just read on TPS's Facebook where she said that LM is the one that told her how to get in touch with EJ in San Antonio. Didn't she say before that she is the one that told LM how to get in touch with EJ in San Antonio? Does anyone remember? Because she had a new cell phone that she got in San Antonio and after EJ called her she called LM and gave him the number?
Tammi previously said on NG that Logan told her about Eliz's myspace, she left her a message, and then Eliz texted and then called her. Rumor had this occurring around Dec 21.
Because of the 'grandma' call reported by the babysitter on Dec 23, I had that pegged as the earliest day identified that Tammi and Eliz spoke on the phone.
As evidence that this happened, Tammi offered NG a copy of the message - the one in which Eliz says she is 'ever worried' about being traced (contained in NG transcript).
A few things are curious about this.
First, the only message I know of that Tammi left Eliz is dated Dec 31 (titled 'Gabriel'). It could be that an earlier message was deleted. I don't think so, but it could be.
Second, the 'ever worried' message is dated Dec 29. (NG transcript)
Third, in Eliz's hearing, the county attorney indicates that Logan did not know that Eliz was in San Antonio until Dec 27, and that that information was determined by LE.
To add further confusion, Tammi stated that she had her attorney and also her friend call Eliz on Dec 26.
I suppose that Eliz could have called Tammi and blocked her number from showing, which would explain some of it. However, Tammi specifically said that she had those two people call Eliz on Dec 26, which means Tammi had the number then, and of course, could have given it to Logan then.
It's great fun trying to do timelines in this case.
ETA: Oh! I almost forgot! Tammi also said that the last time she talked to Logan was Dec 23, and that he had hung up on her, and therefore they didn't speak after that.
ETA again: I believe Logan, and I believe the county attorney, that Logan didn't know Eliz was in San Antonio until Dec 27, and that that was determined by LE.
Amster said: What date did TS talk about EJ traveling and the underground?
December 23rd on Facebook, Amster
Has the grandfather said in any of his interviews if he had met the Smiths? EJ borrowed his car. Would the Smiths know she had transportation and where she got it? She told the grandfather,iirc, that she needed it for a job interview. I believe she borrowed it on the 18th. So it is possible the only one who knew she had transportation was the grandfather.
Tammi previously said on NG that Logan told her about Eliz's myspace, she left her a message, and then Eliz texted and then called her. Rumor had this occurring around Dec 21.
Because of the 'grandma' call reported by the babysitter on Dec 23, I had that pegged as the earliest day identified that Tammi and Eliz spoke on the phone.
<snip>
ETA: Oh! I almost forgot! Tammi also said that the last time she talked to Logan was Dec 23, and that he had hung up on her, and therefore they didn't speak after that.
Tammi's 12/23 FB message "Pray for Gabriel.". Tammi knew they were in Texas....not sure when she realize the area code was San Antonio
Dec 23rd at 1:37pm is odd. Wasn't that the time she was supposed to be just arriving back at the hotel after her appointment, and around the time she was supposed to be talking to someone on the phone?
"Kamille wrote: Dec 23rd at 1:37pm is odd. Wasn't that the time she was supposed to be just arriving back at the hotel after her appointment, and around the time she was supposed to be talking to someone on the phone?"
I'm still wondering if the 23rd is the correct date for the babysitter, was that verified?
What we have now is that she would have been on myspace within minutes of getting back to the hotel room.
Yep! And if this was right after the library visit...her status would be interesting to know. "Where there's..." Where there's a will there's a way???