Tony Padilla part 2

[sumbunny]

I had never seen a picture of Tony..~fans self~ He's a studmuffin.

Please come back Tony!

 

[cecybeans]

KC's a female impersonator.

Oh, Brini, that's an insult to drag queens everywhere, lol!

You are giving her more credit than I would. I think she's an android. Or a Chatty Cathy wind-up doll (zowie, that dates me back to the Pleistocene).

Or maybe an avatar that lived in the cyber cracks amongst all the things she copied and posted on her myspaces and facebooks and Photobuckets.

I just don't see her exuding anything that is not completely superficial and two-dimensional. She sees things, commits them to memory and regurgitates them when it suits her purpose. Only there is no comprehensive context to any of it.

Maybe she's a person impersonator. That broke.

 

[Brini]

Oh, Brini, that's an insult to drag queens everywhere, lol!

You are giving her more credit than I would. I think she's an android. Or a Chatty Cathy wind-up doll (zowie, that dates me back to the Pleistocene).

Or maybe an avatar that lived in the cyber cracks amongst all the things she copied and posted on her myspaces and facebooks and Photobuckets.

I just don't see her exuding anything that is not completely superficial and two-dimensional. She sees things, commits them to memory and regurgitates them when it suits her purpose. Only there is no comprehensive context to any of it.

Maybe she's a person impersonator. That broke.

Blow up doll?

 

[Brini]

OLG...I just discussed this with someone...now wouldn't that "shock" us?! What if they were to come out and say that they believe somehow Casey was involved? Reasons why I think they would want to work this angle (cause surely the other way hasn't "worked" for them), one can surmise.

You know what would shock me?

If it turned out that KC really WAS attacked, in Blanchard Park, by Samantha's kids (The Sippy Cup Gang).

They beat her about the knees with their little plastic cups, which were weighted with tightly packed pacifiers, and bits of nappies, and bibs.

While KC was bravely fighting off this toddler onslaught, Sam stole Caylee.

The kids then hopped into their car seats, and Sam sped away.


Criminals ARE getting younger, these days!

 

[Brini]

I had never seen a picture of Tony..~fans self~ He's a studmuffin.

Please come back Tony!

He's a hottie! Coupla the ladies plum forgot their questions, when he came on.

But, if I had my choice.. it would be Yuri. :blowkiss: (NOT gonna make any cop "gun jokes" )

 

[Brini]

Ummmm, well, I did feel a bit uncomfortable while reading....

Yeah, some of 'em were downright rude.

 

[LC446]

I very rarely post, but I felt the need to say a few things after reading this entire thread. First, I enjoyed reading Tony's posts and his perception of things, even if I didn't agree with his perception of the A's. (It still puzzles me, but he is entitled to his opinion, just like I'm entitled to mine.) I can respectfully disagree. Second, I didn't think anyone was rude to him. Several asked tough questions and made statements but no one was rude in my opinion. Third, I think some of those questions needed to be asked and some of the statements made. It seemed to me that several people were fawning (might not be the right term but it's what came to mind) whenever he came on, almost treating him as if he were some type of celebrity. We had never heard of him until he was involved in this case and THAT is the only reason we know him now.

There are some amazingly smart and insightful people on WS and I learn from reading their posts every day, they have great opinions and can piece a puzzle together like no other. Tony was a piece of that puzzle to me, nothing more, nothing less. It was good to hear from him but if he doesn't return I don't think it will hinder anyone in any way.

Now, I will step back and await the barrage that I'm sure is to come. Just please know that I am not trying to offend anyone, I just wanted to share my opinion.

 

[pferrin]

You know what would shock me?

If it turned out that KC really WAS attacked, in Blanchard Park, by Samantha's kids (The Sippy Cup Gang).

They beat her about the knees with their little plastic cups, which were weighted with tightly packed pacifiers, and bits of nappies, and bibs.

While KC was bravely fighting off this toddler onslaught, Sam stole Caylee.

The kids then hopped into their car seats, and Sam sped away.


Criminals ARE getting younger, these days!

Thanks I needed that laugh.

I was also uncomfortable with some of the questions and statements to TP.

Am very grateful for the info he offered and the time he spent ....sometimes answering the same question many times with great patence.

So if you still read here..Thanks Tony.

 

[magic-cat]

Honestly, I'm struggling to see where anyone has been unkind. Could we have an example please?

Don't forget the first thread on this topic was shut down in part to the poster bickering and impolite posts.
We took another shot at it on this thread and just a quick review shows me 30 deleted posts on this thread and I don't know how many were edited.

The reason nobody saw the "rude" posts? See JBeans post quoted above...they were removed. There were some pretty rude things said to Tony since he came back to chat with us...sometimes unless you are there in the thick of it, then you never see the "bad" posts as they are removed for that very reason.

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

I'm usually (not always) a fence-sitter. I've been trying to decide what I really think about Tony Padilla, everything he said, what our overall response here at WS was to him and his leaving. Although I sure didn't agree with everything he said I've pretty well decided that I think it's our loss. If you think about it, he wasn't gaining anything. Some might think he was testing the waters or taking our pulse on what's going on but, heck, I read here for three months before I ever joined. The only reason I joined was because I wanted to be a contributor. I already knew after three months the tone of what most posters thought. Tony didn't have to join or post to find that out either. He wasn't, imo, using us but chose to join in with us to contribute. He didn't have to use this forum to "get his word out." I think there are a few tv personalities that would have welcomed his appearance on their shows. . . and they did, as he told us the night before his appearance, to explain his position on the "contract" with JB. He didn't need us.

I felt uncomfortable with his comments about his uncle. Especially compared to his praise for the Anthonys' hospitality. But his family is a lot different than mine and his perspective of the Anthonys is from the inside out while mine is from the outside in. His opinions have as much right to be different from mine as many other fellow WSers' rights are. . . But for some reason his posts seemed cause a different, more radical reaction than a regular WS poster's would. More extreme on both ends; hardly the bell curve most posts receive. While no one has ever thanked a regular member for coming in to post with us (that I've ever seen!), there has also never been an entire thread started on a member based on the veracity of the insights they have posted here.

I sure don't know what the answer is but I do know we had nothing to lose; Tony had nothing to gain and I'm really, really sad it all turned out the way it did. How can we fix this so it doesn't happen again? We all still have to be able to express ourselves but is there some way we can figure out how to do that without cutting our noses off to spite our faces?

 

[CuriousTwo]

I very rarely post, but I felt the need to say a few things after reading this entire thread. First, I enjoyed reading Tony's posts and his perception of things, even if I didn't agree with his perception of the A's. (It still puzzles me, but he is entitled to his opinion, just like I'm entitled to mine.) I can respectfully disagree. Second, I didn't think anyone was rude to him. Several asked tough questions and made statements but no one was rude in my opinion. Third, I think some of those questions needed to be asked and some of the statements made. It seemed to me that several people were fawning (might not be the right term but it's what came to mind) whenever he came on, almost treating him as if he were some type of celebrity. We had never heard of him until he was involved in this case and THAT is the only reason we know him now.

There are some amazingly smart and insightful people on WS and I learn from reading their posts every day, they have great opinions and can piece a puzzle together like no other. Tony was a piece of that puzzle to me, nothing more, nothing less. It was good to hear from him but if he doesn't return I don't think it will hinder anyone in any way.

Now, I will step back and await the barrage that I'm sure is to come. Just please know that I am not trying to offend anyone, I just wanted to share my opinion.

I would add that I don't understand why anyone who is personally involved in the case would even post on a general forum. JMHO.

 

[magic-cat]

I'm usually (not always) a fence-sitter. I've been trying to decide what I really think about Tony Padilla, everything he said, what our overall response here at WS was to him and his leaving. Although I sure didn't agree with everything he said I've pretty well decided that I think it's our loss. If you think about it, he wasn't gaining anything. Some might think he was testing the waters or taking our pulse on what's going on but, heck, I read here for three months before I ever joined. The only reason I joined was because I wanted to be a contributor. I already knew after three months the tone of what most posters thought. Tony didn't have to join or post to find that out either. He wasn't, imo, using us but chose to join in with us to contribute. He didn't have to use this forum to "get his word out." I think there are a few tv personalities that would have welcomed his appearance on their shows. . . and they did, as he told us the night before his appearance, to explain his position on the "contract" with JB. He didn't need us.

I felt uncomfortable with his comments about his uncle. Especially compared to his praise for the Anthonys' hospitality. But his family is a lot different than mine and his perspective of the Anthonys is from the inside out while mine is from the outside in. His opinions have as much right to be different from mine as many other fellow WSers' rights are. . . But for some reason his posts seemed cause a different, more radical reaction than a regular WS poster's would. More extreme on both ends; hardly the bell curve most posts receive. While no one has ever thanked a regular member for coming in to post with us (that I've ever seen!), there has also never been an entire thread started on a member based on the veracity of the insights they have posted here.

I sure don't know what the answer is but I do know we had nothing to lose; Tony had nothing to gain and I'm really, really sad it all turned out the way it did. How can we fix this so it doesn't happen again? We all still have to be able to express ourselves but is there some way we can figure out how to do that without cutting our noses off to spite our faces?

Not to be nitpicky or anything, but regarding his "take" on the Anthony's being from the "inside"? His take on them is, to me, an illusion. He rode in on a white horse and saved their daughter by posting half a million in bond...and this would certainly alter how they would behave with him personally...it doesn't mean that what he saw was real in any way, and I know for a FACT that it was NOT because I have seen my fill of how they operate and that is exactly what they were doing with Tony-operation be super nice to the man with the LARGE capability to help us! JMO of course...:crazy:

 

[CuriousTwo]

Not to be nitpicky or anything, but regarding his "take" on the Anthony's being from the "inside"? His take on them is, to me, an illusion. He rode in on a white horse and saved their daughter by posting half a million in bond...and this would certainly alter how they would behave with him personally...it doesn't mean that what he saw was real in any way, and I know for a FACT that it was NOT because I have seen my fill of how they operate and that is exactly what they were doing with Tony-operation be super nice to the man with the LARGE capability to help us! JMO of course...:crazy:

During the time that the Padillas became involved, IIRC, was when protesters were outside the A home voicing their opposition to the A's behavior, and when the media and the public were baffled and at the height of being non-supportive of the way the A's handled the "search" for Caylee. I agree with the above that at that point, the A's would have been wonderfully gracious and hospitable to anyone who appeared to be a "knight in shining armor" for them. So naturally, anyone who didn't pressure or question them would be treated wonderfully by them. When TP questioned them and asked the hard questions, he was banned from the home. JHMO.

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

Not to be nitpicky or anything, but regarding his "take" on the Anthony's being from the "inside"? His take on them is, to me, an illusion. He rode in on a white horse and saved their daughter by posting half a million in bond...and this would certainly alter how they would behave with him personally...it doesn't mean that what he saw was real in any way, and I know for a FACT that it was NOT because I have seen my fill of how they operate and that is exactly what they were doing with Tony-operation be super nice to the man with the LARGE capability to help us! JMO of course...:crazy:

I agree; I didn't like this either. I shouldn't have tried to make excuses for him other than to point out his perspective and opinion are opposite of mine.

 

[magic-cat]

During the time that the Padillas became involved, IIRC, was when protesters were outside the A home voicing their opposition to the A's behavior, and when the media and the public were baffled and at the height of being non-supportive of the way the A's handled the "search" for Caylee. I agree with the above that at that point, the A's would have been wonderfully gracious and hospitable to anyone who appeared to be a "knight in shining armor" for them. So naturally, anyone who didn't pressure or question them would be treated wonderfully by them. When TP questioned them and asked the hard questions, he was banned from the home. JHMO.

Actually that was LP that was banned from the home. Tony remains on good terms with them...imagine that? To me it just shows their TRUE colors even MORESO that they are SOOOOOO nice to the man with the big pocket book who rides in to bail out Casey, but the man searching for their granddaughter? The one who relies on volunteers and donations? They treated HIM like pure kaka! There is a TRUTH revealed in those actions-they are shape-shifters too so their daughter at least came by it naturally.:furious:

 

[magic-cat]

I agree; I didn't like this either. I shouldn't have tried to make excuses for him other than to point out his perspective and opinion are opposite of mine.

His "perspective" was based on a VERY narrow set of circumstances and I for one do NOT accept the face value of the "niceness" that they portrayed for and to Tony...it was an act for the very large gratuity he provided for Casey THUS enabling THEM not to have to attempt to come up with it...so...of course they were nice. Only a complete and utter embicile would NOT be nice in those circumstances...

 

[RR0004]

I'm usually (not always) a fence-sitter. I've been trying to decide what I really think about Tony Padilla, everything he said, what our overall response here at WS was to him and his leaving. Although I sure didn't agree with everything he said I've pretty well decided that I think it's our loss. If you think about it, he wasn't gaining anything. Some might think he was testing the waters or taking our pulse on what's going on but, heck, I read here for three months before I ever joined. The only reason I joined was because I wanted to be a contributor. I already knew after three months the tone of what most posters thought. Tony didn't have to join or post to find that out either. He wasn't, imo, using us but chose to join in with us to contribute. He didn't have to use this forum to "get his word out." I think there are a few tv personalities that would have welcomed his appearance on their shows. . . and they did, as he told us the night before his appearance, to explain his position on the "contract" with JB. He didn't need us.

I felt uncomfortable with his comments about his uncle. Especially compared to his praise for the Anthonys' hospitality. But his family is a lot different than mine and his perspective of the Anthonys is from the inside out while mine is from the outside in. His opinions have as much right to be different from mine as many other fellow WSers' rights are. . . But for some reason his posts seemed cause a different, more radical reaction than a regular WS poster's would. More extreme on both ends; hardly the bell curve most posts receive. While no one has ever thanked a regular member for coming in to post with us (that I've ever seen!), there has also never been an entire thread started on a member based on the veracity of the insights they have posted here.

I sure don't know what the answer is but I do know we had nothing to lose; Tony had nothing to gain and I'm really, really sad it all turned out the way it did. How can we fix this so it doesn't happen again? We all still have to be able to express ourselves but is there some way we can figure out how to do that without cutting our noses off to spite our faces?

...or critiquing what others are posting...not responding to their posts IMO...downright criticizing the poster. Personally, I think we were fortunate to have him here. He was just starting to feel comfortable...I think he liked being a part of WS. Come on...he was on three separate times in a short span. He was hooked! JMHO

 

[Kimster]

I would add that I don't understand why anyone who is personally involved in the case would even post on a general forum. JMHO.

Why not? Perhaps they enjoy posting just as much as you or I do. I don't understand why it seems so unusual just because one is involved in a high-profile case. :waitasec:

 

[Brini]

The reason nobody saw the "rude" posts? See JBeans post quoted above...they were removed. There were some pretty rude things said to Tony since he came back to chat with us...sometimes unless you are there in the thick of it, then you never see the "bad" posts as they are removed for that very reason.

Some of us DID see some rude posts.

Not confrontive or enquiring-- rude.

 

[Brini]

During the time that the Padillas became involved, IIRC, was when protesters were outside the A home voicing their opposition to the A's behavior, and when the media and the public were baffled and at the height of being non-supportive of the way the A's handled the "search" for Caylee. I agree with the above that at that point, the A's would have been wonderfully gracious and hospitable to anyone who appeared to be a "knight in shining armor" for them. So naturally, anyone who didn't pressure or question them would be treated wonderfully by them. When TP questioned them and asked the hard questions, he was banned from the home. JHMO.

That was LP.

TP is not an investigator.