respectfully snipped from the last thread, OP Salem:
"Again CZ - I appreciate your heart and admire you for tenacity but I have to say that the affidavit clearly says that SA threatened the lives of BD & HD and that SA admitted that he had done so. At this point, knowing that LE will have a paper trail and that LE can not openly lie in a sworn affidavit, I have to go with what LE told the judge.
I know it can be embarrassing to admit to domestic violence in your home and there is a certain amount of shame associated with such disturbances, but I really question BD's response to YOU, her friend. A friend that is standing by her and doing everything she can to help. And, I'm sorry to say that if BD can tell you stories like this, I have to wonder what she is telling LE. This was a documented incident, not just some rumor that is floating around. Does BD not understand, that if you wanted to, you could, at a minimum, ask for the incident report on the 911 call? (At least in CA you can ask for any incident report from LE and they have to give it to you).
I'm going to leave this alone now. I am just amazed at BD's trying to sweep this under the rug.
Salem"
Again, I appreciate your honesty with me... however, I must continue this debate just a little bit more.
As far as the affidavits are concerned, I am not the only one who have noticed several things that I am just going to call 'off'....
First, is the fact that LE outright called Billie a liar, and told any MSM that would listen that they had NOT told her she had failed her poly. In the affidavit, it clearly states that: "Following the polygraph examination, DUNN was given an opportunity to explain her results of the polygraph examination and DUNN could not explain why she failed the polygraph examination."
The sentence before this, which is clear as mud to me, could be construed in one of two ways, IMO - either that Billie was told that SA failed, or the affidavit just simply contains errors: "On the second attempt to conduct a polygraph examination of DUNN, she did consent to the polygraph and the results of the examination was deception indicated, meaning that
ATKINS failed the polygraph examination on the relevant questions of the participation in the disappearance of Hailey Dunn."
So, LE, in their own statement, have at the very least sworn that they told Billie she failed,
and also either told her SA failed also, or just plain messed up and put ATKINS where they meant DUNN.
Then of course it the NYE 'party'. It was simply a gathering of Billie's family around her during a difficult time. But, the affidavit states that: "Information was also obtained that ATKINS and Billie DUNN hosted a New Years Eve party at their home after Hailey DUNN had been reported missing. ADKINS downplayed the 'party' stating they just had a few friends over to the house to have drinks on New Years Eve."
Where was the information obtained? Only by SA? I feel quite sure that LE must have interviewed the people who were with Billie that night.... I wonder if anyone else considered it a 'party'? Because we know that Billie did not.
Which brings me back around to the Feb. 2010 incident. I am fully aware that there is a log of all calls coming in, that includes at least the date, time, address, at least one party involved, and type of call. I am also quite sure that LE looked back as far as they were able to ascertain how many times they had been called to Billie's house. If there were no charges or report filed, then LE only has the small bit of info in the call log to go on.
So, it is very possible that all LE saw recently was "2/??/2010, 00:00?m, 1804 Chestnut, B.Dunn, domestic", or something to that effect. And, again, JMO, this is all LE has.
Now, in my mind (and JMO), LE questioned SA about this in their investigation of Hailey's disappearance. And he brought up (or admitted after being questioned more than once about this incident) that he threatened both Billie's and Hailey's lives. I think this for a couple of reasons - one being that this incident is wedged in between LE looking at SA's phone and then SA's defamation of Hailey's character. Also is the wording of this particular paragraph... it just could be interpreted more than one way. Another is because, as many people here have pointed out, he just seems to get a kick out of lying and misleading LE.
Then, there is the 'illegal narcotic' issue. After everything else in the affidavits, why would anyone believe this in particular. Personally, I find it hard to believe that anyone would admit to buying illegal narcotics from someone to LE just out of the blue. Yes, LE may have questioned Billie about the ATM withdrawals, but still, it's not like LE had any evidence or proof, or even an idea (that I would think) about that. I don't really believe that some random 'dealer' would have called the tip line to say 'Hey, I sold Hailey's mom drugs the day she went missing'. So, in my mind anyway, I am wondering why in the world would Billie say this? And if LE has already 'stretched the truth' in the affidavits, why not just go ahead and go all out?
Again, this is just debating, I am not calling LE liars.
Again Salem, I mean no disrespect at all..... in fact, I have come to appreciate your honesty and integrity, which is why I would like to continue this little back and forth. I am actually looking forward to your thoughts on this. I am not able to keep up with the threads very well anymore (as you can see since I am just now responding to your post where I am), so if you could shoot me a PM with the thread and post #, that would be great.
Thanks.
