Found Deceased TX - Michael Chambers, 70, Hunt County, 10 March 2017 #5

[Midge Montana]

So it’s OK for RM to lie about the case, any evidence, and the Chambers family, but it’s not OK for Klein to state the hard facts, and set it straight on what’s really going on? Hmm. Maybe consider how the Chambers family feels about what’s being said about that here, and how it’s affecting them. They read here constantly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Well, God does give him his authority, you know.
If he thinks it is okay for his officers to kidney punch an 8-months-pregnant woman multiple times, then what's a few lies to cover up the fact that you didn't do your J-O-B?

 

[ocgrad]

I went and rewatched the video. Meeks is definitely reading here (waving hello!).

I just cannot get over how defensive he is about people's comments. Its almost as though he thinks unless you defend him and his actions 1110% then you are anti-law enforcement. No....I can support LE and still think there are bad ones in the bunch. It isn't all or nothing... It seriously irritates me that he is practically playing the victim card. No one supports us, etc.

But back to MC. Meeks said he could get us the make/model of the bike. Has that happened yet? Why not? I would think it would be a quick thing to do. Atleast a color description and general idea of what it looked like. Whats the hold up? It should be as simple as looking at the official report and reading the description that was given to them.

Also? Why wouldnt he comment on whether or not BC took a poly? Would answering that hurt the investigation? I doubt it.

I don't understand what he is protecting in the investigation since he believes 100% it is not a homicide. If he believes wholeheartedly there is no bad guy to prosecute then any and all details could be shared to assist in finding him.

I also don't understand since in the early part of the investigation the FBI and TX Rangers were working there, why they didn't track his GPS. HC may only have the technology to ping it to a general area but the other agencies have much greater capabilities. In addition to tracking bank transactions and uses of his DL or credit cards it seems like that would have been their main purpose for being there for the 2 weeks. But they NEVER asked any agency to track the GPS of a missing person, it was only done through the PI hired earlier in the investigation 8 months after the fact. Even if they didnt have tracking data on his phone why wouldn't they have asked for surveillance video on a couple of the main roads within that first week anyway, trying to find a missing person!?
Not bashing LE in general but can't help it if the facts bash HCSO.

Since I don't post much I will also add how ridiculous the idea of him riding a bike 17 miles at 4.5 mph seems. It would be pretty hard to do, because it's so slow. And it would mean being in the saddle for 4 hrs. That's tough! You would have to build up quite a lot of endurance to do that and only stopping once! Now I can understand if going biking just taking ID and cash, but not to commit suicide. I wish SM would state facts, like if all they really have is a time the phone left the house and when it was thrown off the bridge and another point or 2 in between so they know it went through Quinlan and in all took 4 hrs. If those are the facts and everything else in between, like it traveled at a speed of 2.5, no 4.5 mph, on a bike is speculation, then we could understand that they are either dealing with a lot more evidence to his depressed state or are making this as easy on them as possible without going to the trouble to figure out where his body may actually be buried between his house and the bridge.

I find it quite coincidental that this occurred the day BC went back to work. What went on between them those weeks she was stuck at home? A lot of squirrelly stuff can happen when you are involved in an affair and suddenly the normal flow changes like for her recovery. For most people who find an affair is going on there is talk of a divorce, which can get heated. Sometimes the bf reacts badly when he finds you aren't getting a divorce or if you dont want to see him anymore. Just stating what I think is normal in marital and extramarital relations, my opinion only of course. Affairs make this more involved, create motive and make for more people to investigate. Based on something as basic as MC cell phone tracking and a bicycle, I'm not confident in HCSO.

 

[JazzTune]

I don't understand what he is protecting in the investigation since he believes 100% it is not a homicide. If he believes wholeheartedly there is no bad guy to prosecute then any and all details could be shared to assist in finding him.

I also don't understand since in the early part of the investigation the FBI and TX Rangers were working there, why they didn't track his GPS. HC may only have the technology to ping it to a general area but the other agencies have much greater capabilities. In addition to tracking bank transactions and uses of his DL or credit cards it seems like that would have been their main purpose for being there for the 2 weeks. But they NEVER asked any agency to track the GPS of a missing person, it was only done through the PI hired earlier in the investigation 8 months after the fact. Even if they didnt have tracking data on his phone why wouldn't they have asked for surveillance video on a couple of the main roads within that first week anyway, trying to find a missing person!?
Not bashing LE in general but can't help it if the facts bash HCSO.

Since I don't post much I will also add how ridiculous the idea of him riding a bike 17 miles at 4.5 mph seems. It would be pretty hard to do, because it's so slow. And it would mean being in the saddle for 4 hrs. That's tough! You would have to build up quite a lot of endurance to do that and only stopping once! Now I can understand if going biking just taking ID and cash, but not to commit suicide. I wish SM would state facts, like if all they really have is a time the phone left the house and when it was thrown off the bridge and another point or 2 in between so they know it went through Quinlan and in all took 4 hrs. If those are the facts and everything else in between, like it traveled at a speed of 2.5, no 4.5 mph, on a bike is speculation, then we could understand that they are either dealing with a lot more evidence to his depressed state or are making this as easy on them as possible without going to the trouble to figure out where his body may actually be buried between his house and the bridge.

I find it quite coincidental that this occurred the day BC went back to work. What went on between them those weeks she was stuck at home? A lot of squirrelly stuff can happen when you are involved in an affair and suddenly the normal flow changes like for her recovery. For most people who find an affair is going on there is talk of a divorce, which can get heated. Sometimes the bf reacts badly when he finds you aren't getting a divorce or if you dont want to see him anymore. Just stating what I think is normal in marital and extramarital relations, my opinion only of course. Affairs make this more involved, create motive and make for more people to investigate. Based on something as basic as MC cell phone tracking and a bicycle, I'm not confident in HCSO.

( BBM )

Well, this post proves you need to post a whole lot more! Excellent analysis! Very well said.

Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts. They are all good, but one that especially jumps out at me is the one I have bolded:

"...Not bashing LE in general but can't help it if the facts bash HCSO..."

Sums it up in a tidy nutshell. Much of what we've been discussing for the last several days.

We aren't bashing HCSO. The facts are.

Thank you again for taking the time to post your well-articulated opinion....


JMO

 

[Hstevenson86]

Does anyone know which neighbors helped becca with the golf cart/ atv search?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Nosy88]

Does anyone know which neighbors helped becca with the golf cart/ atv search?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The neighbors that are JC1’s inlaws.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Razz]

I went and rewatched the video. Meeks is definitely reading here (waving hello!).

I just cannot get over how defensive he is about people's comments. Its almost as though he thinks unless you defend him and his actions 1110% then you are anti-law enforcement. No....I can support LE and still think there are bad ones in the bunch. It isn't all or nothing... It seriously irritates me that he is practically playing the victim card. No one supports us, etc.

But back to MC. Meeks said he could get us the make/model of the bike. Has that happened yet? Why not? I would think it would be a quick thing to do. Atleast a color description and general idea of what it looked like. Whats the hold up? It should be as simple as looking at the official report and reading the description that was given to them.

Also? Why wouldnt he comment on whether or not BC took a poly? Would answering that hurt the investigation? I doubt it.

I think the reason SM didn't answer the polygraph question is because it was no one's business and it might have violated her rights too in that all interviews stay confidential.

Which is what bothers me about her "3 boyfriends." I really don't think it's right for the PIs to reveal that to the public
at this time. If I were one of the three, I'd be a tad unhappy about that.

About the bike and if there is one:
I bought my son a bike several years
ago as he wanted it to ride to work.
(About 1/2 mile away). I didn't spend a lot because there was a good chance it wouldn't get used much. As it turned out it didn't. I have no clue what the make and model was, only that I bought it at Target, it was black and a
3 speed (I think).

I'm sorry if the family gets upset reading here. Maybe they shouldn't or they should put me on ignore. I'm trying to stay fair and weigh both sides. I'm trying hard not to be blunt but I'm not going to sugarcoat things either. I have no connection with the family or Hunt CO SO. (And yes, I googled SM a long time ago.) I have no connection to Texas. I am former LE, female and have worked in the good ol boy network for a good part of my working life, so I'm not particularly partial to male dominated departments or to bullying, bumbling Sheriffs. And without compromising my integrity I learned how to work with them and around them.

The most important thing in my mind,
right now, is finding MC. It's going to take cooperation from BOTH sides. And sometimes being nice to people who don't deserve it is necessary.

Sent from my SM-J727T using Tapatalk

 

[Midge Montana]

Which is what bothers me about her "3 boyfriends." I really don't think it's right for the PIs to reveal that to the public
at this time. If I were one of the three, I'd be a tad unhappy about that.


Sent from my SM-J727T using Tapatalk

For situations like this, I go with "But for".
Here's an example:
But for the action, the result would not have happened. For example, but for running the red light, the collision would not have occurred.

But for the parties being involved in extra-martial affairs, nobody would be exposing them for having extra-marital affairs.
If you don't think affairs have anything to do with disappearances and murders, assaults and other revenge, I don't know what to tell you.
An afternoon of reading here on WS or watching Dateline, etc. will show that affairs have so much to do with nefarious deeds that that is one of the first things LE will NORMALLY investigate.
And I'd bet that very often, when affairs are a piece of the puzzle, they're the reason someone ends up dead. (I don't have data to show, but I'd be interested to find the percentages somewhere.

If you don't have all the facts out on the table, or refuse to consider them as possible motive, you surely aren't seeing all of the picture, and that's not conducive to making a determination.
(I mean 'general you' not you in particular.) IMO. MOO.

 

[Tripod]

I saw the reference about the uneducated remark but Klein's
implication was clear. It was a jab and all those who think SM is the bad guy are doing flips and cartwheels. I love to jab too, but not when things are this serious.

As far as BC staying quiet. Maybe she doesn't feel the need to justify any remarks. Maybe she doesn't want to talk about MC because it would bring further disgrace on the family and
MC's image. As far as divorce goes, it would have worked just fine for BC.
On the other hand, MC would probably have to give up his garage and his house. In other words, he would have been devastated, financially and emotionally.

MC strikes me as a very sensitive man
and a very private one too. IMO, talking about issues he was having with BC were best kept between the two of them, not airing "dirty" laundry to his
family or anyone else for that matter. So I don't think him being depressed is out of the realm of possibility. In fact,
I would be shocked if he wasn't.

I would like MC to be found. But I feel people need to quell their anger for a bit and work in cooperation with SM
or hire their own searchers and/or
divers.

Right now there are two unfortunate, adversarial sides. He was murdered or he committed suicide.
In SM's investigation, he has said there is no evidence of wrongdoing. And according to him, other sheriff agencies have said the same thing.
Perhaps it's time for the other agencies to speak out. But honestly....I don't think the family or part of the public will be satisfied with anything but murder.

So I am hoping that Klein & Co. will continue to to their due diligence and leave the bashing and one upmanship to others.

Sent from my SM-J727T using Tapatalk

There is still a third possibility to consider- that MC left of his own accord and is living somewhere else. I know that's probably quite far-fetched, but it's something I keep in my thoughts.

 

[SavetheQueen]

There is still a third possibility to consider- that MC left of his own accord and is living somewhere else. I know that's probably quite far-fetched, but it's something I keep in my thoughts.

It’s my #2 scenario.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[jellybean96]

Hunt Co Theft Reports on FB has release a photo of what the bike is said to look like.

 

[Razz]

For situations like this, I go with "But for".
Here's an example:
But for the action, the result would not have happened. For example, but for running the red light, the collision would not have occurred.

But for the parties being involved in extra-martial affairs, nobody would be exposing them for having extra-marital affairs.
If you don't think affairs have anything to do with disappearances and murders, assaults and other revenge, I don't know what to tell you.
An afternoon of reading here on WS or watching Dateline, etc. will show that affairs have so much to do with nefarious deeds that that is one of the first things LE will NORMALLY investigate.
And I'd bet that very often, when affairs are a piece of the puzzle, they're the reason someone ends up dead. (I don't have data to show, but I'd be interested to find the percentages somewhere.

If you don't have all the facts out on the table, or refuse to consider them as possible motive, you surely aren't seeing all of the picture, and that's not conducive to making a determination.
(I mean 'general you' not you in particular.) IMO. MOO.

I think you misunderstood my reasoning. Do we have concrete evidence about the 3 boyfriends?
Or is it now confirmed through Klien that she had 3 boyfriends. And what does "boyfriends" mean. Are they boys? underage? Was sex involved?
Did she pay for sex? Did they?
It seems like such an antiquated term.

And depending on the meaning, it is very prejudicial. If this is a somewhat confidential investigation (meaning
no one needs to know until they (Klein) recommend why charges should be pressed or advises the family on the situation, do I, Ms Public, have a right to know that?

I certainly want to know that and all the salacious details but is it our (the public's) role to know BC had boyfriends? And if Klein advised the boyfriends that the interviews were confidential and learned these facts during the interviews then is he at liberty to say anything? (Boyfriend isn't that bad. Imagine had he used the word gigalo?)

I had heard about boyfriends but only through gossip. I don't find gossip to be reliable. Especially in a case like this. Maybe the boyfriends told the interviewer that it was ok to let the public know that they are boyfriends.

I don't think I explained this well.
Sorry. I understand it, but sometimes I need someone else to explain to others just what it is I'm trying to say.


Sent from my SM-J727T using Tapatalk

 

[JazzTune]

I think the reason SM didn't answer the polygraph question is because it was no one's business and it might have violated her rights too in that all interviews stay confidential.

Which is what bothers me about her "3 boyfriends." I really don't think it's right for the PIs to reveal that to the public
at this time. If I were one of the three, I'd be a tad unhappy about that.

About the bike and if there is one:
I bought my son a bike several years
ago as he wanted it to ride to work.
(About 1/2 mile away). I didn't spend a lot because there was a good chance it wouldn't get used much. As it turned out it didn't. I have no clue what the make and model was, only that I bought it at Target, it was black and a
3 speed (I think).

I'm sorry if the family gets upset reading here. Maybe they shouldn't or they should put me on ignore. I'm trying to stay fair and weigh both sides. I'm trying hard not to be blunt but I'm not going to sugarcoat things either. I have no connection with the family or Hunt CO SO. (And yes, I googled SM a long time ago.) I have no connection to Texas. I am former LE, female and have worked in the good ol boy network for a good part of my working life, so I'm not particularly partial to male dominated departments or to bullying, bumbling Sheriffs. And without compromising my integrity I learned how to work with them and around them.

The most important thing in my mind,
right now, is finding MC. It's going to take cooperation from BOTH sides. And sometimes being nice to people who don't deserve it is necessary.

Sent from my SM-J727T using Tapatalk

Thanks Razz, I appreciate your sense of fair-mindedness. I appreciate too learning more about your own background, and how it has helped shape your attitudes. Thank you for that.

What I hear from you is that each side should fight fair, but you feel the P.I. is the one more in the wrong. You admit that BC and the sheriff could be handling things better, but you're most perturbed at the P.I. He's the one who needs to be reined in. Is that a fair assessment?

( Please keep in mind here that my posts are always meant as discussion of points that others have raised. Absolutely no snark or sarcasm intended. )

If I'm correct, I just want to say, as one who doesn't like for anyone to ever fight, that I very much understand the P.I.'s position.

Though I can't pretend to know any of their interactions, I do know that the P.I. was not hired until October. The sheriff was there first! He had many months to show the family his efforts in directing the investigation.

The very fact they hired a P.I. speaks volumes in my opinion. What I'm hearing in the P.I.'s statement is an attempt to set the record straight. I hear self-defense mode. He wasn't the one who misled everyone in the first place.

Also, in your post I feel as if you are leaning toward making allowance for the sheriff regarding the bike. You use your own example of not knowing the make and model of your son's bike.

You said: "I have no clue what the make and model was, only that I bought it at Target, it was black and a 3 speed (I think).

Do you realize though you told us more about your son's bike than we've learned about MC's?

If MC truly did own a bike, why couldn't we, at least, have been told a color?!

You or I could be easily forgiven for not having information about a bike we own.

But this is a missing person investigation! I cannot give the sheriff a pass on this.

He should not have said MC had a bike, rode that bike to his suicide, and yet to this date, has not provided any further information about it.

Remember what I said about the smell test? This is yet another thing, another big thing that does not pass that test.

All of these things say:

"If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck."

I know my definition of a duck...


JMO

 

[JazzTune]

Hunt Co Theft Reports on FB has release a photo of what the bike is said to look like.

Thanks. This happens to me all the time. I post something, and right after I do I find a post above it that contradicts what I just said. <sigh>

But I'm leaving my post alone. It should not have taken this long for them to provide a description...

( I still have my doubts about the bike, but that's me...)


JMO

 

[JazzTune]

There is still a third possibility to consider- that MC left of his own accord and is living somewhere else. I know that's probably quite far-fetched, but it's something I keep in my thoughts.

Theoretically, anything is possible...

But honestly? I would bet that his daughters, and all those he loved, and who loved him in return, would sooner believe there was no sun, moon, or stars, than to think he would ever choose to be living his life somewhere else.

We didn't know him, but watching their faces in interviews when they describe their father and his fierce love for them, I bet they're right.

The only way I could imagine it happening is if he had genuine amnesia and had no idea who he was.

Who knows, maybe that's even his family's prayer.

If that were true, at least it would give them some hope that he could possibly come home to them again at some point...


JMO

 

[SavetheQueen]

If I recall a poster on here messaged several people in the beginning of the case, and spread the gossip that BC had a boyfriend.... I’m wondering how that poster knew that information. [emoji848]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[ocgrad]

I think you misunderstood my reasoning. Do we have concrete evidence about the 3 boyfriends?
Or is it now confirmed through Klien that she had 3 boyfriends. And what does "boyfriends" mean. Are they boys? underage? Was sex involved?
Did she pay for sex? Did they?
It seems like such an antiquated term.

And depending on the meaning, it is very prejudicial. If this is a somewhat confidential investigation (meaning
no one needs to know until they (Klein) recommend why charges should be pressed or advises the family on the situation, do I, Ms Public, have a right to know that?

I certainly want to know that and all the salacious details but is it our (the public's) role to know BC had boyfriends? And if Klein advised the boyfriends that the interviews were confidential and learned these facts during the interviews then is he at liberty to say anything? (Boyfriend isn't that bad. Imagine had he used the word gigalo?)

I had heard about boyfriends but only through gossip. I don't find gossip to be reliable. Especially in a case like this. Maybe the boyfriends told the interviewer that it was ok to let the public know that they are boyfriends.

I don't think I explained this well.
Sorry. I understand it, but sometimes I need someone else to explain to others just what it is I'm trying to say.


Sent from my SM-J727T using Tapatalk

I know what you're saying about the PI releasing BC boyfriends. When I first saw it I thought it must already be out there because he didn't state it like he was breaking news but more like he was showing that he was doing his job to identify and interview POIs. We have not seen any SW or subpoenas in this case, I'm not sure how to go about looking for them, but maybe that information is available as it was in MB's case and we haven't seen it because of poor MSM coverage. Or maybe the sheriff's investigation overlooked these POIs, that is what it sounded like to me and the PI used that information as a way of differentiating what he is doing as compared to HCSO. It is unfortunate that he used something so personal to make that comparison but while we don't discuss FB rumors for a lot of people it was already out there.

 

[SavetheQueen]

I know what you're saying about the PI releasing BC boyfriends. When I first saw it I thought it must already be out there because he didn't state it like he was breaking news but more like he was showing that he was doing his job to identify and interview POIs. We have not seen any SW or subpoenas in this case, I'm not sure how to go about looking for them, but maybe that information is available as it was in MB's case and we haven't seen it because of poor MSM coverage. Or maybe the sheriff's investigation overlooked these POIs, that is what it sounded like to me and the PI used that information as a way of differentiating what he is doing as compared to HCSO. It is unfortunate that he used something so personal to make that comparison but while we don't discuss FB rumors for a lot of people it was already out there.

It’s common knowledge among the locals that she had/has several boyfriends, and has for years. My personal opinion is that the PI stated what’s already known around Hunt County, and also used it to show what they’re doing with the case in comparison to HCSO. They didn’t name any names, so I don’t see any direct harm or foul. I’m sure that the ones they were speaking of know who they are, and obviously have some baring on whatever chain of events that the PI firm is looking into the closest.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[ocgrad]

Thanks. This happens to me all the time. I post something, and right after I do I find a post above it that contradicts what I just said. <sigh>

But I'm leaving my post alone. It should not have taken this long for them to provide a description...

( I still have my doubts about the bike, but that's me...)


JMO

Yeah, now I am wondering if HCSO is trying to smoke someone out or if they are just putting new stuff out there to get people talking again to increase tips or make someone nervous. Because there is no way 70 yr old 6'3" MC rode a bike like that 4 hrs. He would have to have a custom or special large frame. I don't know why he would even own a bike like that. He could get around the block on it, but I think he would have real trouble out on the road. I guess it's possible that bike was in his garage but not his. Perhaps his was a large frame and this picture is not meant to be a real example of his bike. So why wouldn't HCSO want to release something close to the bike so people would help them find it?? It doesn't make sense.

 

[Midge Montana]

Our own verified insider stated that MC was aware of her affairs, to include a recent one, and some other details. That is in earlier threads right here on WS. Stated by a VI.
Of course we have the choice to believe or not believe a VI, or to believe parts of their posts and not others.
Klein didn't let anything out of the bag about that.

 

[Razz]

Thanks Razz, I appreciate your sense of fair-mindedness. I appreciate too learning more about your own background, and how it has helped shape your attitudes. Thank you for that.

What I hear from you is that each side should fight fair, but you feel the P.I. is the one more in the wrong. You admit that BC and the sheriff could be handling things better, but you're most perturbed at the P.I. He's the one who needs to be reined in. Is that a fair assessment?

( Please keep in mind here that my posts are always meant as discussion of points that others have raised. Absolutely no snark or sarcasm intended. )

If I'm correct, I just want to say, as one who doesn't like for anyone to ever fight, that I very much understand the P.I.'s position.

Though I can't pretend to know any of their interactions, I do know that the P.I. was not hired until October. The sheriff was there first! He had many months to show the family his efforts in directing the investigation.

The very fact they hired a P.I. speaks volumes in my opinion. What I'm hearing in the P.I.'s statement is an attempt to set the record straight. I hear self-defense mode. He wasn't the one who misled everyone in the first place.

Also, in your post I feel as if you are leaning toward making allowance for the sheriff regarding the bike. You use your own example of not knowing the make and model of your son's bike.

You said: "I have no clue what the make and model was, only that I bought it at Target, it was black and a 3 speed (I think).

Do you realize though you told us more about your son's bike than we've learned about MC's?

If MC truly did own a bike, why couldn't we, at least, have been told a color?!

You or I could be easily forgiven for not having information about a bike we own.

But this is a missing person investigation! I cannot give the sheriff a pass on this.

He should not have said MC had a bike, rode that bike to his suicide, and yet to this date, has not provided any further information about it.

Remember what I said about the smell test? This is yet another thing, another big thing that does not pass that test.

All of these things say:

"If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck."

I know my definition of a duck...


JMO

You are incredibly diplomatic! [emoji4][emoji6]

I hear you. I just think that the PI may be trying to shape public opinion in the words he chooses. I think rubbing Meeks nose in it via FB in "Meeks house" was not a wise move. I also think mentioning the term "boyfriends" is another way of saying, "BC is a *advertiser censored*, therefore she and or they must have murdered MC. Don't worry. We're on it!"
Wink, wink.

There was a better way to treat SM than how they did it. They could have used you to say in your very diplomatic way that SM is generally a liar and not too smart. IE: We wish to point out that SM has always had access to our information. Perhaps we weren't clear enough on how he needs to access
that info. We will rectify that as soon as possible."

SM may have been misinformed about
Blah, blah blah

Continuing: " in our interviews with MC's family and friends, they are not aware of MC ever owning or riding a bike. Should anyone know differently, please contact us so we can verify that he does indeed own a bike.

The blood in his garage is troubling to us.

Mrs. Chambers has not been available to be interviewed. We have tried to make contact 6 times. We realize it is her right not to say anything but we think it would go a long way in helping the family better understand MC's state of mind during the week he disappeared."

Something to that effect may have made it less a retaliatory move and more of a conciliatory one. Right now, he holds the cards. It's better to be friendly rather than accusatory at this point.

I'd like the PI to get the GPS info.
Ie" We have a great phone expert and with your tech overseeing, we'd like to see if we can better pinpoint MC's travels that afternoon."

The reason I brought up my son's bike is: It wouldn't be unreasonable if BC can't remember the type and style # of the bike.

I'm just not ready to jump on the "MC was murdered" bandwagon. I hope this isn't true but I hope the family is not using the PI to stir up anger and therefore support. Forgive me for saying it but it's how I"m perceiving it right now. And I understand Meeks wariness of it. A part of that goes back to when they had the FindPawpa fb page. People on there were actually taunting BC. It was unfair and wrong and they allowed that.

I have never gotten or felt snark from you and I appreciate that. You facilitate helpful conversation in a very diplomatic way. Thank you!


Sent from my SM-J727T using Tapatalk