GUILTY CA - Erin Corwin, 19, pregnant, Twentynine Palms, 28 June 2014 - #11

[nikb]

Perhaps I'm wrong and it's just a rumor. I read it in several articles but I read so many articles, I can be mistaken on what is what.

I found it here doing a quick search, I have no idea if it's a known rumor site. I apologize if it is.

http://www.georgianewsday.com/news/...rder-erin-corwin-to-keep-family-together.html

Thanks! I don't think that's a rumor site for the most part (as in, no worse than the many MSM sites that are questionable). I'd seen that article but missed the part about him being gone so much.

 

[Mamamerced]

No, it is not a "normal" thing to do, to refuse to get married on principle. It is not okay to go on thinking that way. Truly loving someone involves much more than just being together. Getting married means standing up in front of everyone and declaring you will take responsibility for each other's lives, be there for each other, share your life together. Be partners in everything you do, through and through. To have RESPECT for each other and for the union you now vow to share. Respect for the arrangement of marriage that has been created for us by god, and for his standards of righteousness.

If you aren't motivated to really and truly take responsibility for the one you claim to love, then honestly, you don't love them enough to reap the benefits of a relationship with them. It's that simple.

It's these kinds of people that we're talking about when we're saying they're marrying themselves to an (expletive) because some married people don't even understand the responsibilities they have towards their mates. To love them, care about them, treat them right, let them in, build a life together, a true partnership. Not some kind of "baby I love you, let's live together, figure things out as they happen, don't know what the future holds" house of cards.

Nonsense. Marriage doesn't guarantee any of the points stated above. Commitment does.

 

[roadrunnermt]

I have had this exact thinking going on in my head for while. I do believe she was involved in the planning as well as coverup but i do think this played a part all along. I do think she is smarter than some of the sloppy actions we have seen but maybe she wanted to help make it appear all CL doings as a win/win for her. One, she thinks CL cares enough not to throw her under the bus with him because of the child and two if he gets busted it sets her free of her cheating husband. Obviously, cheated from feb through june that we know of despite the affair supposedly overly and even more serious obviously used no protection at that that we know of which can be life threatening with risk of STDs. Im a better +gambler+ so im playing games with myself trying to decide which will happen first divorce papets or her showing up at IMs to stay but thinking she is trying to lie low key hoping she gets out of the spotlight. If she does get booked in for being involved guarantee you she will pull spousal abuse card. UOTE=cluciano63;10901475]If NL planned it she is no brighter, unless she was setting CL up to be caught.[/QUOTE]

 

[Mrs. Gladden]

Ok, since the subject of "JC being gone days or weeks at a time" being covered in MSM, can anyone tell me where in MSM it has been covered that CL's phone pinged in the area where the murder took place? I've seen this alluded to several times, and I've not read it otherwise. TIA.

 

[jash]

Ok, since the subject of "JC being gone days or weeks at a time" being covered in MSM, can anyone tell me where in MSM it has been covered that CL's phone pinged in the area where the murder took place? I've seen this alluded to several times, and I've not read it otherwise. TIA.

"More than 100 mines were explored as part of the search for Erin, but many of these mines were searched before detectives showed the cave team where to prioritize. The sheriff's department used some form of electronic tracking — likely pings from a cell phone — to zero in on the area of the Rose of Peru Mining District, the Brooklyn Mining District and the Los Angeles Mining District."
http://www.desertsun.com/story/news.../26/erin-corwin-cave-team-gold-mine/14626257/

 

[amm]

To the married folk, how often are you asked or needed to show a marriage license for anything. Purchase of a home, credit card, loans, medical insurance etc...etc... NEVER. Are they secretly looking this up? It is a great point Darkhorse. They've been married for less than 5 years based off the 12/29/2009 date. Maybe the military found out and they had to rush to marry??

We've been married for 16+ years. Besides the times we've needed to show it for the military, we also needed to show it less than two weeks ago for selling some property. I know there are other times that I can't think of the specific reason for....

 

[Mrs. Gladden]

Thank you!

Interesting. I wonder if he had enough reception to take/make calls.

Sorry, can I call you back? I'm kinda busy right now. The idea of that blows my mind.

 

[77DarkHorse7]

Ok, since the subject of "JC being gone days or weeks at a time" being covered in MSM, can anyone tell me where in MSM it has been covered that CL's phone pinged in the area where the murder took place? I've seen this alluded to several times, and I've not read it otherwise. TIA.

They never said this. Some people came to this conclusion based on the sheriff's "technology" comment. More likely they meant internet searches about the mines in the area. Not actual phone pings.

 

[77DarkHorse7]

"More than 100 mines were explored as part of the search for Erin, but many of these mines were searched before detectives showed the cave team where to prioritize. The sheriff's department used some form of electronic tracking — likely pings from a cell phone — to zero in on the area of the Rose of Peru Mining District, the Brooklyn Mining District and the Los Angeles Mining District."
http://www.desertsun.com/story/news.../26/erin-corwin-cave-team-gold-mine/14626257/

"The sheriff's department initially said Erin was found at the bottom of a 140-foot deep mine. But the cave team said Monday night that the mine was actually about 100 feet deep and that the initial reports were based on inaccurate early estimates."

 

[Mrs. Gladden]

They never said this. Some people came to this conclusion based on the sheriff's "technology" comment. More likely they meant internet searches about the mines in the area. Not actual phone pings.

That's what I had understood, also, that's why I was asking.

 

[Dallen]

Well for one, if they weren't married they wouldn't have been living on base in base housing.

You're not given married quarters and allowed to have your girlfriend live with you. Even if CL had housing based on a legal child, visitors have a limit as to how long they are allowed to stay in housing.

The military will need to see paperwork that you are, in fact, married. You can't just show up and say "Here's my new spouse!!!"

It doesn't have to be anything more than a civil service with a justice of the peace. But you DO have to gave official paperwork.

Yep, yep and yep.

 

[Dallen]

Again, all he has to do is say "this is my wife and daughter" we want to live on base. She's changed her name, out of state. Who would question it? Where does it say 'copy of marriage contract required'?

I'm playing catchup here, so sorry if this has been through the wringer, but....
I'm very surprised you are making such a big to do about this. Yes, you have to take a certified copy of all your paperwork before you can even enroll your spouse in DEERS and they receive military benefits. No one should have to provide you proof. This is fact. After years of marriage, my husband had to take our marriage certificate to the DEERS office just last month (for some reason or another...he didn't really explain. Nor did I question, because that's just the way it works in all branches of the military).

Besides, living with a person you are not married to is considered adultery in the military's eyes. Haven't we discussed how big of a no-no this is? Not allowed. On base or off, it doesn't matter.

 

[atthelake]

:deadhorse: :deadhorse: :deadhorse:

 

[maskedwoman]

Can anyone provide a LINK to substantiate this claim?

http://www.military.com/spouse/mili...rides/checklist-for-new-military-spouses.html

"Obtain an original copy of your marriage certificate from the city, town, or county clerk's office where the wedding took place."

http://www2.hurlburt.af.mil/questions/topic.asp?id=113

"A member with a pending marriage date may submit an application for housing 60 days before the marriage. A written statement with the member's intent to marry and the date of the event accompanies the application and member provides proof of marriage before housing assignment."

Although I understand that it would be great if they weren't married, because she could be forced to testify against him, I think that is wishful thinking.

 

[Dallen]

:deadhorse: :deadhorse: :deadhorse:

Yes, sorry, as I warned I was catching up and hadn't read through all the comment yet (I have now). I'm really having to sit on my hands on all this military talk over the last few threads.

 

[maskedwoman]

My deepest apologies for :deadhorse: The whole to-do about them not being married was making me a little :tantrum:, I guess.

 

[Dallen]

Understandable.

 

[RSC]

To play the devil's advocate here, I actually understand why the conversation happened and appreciate that 77darkhorse brought it up. She was a minor--there IS a chance that they could have just pretended to be married, which would make a significant impact regarding testimony in this case. Those of us who are not military would not know whether you could just claim to be married or if you would have to actually produce proof. Your links were really helpful. I have been married for 8 years and have never once had to show anyone proof of my marriage, though I have had to claim I was married many times.

This also triggered me to try to figure out whether NL could testify against him if she divorces him, though I haven't clearly determined that. 77DH, I know you said that it wouldn't make a difference because they were married at the time, but I didn't see that in the law--if you find it, will you post it? It's driving me crazy not to know!!

Perhaps this is a stretch, but...If my husband did something like this and I was not involved at all, and divorcing him meant I could testify against him, you bet your bottom that I would file. If I didn't, it stands that someone would suspect perhaps I was involved, after all...

My deepest apologies for :deadhorse: The whole to-do about them not being married was making me a little :tantrum:, I guess.

 

[la2cabo]

To play the devil's advocate here, I actually understand why the conversation happened and appreciate that 77darkhorse brought it up. She was a minor--there IS a chance that they could have just pretended to be married, which would make a significant impact regarding testimony in this case. Those of us who are not military would not know whether you could just claim to be married or if you would have to actually produce proof. Your links were really helpful. I have been married for 8 years and have never once had to show anyone proof of my marriage, though I have had to claim I was married many times.

This also triggered me to try to figure out whether NL could testify against him if she divorces him, though I haven't clearly determined that. 77DH, I know you said that it wouldn't make a difference because they were married at the time, but I didn't see that in the law--if you find it, will you post it? It's driving me crazy not to know!!

Perhaps this is a stretch, but...If my husband did something like this and I was not involved at all, and divorcing him meant I could testify against him, you bet your bottom that I would file. If I didn't, it stands that someone would suspect perhaps I was involved, after all...

The below site explains the 2 different privileges relatively clear. It can be somewhat confusing so I tried to find the site that was easiest to interpret:

http://adissolutionsolution.wordpre...ileges-testifying-and-marital-communications/

 

[stayhomemommy]

Personally, I don't see NL divorcing CL. They've been together since their teens; he might even have married her because she was pregnant. NL might or might not be a controlling person towards CL (I have no idea), but I don't think she's all that strong emotionally without him. I think she's codependent and enmeshed with CL, and I don't see her going anywhere. If they truly thought LE would never find a body, they likely think he'll get off, too. She's gonna stick it out. JMOO