Raven's comments regarding Janet . . .

[OriginalJerseyGirl]

After thinking about it, I don't think he was referring to Janet ... :furious:

Hmmm, the wording is odd but I just can't tell. He does refer to his "better half" in the one comment. But the one about the Valentine reads weird. I'm not sure what, if anything, to make of it.

 

[golfmom]

Hmmm, the wording is odd but I just can't tell. He does refer to his "better half" in the one comment. But the one about the Valentine reads weird. I'm not sure what, if anything, to make of it.

I've read a lot of the material over at the VX boards, when he refers to Janet he refers to his wife. I thought they didn't reconcile until March. It's not on the timeline, can anyone confirm?

 

[golfmom]

It just dawned on me. Those posts regarding Valentine's day were made in JANUARY! That is when Raven and Janet were separated ... so I feel pretty certain here that he was not referring to Janet!

 

[OriginalJerseyGirl]

It just dawned on me. Those posts regarding Valentine's day were made in JANUARY! That is when Raven and Janet were separated ... so I feel pretty certain here that he was not referring to Janet!

I noticed that they were in January but they were at the very end of January. I don't know if the reconciled in Jan. or Feb., etc. Does anyone know when Janet realized that she was pregnant or when she informed Raven?

 

[LvsAMystry]

It just dawned on me. Those posts regarding Valentine's day were made in JANUARY! That is when Raven and Janet were separated ... so I feel pretty certain here that he was not referring to Janet!

Well, in January they had to have been having more than casaul contact -- that's the month Kaiden would have been conceived! So he may have been referring to her. Or not.

 

[Jenifred]

I noticed that they were in January but they were at the very end of January. I don't know if the reconciled in Jan. or Feb., etc. Does anyone know when Janet realized that she was pregnant or when she informed Raven?

I think that I found out I was pregnant at the end of February beginning of March with my October baby. And Kaiden was born earlier in the month than my baby was. So she for sure had to know by mid-March, and probably earlier than that.

 

[golfmom]

timeline

1. Janet and Raven separated initially in January of 2004
2. She became pregnant just before they separated
3. She didn't find out for certain that she was pregnant until the beginning of March.
4. ............
5. In May of 04 when Janet was 5 months pregnant they reconciled

 

[ewwwinteresting]

Raven initially didn't want Kaiden and suggested Janet give him up for adoption

I'm speechless.....and that doesn't happen often!

 

[LvsAMystry]

I'm speechless.....and that doesn't happen often!

I am too, but I also wonder -- Golfmom, how do you know that information? I mean, I assume it's someone giving you information privately, and that's fine, but how do we know it's reliable? I always tend to feel that if someone is so reluctant to share it openly, especially on an anonymous message board, than there may be a kernal of untruth to what they're saying. Maybe not, but we can't be sure I don't think.

 

[golfmom]

I am too, but I also wonder -- Golfmom, how do you know that information? I mean, I assume it's someone giving you information privately, and that's fine, but how do we know it's reliable? I always tend to feel that if someone is so reluctant to share it openly, especially on an anonymous message board, than there may be a kernal of untruth to what they're saying. Maybe not, but we can't be sure I don't think.

LvsAMystry! Feel free to discount the information then. :blowkiss:
This is what I was told when I asked some questions regarding the separation timeline.

You're absolutely right, I have no way to verify it to any reasonable certainty at this time. Maybe someone will post and let us know if I got it right or not!

Pretty please with sugar and cream!

 

[ewwwinteresting]

Maybe someone will post and let us know if I got it right or not! Pretty please with sugar and cream!

We promise we won't bite......:croc: We'd love to have you join us with information confirming or denying anything that is being said here!

 

[Timex]

I am too, but I also wonder -- Golfmom, how do you know that information? I mean, I assume it's someone giving you information privately, and that's fine, but how do we know it's reliable? I always tend to feel that if someone is so reluctant to share it openly, especially on an anonymous message board, than there may be a kernal of untruth to what they're saying. Maybe not, but we can't be sure I don't think.

This is exactly why we have the rule that no one can post for another person. The exchange of information via pvt message or email is fine...but you cannot post that information here on the forums. If the person giving the information isnt willing to do so openly, then it cannot be shared on the forum.

 

[golfmom]

This is exactly why we have the rule that no one can post for another person. The exchange of information via pvt message or email is fine...but you cannot post that information here on the forums. If the person giving the information isnt willing to do so openly, then it cannot be shared on the forum.

I edited my post to just reflect the dates of events only. Sorry!

 

[LvsAMystry]

LvsAMystry! Feel free to discount the information then. :blowkiss:
This is what I was told when I asked some questions regarding the separation timeline.

You're absolutely right, I have no way to verify it to any reasonable certainty at this time. Maybe someone will post and let us know if I got it right or not!

Pretty please with sugar and cream!

I would love to know if that's accurate because it's scary to contemplate, and may well be what pushes me over the fence if true.

I hope you don't think I'm questioning you, Golfmom! I am not. I was just thinking how there are so many people out there that could have a personal axe to grind with him, or even just a crazy who doesn't know him or Janet at all, and I'd hate to see the focus being misdirected if someone were playing that way. I just wanted to point out that all options need be considered when we come by this sort of information.

My guess is that it's right on and I'm glad someone has found a voice with you to speak for them here. I can understand it may be difficult to post just in case it's found out. When it's time, he/she/they will speak here for themselves, and that's great since we all want the same thing I think!

 

[SouthEastSleuth]

My guess is that it's right on and I'm glad someone has found a voice with you to speak for them here. I can understand it may be difficult to post just in case it's found out. When it's time, he/she/they will speak here for themselves, and that's great since we all want the same thing I think!

Well said!

 

[golfmom]

This has been a tricky case. There are a number of people who are in very sensitive positions who would like to post but can't. Even posting why they can't post, jeopardizes their positions.

Unfortunately, there is just so little coming out in the media and everything is so tight-lipped, I'm not sure what there is left to talk about without the assistance of these sources. I know we wouldn't be as far along as we are without them guiding us where to look, poke, and question.

 

[golfmom]

My guess is that it's right on and I'm glad someone has found a voice with you to speak for them here. I can understand it may be difficult to post just in case it's found out. When it's time, he/she/they will speak here for themselves, and that's great since we all want the same thing I think!

That's what I hope. I hope that soon, they will all be *free as a bird* to post!

Often I've been on the boards and seen the "I know something, you don't know" type posts. Drives me bat$hit. I'm sorry if I've offended anyone by posting info from sources. I've always tried to be sensitive not only to the person who is giving me the information, but also to the people who will be receiving the information.

 

[ewwwinteresting]

:laugh:

That's what I hope. I hope that soon, they will all be *free as a bird* to post!

I, too am happy about the additonal information, annonymous or not! Most of all our postings are opinions and speculations, but every once in awhile, we nail it head on.....so thanks for the various pathways to explore. We don't have much choice but to speculate until LE releases some further facts or we find further facts for LE, the later seeming more likely.

 

[SouthEastSleuth]

It does seem to me that there are many days when we would all be sitting around twiddling our thumbs (what a stupid expression, and I used it anyway! LOL) if it were't for some of the information, leads, etc., that many of these sources have provided.

I think something that is key to keep in mind with ANY unnamed source, etc., is that you have to take it for what's it worth. My thoughts? Take the tidbit of info, run with it, see what I can find that's verifiable, etc., then make an informed opinion about that validity of the information, or not, as the case may be...

Saying that a "source" has no real voice unless they come forward themselves, is like saying the Washington Post should not reported the comments of Deep Throat, unless he had come forward at the time... Even then, it was reported that it was an UNNAMED SOURCE, but that had provided verifiable information. Or, that had pointed someone in a direction to at least follow...

Sure, to come on here and say, for example, "well a source told me that John Doe used to be married and was arrested for spousal abuse." To post THAT, may not be correct. What SHOULD be posted, is the WebSleuther digging up of a link to the arrest warrant when Mr. Doe beat his wife....having done that BASED on the source's information. OR, perhaps if the WebSleuther has hit a brick wall, is it not ok THEN, to come on here and say, "listen guys, someone told me this info about Mr. Doe, and I need help VERIFYING it??"

Just my thoughts...

 

[golfmom]

I think something that is key to keep in mind with ANY unnamed source, etc., is that you have to take it for what's it worth. My thoughts? Take the tidbit of info, run with it, see what I can find that's verifiable, etc., then make an informed opinion about that validity of the information, or not, as the case may be...

..........

Sure, to come on here and say, for example, "well a source told me that John Doe used to be married and was arrested for spousal abuse." To post THAT, may not be correct. What SHOULD be posted, is the WebSleuther digging up of a link to the arrest warrant when Mr. Doe beat his wife....having done that BASED on the source's information. OR, perhaps if the WebSleuther has hit a brick wall, is it not ok THEN, to come on here and say, "listen guys, someone told me this info about Mr. Doe, and I need help VERIFYING it??"

Just my thoughts...

I've been trying to pass along stuff to get help sleuthing. There just are so many different fronts to attack. Please can someone jump in and try to see if Raven has been advertising himself on single's sites or married looking for some nookie sites?