Quote:
I like Nancy too. She spoke the truth.
I like Nancy too. She spoke the truth.
preventing caylee anthonys family from exploiting for$
- Thread starter naakte
- Start date
Quote:
Okay, I tried to keep relatively quiet when the topic of Nancy Grace came up, but now that we are talking about how "honest" she is, perhaps some of you need to do more reading. This is a woman who outright LIED about many of her own fiancee's murder circumstances in order to advance her own career. In her book, "Objection", she writes about how he was murdered by a man "with a history of prior convictions" [he had NO police record], how he was a stranger [he actually was not a stranger; he worked with her fiancee and knew him well], how the jury deliberated for three DAYS [it was three HOURS], how she was asked if she wanted the death penalty upon his conviction, but out of the goodness of her heart she said no [they actually DID ask for the death penalty, but it was denied because the man was retarded], how he vehemently denied the charges [he actually admitted to the crime immediately upon arrest], and how he began a series of relentless appeals but was denied [he in fact NEVER filed a single appeal]. All of this to paint the portrait that she was a survivor who entered a career in prosecution out of the desire for true justice, yet she lies repeatedly in her own book on the topic of her own fiancee's murder.
In that same book, she also plagiarized something like 400 words, word for word, for two straight pages, lifting them from a New York Times article and not giving any notation or credit that they were not her words.
So I think it's fair to say, she is NOT an honest person. She might be, in her own nutjob way, fighting the good fight for the right causes, but she does it in a very dirty, very dishonest way. I for one, don't need lunatics like her fighting for justice and misleading the public into believing that she's doing this for the love of justice. She is doing this because she's not right in the head, and is apparently on a rampage against anyone that SHE decides is a criminal (let's not forget her VERY FALSE accusations against Richard Ricci for the kidnapping of Elizabeth Smart, when it was later proved that he had nothing to do with the crime).
She can keep her justice. I'll watch the news, not her jaded, bitter commentaries.
Okay, I tried to keep relatively quiet when the topic of Nancy Grace came up, but now that we are talking about how "honest" she is, perhaps some of you need to do more reading. This is a woman who outright LIED about many of her own fiancee's murder circumstances in order to advance her own career. In her book, "Objection", she writes about how he was murdered by a man "with a history of prior convictions" [he had NO police record], how he was a stranger [he actually was not a stranger; he worked with her fiancee and knew him well], how the jury deliberated for three DAYS [it was three HOURS], how she was asked if she wanted the death penalty upon his conviction, but out of the goodness of her heart she said no [they actually DID ask for the death penalty, but it was denied because the man was retarded], how he vehemently denied the charges [he actually admitted to the crime immediately upon arrest], and how he began a series of relentless appeals but was denied [he in fact NEVER filed a single appeal]. All of this to paint the portrait that she was a survivor who entered a career in prosecution out of the desire for true justice, yet she lies repeatedly in her own book on the topic of her own fiancee's murder.
In that same book, she also plagiarized something like 400 words, word for word, for two straight pages, lifting them from a New York Times article and not giving any notation or credit that they were not her words.
So I think it's fair to say, she is NOT an honest person. She might be, in her own nutjob way, fighting the good fight for the right causes, but she does it in a very dirty, very dishonest way. I for one, don't need lunatics like her fighting for justice and misleading the public into believing that she's doing this for the love of justice. She is doing this because she's not right in the head, and is apparently on a rampage against anyone that SHE decides is a criminal (let's not forget her VERY FALSE accusations against Richard Ricci for the kidnapping of Elizabeth Smart, when it was later proved that he had nothing to do with the crime).
She can keep her justice. I'll watch the news, not her jaded, bitter commentaries.
Last edited:
Some exotic film maker in southern california offered her a deal to star in a "movie" but got so much negative feedback from his "patronage" that he withdrew the offer. I not sure I can post the link on here. One of the alternate jurors was offered 50,000.00 or so to sign a movie or book deal. It will happen just wait.
Where was Geraldo Rivera all this time?
Quote:
Okay, I tried to keep relatively quiet when the topic of Nancy Grace came up, but now that we are talking about how "honest" she is, perhaps some of you need to do more reading. This is a woman who LIED about her own fiancee's murder circumstances in order to advance her own career. In her book, "Objection", she writes about how he was murdered by a man "with a history of prior convictions" [he had NO police record], how he was a stranger [he actually was not a stranger; he worked with her fiancee and knew him well], how the jury deliberated for three DAYS [it was three HOURS], how she was asked if she wanted the death penalty upon his conviction, but out of the goodness of her heart she said no [they actually DID ask for the death penalty, but it was denied because the man was slightly retarded], how he vehemently denied the charges [he actually admitted to the crime immediately upon arrest], and how he began a series of relentless appeals but was denied [he in fact NEVER filed a single appeal]. All of this to paint the portrait that she was a survivor who entered a career in prosecution out of the desire for true justice, yet she lies repeatedly in her own book on the topic of her own fiancee's murder.
In that same book, she also plagiarized something like 400 words, word for word, for two straight pages, lifting them from a New York Times article and not giving any notation or credit that they were not her words.
So I think it's fair to say, she is NOT an honest person. She might be, in her own nutjob way, fighting the good fight for the right causes, but she does it in a very dirty, very dishonest way. I for one, don't need lunatics like her fighting for justice and misleading the public into believing that she's doing this for the love of justice. She is doing this because she's not right in the head, and is apparently on a rampage against anyone that SHE decides is a criminal (let's not forget her VERY FALSE accusations against Richard Ricci for the kidnapping of Elizabeth Smart, when it was later proved that he had nothing to do with the crime).
She can keep her justice. I'll watch the news, not her jaded commentaries.
Quote:
Okay, I tried to keep relatively quiet when the topic of Nancy Grace came up, but now that we are talking about how "honest" she is, perhaps some of you need to do more reading. This is a woman who LIED about her own fiancee's murder circumstances in order to advance her own career. In her book, "Objection", she writes about how he was murdered by a man "with a history of prior convictions" [he had NO police record], how he was a stranger [he actually was not a stranger; he worked with her fiancee and knew him well], how the jury deliberated for three DAYS [it was three HOURS], how she was asked if she wanted the death penalty upon his conviction, but out of the goodness of her heart she said no [they actually DID ask for the death penalty, but it was denied because the man was slightly retarded], how he vehemently denied the charges [he actually admitted to the crime immediately upon arrest], and how he began a series of relentless appeals but was denied [he in fact NEVER filed a single appeal]. All of this to paint the portrait that she was a survivor who entered a career in prosecution out of the desire for true justice, yet she lies repeatedly in her own book on the topic of her own fiancee's murder.
In that same book, she also plagiarized something like 400 words, word for word, for two straight pages, lifting them from a New York Times article and not giving any notation or credit that they were not her words.
So I think it's fair to say, she is NOT an honest person. She might be, in her own nutjob way, fighting the good fight for the right causes, but she does it in a very dirty, very dishonest way. I for one, don't need lunatics like her fighting for justice and misleading the public into believing that she's doing this for the love of justice. She is doing this because she's not right in the head, and is apparently on a rampage against anyone that SHE decides is a criminal (let's not forget her VERY FALSE accusations against Richard Ricci for the kidnapping of Elizabeth Smart, when it was later proved that he had nothing to do with the crime).
She can keep her justice. I'll watch the news, not her jaded commentaries.
- Mar 14, 2011
- 4,324
- 7
- 191
I am the same as Laurajean on Nancy Grace. She is a danger to the justice system. She breeds hate on her narrow minded ideals. She's worse than Casey.
Quote:
WC- I haved wondered about a wrongful death suit also. I don't see George , Cindy or Lee Anthony being able to do it in anyway. BUT there is a family who is claiming that their deceased son could possibly be the father of Caylee. They are trying to have mitochondrial DNA done to try to prove it. They surfaced about a week before the end of trial. They were asked to wait until the criminal trial was over before proceeding with testing. Now its a long shot that the other Grandmother Might be able to sue for wrongful death due to the fact that Caylee was her deacesed (car accident) son's only child. Just a thought! Only preponderance of evidence on civil suits, I think.
WC- I haved wondered about a wrongful death suit also. I don't see George , Cindy or Lee Anthony being able to do it in anyway. BUT there is a family who is claiming that their deceased son could possibly be the father of Caylee. They are trying to have mitochondrial DNA done to try to prove it. They surfaced about a week before the end of trial. They were asked to wait until the criminal trial was over before proceeding with testing. Now its a long shot that the other Grandmother Might be able to sue for wrongful death due to the fact that Caylee was her deacesed (car accident) son's only child. Just a thought! Only preponderance of evidence on civil suits, I think.
Quote:
Agree to disagree, to each their own opinions. No one more important than than anothers. Not trying to change anyones mind, just to look at it from another perspective.
Yep, that's what makes the world go 'round. You know I still love ya.
Agree to disagree, to each their own opinions. No one more important than than anothers. Not trying to change anyones mind, just to look at it from another perspective.
Yep, that's what makes the world go 'round. You know I still love ya.
I give it a matter of 3 months for a book to come out based on either casey, caseys family, or one of the jurors POV
Quote:
Similar threads
New posts New threads Active threads
-
Latest threads
-
-
-
Not looking too good for shipped eggs
- Started by NCchickentender
- Replies: 0
-
-
Concerned for our rescued hen.
- Started by otrippiehippieo
- Replies: 0
-
-
Threads with more replies in the last 15 days
-
Checking-In On Peeps - Post Here To Say Hello!- Started by Nifty-Chicken
- Replies: 2K
-
-
-
Can I get some help from someone with careless neighbours who own dogs.- Started by RiDaGeckoGuy
- Replies: 103
-
-
