The Foreigner

[Lsmith510]

yes, please do give WAH a holler. I'd like to know his opinion on why the Civil Trial was dismissed. Or maybe Loretta Dillon has heard something from one of her sources. Is WAH still tight with Loretta?

Since when has WAH been "tight with Loretta"???

I thought they were in pretty firm agreement on what went down in the Laci case (the 2-trip theory), but maybe I have him mistaken for someone else. Maybe WAH can come on board and define his complete theory on what went down -- does he agree with the State's case, with Loretta, or have a theory all his own?

Yep, you do have him mistaken for someone else. LOL

Hey Intro! WAHz-up??!!

[Abby]

debate is very healthy, and more likely to produce correct results than just discussing it among those that agree with you.

I don't think Farmer wants debate, I think he wants followers, disciples, worshippers.

Yes, so do I. He's the worst since that Huck character. There are some who have been waiting a long time for the analysis on the Peterson film. There is no work being done on it. I'm sure of that. What a joke he is. FBI?

[Abby]

isn't "the foreigner" skov?

she is certainly welcome here, but I no longer have any contact info for her, so can't personally invite her.

Jamie Fear is another one who frequently gets banned from forums. I think she probably holds the record.

she's welcome, too, but I don't have any contact info for her, either.

Even IKLP is welcome. In fact, I'd like to hear more from IKLP. I did an extensive literary study of IKLP's posts, comparing the literal and the symbolic, and there's internal consistency. But that may only mean that IKLP is good at story writing. The poetry sucked, however. So, I hope if he/she comes on, he/she spares us and sticks to prose.

Wearing a Halo posted a comment on the PWC blog that he looked forward to this forum re-opening, but he hasn't joined yet, unless he's on under another username.

but what was the dispute about the watch on OPORD? Come on, out with the gossip . . .

So, he banned Skov, too? I'm not a bit interested in the Zodiac killer. He's dead, for all I care. Jamie knows something, or thinks she does. I'd like to see both of them here. I can't contact Jamie, but I may be able to reach Annike.

[introspectre]

yes, please do give WAH a holler. I'd like to know his opinion on why the Civil Trial was dismissed. Or maybe Loretta Dillon has heard something from one of her sources. Is WAH still tight with Loretta?

Since when has WAH been "tight with Loretta"???

I thought they were in pretty firm agreement on what went down in the Laci case (the 2-trip theory), but maybe I have him mistaken for someone else. Maybe WAH can come on board and define his complete theory on what went down -- does he agree with the State's case, with Loretta, or have a theory all his own?

Yep, you do have him mistaken for someone else. LOL

Hey Intro! WAHz-up??!!

Hey Lsmith510, think about it, the sky is WAHz-up!!! It has been 6.5 years and nothing has changed. I see you have been a bit busy over at TAC. Have you been working hard on your research--anything new?

[JackIsBack]

Hey I believe in the two trip theory... I believe Scott made a fishing trip on December 24th, 2002 and then sometime after that someone else made a second trip to place the bodies in the bay or directly on the shore. (sometime in 2003 closer to the date the bodies were recovered).

[Lsmith510]

yes, please do give WAH a holler. I'd like to know his opinion on why the Civil Trial was dismissed. Or maybe Loretta Dillon has heard something from one of her sources. Is WAH still tight with Loretta?

Since when has WAH been "tight with Loretta"???

I thought they were in pretty firm agreement on what went down in the Laci case (the 2-trip theory), but maybe I have him mistaken for someone else. Maybe WAH can come on board and define his complete theory on what went down -- does he agree with the State's case, with Loretta, or have a theory all his own?

Yep, you do have him mistaken for someone else. LOL

Hey Intro! WAHz-up??!!

Hey Lsmith510, think about it, the sky is WAHz-up!!! It has been 6.5 years and nothing has changed. I see you have been a bit busy over at TAC. Have you been working hard on your research--anything new?

Always working Intro, always working.

[marlene]

Hey I believe in the two trip theory... I believe Scott made a fishing trip on December 24th, 2002 and then sometime after that someone else made a second trip to place the bodies in the bay or directly on the shore. (sometime in 2003 closer to the date the bodies were recovered).

And this is the 2-trip theory that actually has EVIDENCE!!!

[marlene]

yes, please do give WAH a holler. I'd like to know his opinion on why the Civil Trial was dismissed. Or maybe Loretta Dillon has heard something from one of her sources. Is WAH still tight with Loretta?

Since when has WAH been "tight with Loretta"???

I thought they were in pretty firm agreement on what went down in the Laci case (the 2-trip theory), but maybe I have him mistaken for someone else. Maybe WAH can come on board and define his complete theory on what went down -- does he agree with the State's case, with Loretta, or have a theory all his own?

Yep, you do have him mistaken for someone else. LOL

Hey Intro! WAHz-up??!!

Hey Lsmith510, think about it, the sky is WAHz-up!!! It has been 6.5 years and nothing has changed. I see you have been a bit busy over at TAC. Have you been working hard on your research--anything new?

Always working Intro, always working.

Reminds me of chicken little -- the sky is falling, the sky is falling! And everyone believed chicken little, until it became oh so painfully obvious that chicken little was a tad-bit radical and very hasty in her conclusion.

But we've yet to hear from WAH, and he seemed so sincere when he said he was anxious for this forum to open again. Surely he's not just lurking in the shadows . . . he never hesitated to comment on the Blog.

Intro, what did you expect to change in 6.5 years? Scott doesn't even have his court-appointed attorney for the CA Supreme Court appeal -- it might be even longer before he gets one, since CA is going bankrupt. The Rochas got smart and dismissed the civil trial - so it won't be until a brief is filed, in one appeal or another, that any of us know what's changed. So, the argument that nothing's changed because nothing has been announced bespeaks an ignorance about how the appeal process works.

[introspectre]

yes, please do give WAH a holler. I'd like to know his opinion on why the Civil Trial was dismissed. Or maybe Loretta Dillon has heard something from one of her sources. Is WAH still tight with Loretta?

Since when has WAH been "tight with Loretta"???

I thought they were in pretty firm agreement on what went down in the Laci case (the 2-trip theory), but maybe I have him mistaken for someone else. Maybe WAH can come on board and define his complete theory on what went down -- does he agree with the State's case, with Loretta, or have a theory all his own?

Yep, you do have him mistaken for someone else. LOL

Hey Intro! WAHz-up??!!

Hey Lsmith510, think about it, the sky is WAHz-up!!! It has been 6.5 years and nothing has changed. I see you have been a bit busy over at TAC. Have you been working hard on your research--anything new?

Always working Intro, always working.

Reminds me of chicken little -- the sky is falling, the sky is falling! And everyone believed chicken little, until it became oh so painfully obvious that chicken little was a tad-bit radical and very hasty in her conclusion.

But we've yet to hear from WAH, and he seemed so sincere when he said he was anxious for this forum to open again. Surely he's not just lurking in the shadows . . . he never hesitated to comment on the Blog.

Intro, what did you expect to change in 6.5 years? Scott doesn't even have his court-appointed attorney for the CA Supreme Court appeal -- it might be even longer before he gets one, since CA is going bankrupt. The Rochas got smart and dismissed the civil trial - so it won't be until a brief is filed, in one appeal or another, that any of us know what's changed. So, the argument that nothing's changed because nothing has been announced bespeaks an ignorance about how the appeal process works.

Actually, I do not expect anything to change, it will all be exactly the same just as I have stated that 'nothing has changed, IMO. I understand how the Appeals Process works. In the meantime, noone--not even in blogs and forums--has come up with anything/anyone, but SLP.

"But we've yet to hear from WAH"

Not true, I have heard from WAH!

[marlene]

Intro wrote:

Actually, I do not expect anything to change, it will all be exactly the same just as I have stated that 'nothing has changed, IMO. I understand how the Appeals Process works. In the meantime, noone--not even in blogs and forums--has come up with anything/anyone, but SLP.

Really, I guess WAH has never told you about the articles on the PWC blog -- which point definitively away from Scott.

but, I agree with you, nothing's going to change. the State had no evidence to begin with, and it's not going to be able to find any because Scott is factually innocent.

BTW, tell WAH I'm still waiting for him to produce that info from NOAA and SFPORTS that confirms Cheng's testimony. He said it's there, but he has yet to produce it. Tell him he's delusional if he thinks I take his word for it, especially when I have the data from NOAA and SFPORTS on SII and it DOES NOT agree with Cheng.