Head Stone

Judged:

5

5

4

Shadow Heart wrote:

I chose shadow heart because my threads were pulled under Daisy Mae. I wanted to point out the date on JBs head stone, it was said that John had the 25th put on to remind the world blah blah blah. Thats BS, he knew that was the day she really died.

Judged:

5

5

4

Capricorn wrote:

Nothing says drama more than a headstone that shows a child having died on Christmas Day, even though the odds were that she died on the 26th, and known to the family.
But...they needed the extra sympathy. Patsy was forever the perennial victim and drama queen

Judged:

1

1

1

DrSeussMd wrote:

Hard to decide which one was more dramatic in their own way<quoted text>

Judged:

4

4

3

Capricorn wrote:

Nothing says drama more than a headstone that shows a child having died on Christmas Day, even though the odds were that she died on the 26th, and known to the family.
But...they needed the extra sympathy. Patsy was forever the perennial victim and drama queen

Judged:

5

4

2

Shadow Heart wrote:

<quoted text>
Naw, i believe they put on the right date.

Judged:

3

3

2

DrSeussMd wrote:

Hard to decide which one was more dramatic in their own way, John by saying
“And I wanted to tell the world that you killed my daughter on Christmas Day. Don't ever forget.”
Or Patsy with her Lazarus-raising speech and her Jackie O. funeral dress.
<quoted text>

Judged:

5

5

2

Shadow Heart wrote:

<quoted text>
I do believe John was molesting JB

Shadow Heart wrote:

<quoted text> PR started trying to improve her, bleaching her hair, makeup, adult clothing and so on.

Judged:

2

2

2

Capricorn wrote:

Nothing says drama more than a headstone that shows a child having died on Christmas Day, even though the odds were that she died on the 26th, and known to the family.
But...they needed the extra sympathy. Patsy was forever the perennial victim and drama queen

Judged:

3

3

3

Capricorn wrote:

Nothing says drama more than a headstone that shows a child having died on Christmas Day, even though the odds were that she died on the 26th, and known to the family.
But...they needed the extra sympathy. Patsy was forever the perennial victim and drama queen

Judged:

3

3

3

Capricorn wrote:

<quoted text>
Once again, you lack the ability to discern between Ramsey haters and child murderer haters.
It's a pity you don't get upset when the hateful posts that your good and sweet friend post on the board with the most vile and hateful things go unchallenged by YOU and then say how sweet and wonderful she is.
But then again, you are a hypocrite and appreciate those sorts of posts as you have claimed, so you are the last person who has the right to criticize anyone
Hypocrite

Judged:

2

2

2

Ole South wrote:

<quoted text>
Cappie, putting our differences aside, I'd like you to know that while I can understand where you're coming from, I feel you're re-acting irresponsibly, JMO. Please try to understand why I'm saying this.
I'm sure Lynette has gotten your message by now, so why do you keep stirring the pot? Aren't you satisfying Franky's purpose by showing him exactly how much he has affected you? Every time you bring into focus something he's done, no matter how indirectly, he's probably sitting on his throne getting his jollies!
I hope you take this with the spirit it's intended, since I know there are posters here who think highly of you. And IMO what you are doing doesn't justify their high opinion. By the same token, there are other posters who probably get a snicker or two every time you re-act as you do. So, why keep giving them fodder?

Judged:

2

2

2

Capricorn wrote:

<quoted text>
Putting all our differences aside, while I understand what you are saying, please understand where I am coming from
Getting his jollies are gotten every time Lynette tells him he is wonderful. I know full well that Lynette has gotten my message, but it won't stop me from reminding her that she has supported a very vile spammer and hater. She is quick to be pious when other vile posters post,(as long as they aren't franky) which shows that she is in fact, not above scolding inappropriate posts, despite her own pious attitude.
Franky has not affected me personally as this is just a stranger on the internet and one of many crazies who get their jollies online when there is not much else in life. What he/she HAS upset is the discussion on the board and has shown nothing but real cruelty, way beyond spamming that is tolerable. Lynette has shown him nothing but support and "love" for lack of a better word even after some of the things he has stated on this forum. Personally, I won't be one of the people who are willing to give Lynette a pass on this. I don't think anyone should, but what others choose to do is their own decision. It is insulting for those to continue to treat lynette with dignity and respect after her support for a person who has been so cruel. You of all people, who were a victim quite often yourself should understand.
While I have my own "knowledge" of things and some of the posters, I will not elaborate on the forum as you know. Anyone who chooses to continue to support certain posters on the forum do so at their own risk. My conscience is clear as I can only warn others and give them advice. What they do with the warnings and advice is up to them.
I too, hope you are taking it in the spirit in which it is intended, but anyone who supports the spammer as lynette has, is agreeing with the things that were said. In turn, anyone who supports lynette is also doing the same. That is just my perspective on things of that nature and I don't ask or expect that others will do the same, although IMO they should
At the very least, IMO and IMO only, Lynette should not only denounce those posts publicly if she wants to be considered a serious poster, and apologize to the forum for her support of franky, but again, that is my opinion
As far as anyone getting their "jollies", I think when others poke fun at another poster about whether they are "handsome" or not and talk about photos, that is getting jollies as well at someone else's expense and is despicable and beyond juvenile IMO. Posters can choose to support that as well and that is their choice. I choose to speak out about it
That is just the way I view things
For those who support those particular posters, I say again: BEWARE

Judged:

2

2

2

Biz wrote:

<quoted text>
I disagree. At the time it was not known if she died on Christmas Day or the very morning hours of December 26th. Being religious I think they chose to list Christmas since it is such a significant day to Christians.
I think the perpetrator chose Christmas IMO to further add insult to injury--killing her or kidnapping her on the most treasured day of the year by most American Christians would really make his mark. IMO the perp hated Christmas, he was probably isolated from his family and friends that year and someone was going to pay for that. Whatever was planned--a kidnapping gone bad---an intended murder---it was suppose to happen on Christmas Day....but something went wrong and it was delayed. It still happened on Christmas night. Doesn't matter what time, it was before the start of the on the 26th...therefore it was considered to be Christmas night, the 25th.