To: MizSterious
While you're asking yourself some questions about the timeline with Watkins et al, ask this one: is it possible they were the ones at the house surfing the porn sites, and not Neal at all? Sort of padding their case, perhaps? NOthing better than an EXPERT at CHILD PORN and COMPUTERS to be able to PLANT an incriminating file on your computer and make it look like it was there, protected by YOUR PASSWORD, and DATED properly.
To: UCANSEE2
What do ya wanna bet that prior to LE arriving on 2/1, the vdams flushed ~~~ their stash of pot???
To: UCANSEE2
This is off the wall.....but I recall some years ago a Senate confirmation hearing for a Supreme Court nominee that involved porn. That nominee had rented porn videos and the police went to the video store WITHOUT warrant and asked the store for a list of titles that the nominee had checked out and they got that information from the store. I don't think he went on to become a rapist/murderer (name of Thomas, wasn't it?) Also, concerning same confirmation there was much discussion concerning a SINGLE hair on a Coke can....sort of like a SINGLE hair in a sink trap. Where am I going with this.....oh well, back to the Van Dam trial...nothing to see, move on folks...
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson