Posted on 05/02/2005 5:57:48 PM PDT by kingattax
The fiancee of Jennifer Wilbanks, the runaway bride, is on Hannity & Colmes tonight at 9 PM EDT. Also Zell Miller will be on. Tune in !
She left Duluth at 10:30 Tuesday night; the trip took 2 and a half days; she was in Albequerque by 9 P.M. Friday night.
You do the math.
It is also funny that everyone has decided these 2 people are wealthy.His home is a small house probably worth less than $200,000 in a zip code with $2milliopn $ homes.I believe her step father is a police officer.He is the administrator of a medical practice.His father is a city court judge and small town lawyer.
>I missed the evidence of her staying at the treasure island. <
unconfirmed speculation (read that as rumor)by a Las Vegas reporter getting her 2 minutes on Greta
Do we want the police to provide trinkets and first-class plane tickets to those who file false police reports as well? That behavior, as what happened in this case, will encourage more of these phony stories.
I would think differently if it seemed she had taken purposeful action to make them look for her (like that college girl who reported herself kidnapped and then hid for several days).
She wanted everybody to look for her. If she didn't, then why not simply leave a note, or make a phone call, saying she needed to go off and think alone for a while? She didn't even have to tell her fiance -- all she had to do was tell one person. And even when she eventually turned herself in, the first thing she did was tell police a phony story of being abducted. That's not exactly innocent behavior.
Really, how much danger is an armed police officer "putting himself into" walking through the woods looking for a body?
I've helped people look through the neighborhood for their missing cats. Those cats run off because the stupid owners leave the door open. I don't complain about how dangerous it was for me, or for how much time and effort I expended looking for a stupid cat that shouldn't have been out in the first place.
That is just what neighbors do for one another. And it isn't a burden, and it isn't a life-threatening endeavor.
And frankly it amazes me that they could spend $100,000 in EXTRA FUNDS looking for a person for 2 days. That's a lot of overtime. I assume the police were already going to be paid for their normal work, and the volunteers weren't paid. I suppose a few thousand in helicopter fuel?
I'm asking the question, because I just don't understand, how this search cost so much in REAL FUNDS over a 2-day period.
Thank you.
Did I tell you that I got my silver pattern wrong and have had it wrong for years. I have Rhapsody not Prelude and am in shock that I had been so wrong.
It is like suddenly wondering if the man with you is the one you married. Very unhinging!
I can't believe you're actually arguing that pornography is a private act unless it is publicly funded.
_________________________________________________________
I don't live in NYC. Maybe you don't but you have that signon. I live someplace where pornography is viewed as something the state should ban, ie a public matter. You apparently although I have not clicked on your name, live in a place where it is viewed as a private matter, ie a decision between an employee and an employer to produce a product.
As far as I know every where in the US it is a private matter:
1. When you get on a Greyhound and head out of town.
2. What cable news networks cover, short of pornography and on Fox only Victoria Secret fashion shows short of pornography.
3. What you chose to watch on your tv.
Even that may not be a "crime." But Jethro did call the police, and he got the public emotionally involved, when he declared her "missing". The public reacts to missing persons with concern and offers of help.
But, the public does not like to be duped, which is why the public, in large measure, wants to take a pound or two out of her hide.
This woman had best check herself into a "clinic". She obviously doesn't have the wherewithall to actually apologize for misleading the public, so she'd best endure the shame of being thought a mental case.
I almost agree with you. But I'm not sure that you have the LEGAL responsibility to turn yourself in if you are hiding and you find out people are looking for you, unless there is a warrant ordering you to appear.
Just stick a semicolon between the handles. Don't worry about spaces - have 'em, don't have 'em, doesn't matter.
cajungirl;suthrenbelle
LOL. Garfunkle!
That is why the US Constitution protects us from the public. That is why we have actual laws and you must break one for the public to punish you.
Your strategy of checking herself into some kind of clinic for the vowsaphobic might be a good PR move. Likley she will either just move out of town or marry the guy and they will become town eccentrics. [I know Duluth is an exurb so they will become neighborhood eccentrics. Kids will tell each other, "psst did you know that old lady that lives down the block ran away from her big wedding and was all over national tv 30 years ago."]
I sort of think the "How dare her show up alive" crowd should use this case as a wake up call. I sure hope they do and Fox finds better ratings in covering the news rather than the next Peterson case.
Let's see if it works.
It worked!
Thank you.
No. SHE has to pay, not the family. And it is no one's decision except the police on whether to search or not. The family is not directly involved in the decision.
This has no chilling effect one way or the other.
Georgia Peach and all that entails! :)
CG, you're a true gem - growing up in your neighborhood might just have civilized me :-)
Right, she made a lot of people mad. I have tonight taken to calling them the "how dare she show up alive crowd" which is short for the "how dare she show up alive when we are expecting blood and gore and the next Peterson trial crowd."
I do wonder if you do have a legal responsibility to notify the authorities you are ok when a search is on for you? Certainly you should but must you? Of course she was on a bus and so I suspect she may not have known the commotion she started for a few days and then she surfaced. Her mistake was saying what everyone expected to be the case. But that she does not face hard problems well is why she ran in the first place.
But now you are saying that anytime they want, the police can decide i'm missing and search for me, and when I turn up NOT missing they can bill me for their "efforts".
The woman did not do anything to cause the police to look for her. It was her family that got them to look for her. And since I presume her family loves her and cares for her, they would be deterred from asking for police help if they thought it would cost her money, unless they KNEW she was really missing and not just run off.
Look, I'm pretty radical on this point, in that I have a problem with charging people lost in the mountains for their rescue either. But at least with those people they are specifically warned not to go in, and they do it anyway, so they know the consequences.
We all pay our taxes to fund a police force which can look for missing people. This isn't like a house alarm going off every day for a week, at some point you should charge people for wasting your time, but this doesn't reach that level, unless there is evidence that she reported herself missing to the police falsely, causing them to search for her.
So far there is no evidence of that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.