Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Rippersnapper

I must have missed this, but can you tell me whether or not it was ever established if the underwear found was Natalee's?


600 posted on 06/21/2005 5:44:18 AM PDT by demkicker (A skunk sat on a stump; the stump thunk the skunk stunk; the skunk thunk the stump stunk.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 560 | View Replies ]


To: demkicker

Officially I don't know.

but freepers all declared it was not Nat's underpants, too big, too old fashioned. I mean, they were granny panties.


601 posted on 06/21/2005 5:47:41 AM PDT by cajungirl (no)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 600 | View Replies ]

To: demkicker

I heard that "they had no connection to the case".


609 posted on 06/21/2005 6:21:04 AM PDT by BunnySlippers (••• ••• •••)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 600 | View Replies ]

To: demkicker
I must have missed this, but can you tell me whether or not it was ever established if the underwear found was Natalee's?

I think I read or heard that the underwear was NOT hers.

616 posted on 06/21/2005 7:02:11 AM PDT by Rippersnapper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 600 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson