To lie or not to lie, that is the question
I have been sent some comments from a fellow bloggers post.
They are from Jim’s blog and now he claims I am a liar and should have no creditability in this case.
I have to laugh once again at his stupidity.
First and foremost, if he or any one can point out anything on my blog that is a lie, let me know and I will post a retraction as long as you can provide proof that what I have posted is in error.
Please do not post your opinion. Jim and Rob are notorious for only being able to post their weak, feeble minded opinions and that proves absolutely nothing in this case.
As a matter of fact Jim and Rob have destroyed their own creditability with repeated attempts to remain anonymous in this case.
I find that a man unable to stand up for what he believes in is not much of a man at all.
Certainly destroys creditability to only be able to post whatever you want behind a screen name so you can remain anonymous.
I can see Jim and Rob both sitting at their computer sniffing Sean’s dirty used underwear he auctions off and typing there is no way Sean can be involved. Then in the next sentence typing see I proved you wrong again.
Jim and Rob’s problems are simple. They obviously don’t have the knowledge to know what will be required to obtain such a conviction in a capitol case.
Not only do they not know, they want to post they have the facts of the case and they are the only ones that know the truth of what happened in this case. But as we have seen time and time again, the only thing they have been able to prove is NOTHING.
They have only posted opinions backed with no facts whatsoever other than I told you so.
Talk about a way to build creditability.
Now part of Jim’s and Rob problem is they also have no clue as to what I believe in this case. They only know what has been posted. Nothing more, nothing less.
They would like for you to think they know but once again they have only been able to post their opinion and say see I told you so. Once again, they have no clue.
They also wanted to condemn Elm and Renee and say neither of them have any creditability in this case either.
Elm is one of the few people that have actually stood up for what he believes in regardless of what anyone else says to him. Unlike Rob or Jim, Elms opinions have not wavered in the least. A lot more than I can say for Jim and Rob.
Renee is so far out of Jim’s league it’s not even funny. Ree is an awesome person.
Of course nothing more could be expected from a scared man hiding behind a computer screen. Build that creditability Jim…
As this case progresses more and more of the truth has been coming to light. Jim and Rob have been proven wrong time and time again.
Maybe we can get PC to post the information released to the defense from the discovery. Read that document and you will see a lot of light into this case.
You will see what I have said all along. There is a lot more to this case than Jim or Rob knows. This document is fact filled. Not once in this document can Jim or Rob post whatever and then post see I told you so.
This document does contain the facts of the case.
As many of us have requested time and time again, Jim and Rob (especially) post facts not your opinion. I realize your blog will have to close Jim if you can no longer post your made up facts of this case, but oh well. People would be better off not knowing people like you.
Please note, Jim is not wearing the cowboy hat in this picture. The second image shares a lot of the same characteristic of Jim. We are working to prove the identity of the second image.
11 comments:
Great post Jakester.
Thanks Elm
Hi Jakester--
Elm's views of this case have changed so many times and have not born fruit. He is a one note harpsicord--Harlow did not do this.
Unfortunately for Elm, the evidence does not bear him out.
As for you Jakester, you don't like Jim or me because we try to use facts to back our claims as opposed to wishful thinking. For as long as you and Elm decide to concot half-assed bullshit to substitute for facts, I for one will call your hand. Bank on it.
So Elm does not read CV or TL and misses that the reporter at CV caught Harlow in his lie about being with a john the night of the murder and does what, repeats the lie. But Elm is a credible blogger.
Elm repeats a Joe tall tale about a mid-winter's camping trip to PA. And simply says Joe lied. But Elm is a credible blogger.
The Masarati's whereabouts pan out. Grant mentions the same thing in his PHT, Day 2. However, Elm tries to shread the credibility of other eyewitnesses to the Silver SUV leaving Kocis' driveway the night of the murder. But Elm is a credible blogger.
Elm tried to tell us that he was not part of a 3-way conferencing call scheme into the holding facility as was Renee. But Elm is a credible blogger.
Yes, Jakester you definitely need Elm.
slbo, your a fine one to talk about views... lets see, you say RW was upstairs in house of kocis in a closet watching the murder live on cctv. you then say rw was photographed at the scene on night of murder. you also said rw's car was there in the driveway. research told me and showed me just how full of shit you are. you continue to be full of shit. you are a coward and loser you need to mention other peoples names (jim this time) in a lame attempt to give you back-up and credibility. that only works if those people (jim) say it themselves. yet they remain silent in showing support for you.
you have been proven wrong on every claim you have made. all you can do is attack other bloggers, you impersonated a federal agent in doing so. you are a criminal and liar. what you say to jakester = pot kettle black.
Hi Robert--
Well for a guy who is just there you opened your big mouth at Jason's blog within 3 days of the murder and identified yourself.
Oh yes Bryan had CCTV. And, no I do not believe you were in NYC at the time of the murder. Kocis was too paranoid to meet anyone new without a backup plan.
As for Elm, he is in a dream world. Harlow and Joe are where they both belong. He is grasping at anything to keep Harlow out of prison. I don't support Elm and never will.
Sorry Robert. You only attack. I do try to follow the fact trail. You have never provided a single one. You just like to dis Sean and Grant.
Rob,
I have a few problems with your statement but the main one would still have to be you don’t know any facts.
You post nothing but your opinion as truth and fact.
Once again the only fact you posted here is I told you so.
What a way to build up the fact reporting creditability.
slob, aka fake federal agent, what you believe has no bearing on this saga. your as bad as elm. its in the posts and claims you have made.
like elm, what you think and what you believe has no importance.
Here are some nice facts for you, Jakester, concerning your brother-in-crime Harlow:
"Accounts that were late on or before May 2007:
American Honda Finance: 30 days late for March, April & May 2007
DAIMLERCHRYS: 30 days late for February & May 2007
BMW FIN SVC: 30 days late for February, 60 days late for May 2007
Chase 2: 30 days late for April, 60 days late for May 2007
GMAC Mortgage (2nd Mtg): 30 days late for March & May 2007
Chase: 30 days late for May"
As you can see, the Harlowite talking point that “They were not behind in any of their payments before their arrests” turns out to be a bald faced lie.
According to credit info provided by PC, Harlow was WAY over limit on most of his credit cards; here is the breakdown on that:
Chase 1: $50,000 limit - $55,071 owed = $5,071 OVER LIMIT
Discover Fin: $4,000 limit - $3626.00 owed = $374.00 available
BofA: $18,000 limit - $40,117.00 owed = $22,117 OVER LIMIT
Chase 2: $100,000 limit - $119,113 owed = $19,113 OVER LIMIT
AMEX: $11,556 owed; AMEX is squishy when it comes to credit limits, however, it looks like they were finally cut off (see info concerning Joe's frantic call to credit card companies).
Jakester--
And you have posted what Jakester? Elm told me, Jakester, that . . . ." And you are dumb enough to believe his pap. Well, Lordy, Lordy Elm has a truth problem.
Robert like I said all you do is sling mud when anyone points out that you followed too closely in Bryan Kocis' shadow. Then something interesting regarding that Jason post of 26 Jan 2007. Your pal Cad, the British barrister, was posting as Anonymous on all places, that very Jason Curious blog. The good barrister wanted Jason to delete certain Anonymous posts. What is it about Cad? Oh he was on the phone with Bryan the evening of his murder, and just happened to be customer/client of Bryan Kocis.
And just happened to be the shill for the MOU and details from the Settlement Agreement. Bret, writing at Jason's 26 Jan 2007 was not Cad. That was you.
Like I said before, Harlow and Joe are where they belong, in jail awaiting their murder trial.
Rob you have never gotten anything right because you don't comprehend what you read. I do read the Times Leader and the Citizens Voice.
As for all of the claims that you make about what I have said. All of those were from statements made by Joe and Harlow and printed in those very newspapers that you claim are so factual.
Yet you don't call them liars. Why don't you ask them to print retractions on those news stories.
As far as Jim's claims about Joe nad Harlow's financial status you are basing that on a comment that PC made to me in a instant message. You seem to think that I should believe everything that he said to me.
Well why should I believe him when he posted our chats on his blog when he said that he would not. I don't trust him and I don't trust you or Jim for that matter.
BB is right about you. You did inmpersonate a federal officer. the only problem is that BB does not know the real truth about you.
I told you that I was not going to give it away and I will not.
You have not said anything that is believeable about this case. you have just twisted the words that have been said by others.
You distort the words of people and you have gone after BB for the only reason to claim that he is Robert Wagner.
Why is that Rob? Robert Wagner is a key witness for the prosecution. With his help they might convict Joe and Harlow and that is what you want is it not Rob?
So why the harrasament of BB what purpose does it serve for you to constanly attack him? For that matter what purpose does it serve for you to attack me.
I have nothing to do with this murder other than I am writing about it.
Maybe it scares you that I just might know too much about this case and that I will slip and say something that will ruin your chances of getting them convicted.
Maybe that is why there is the big campaign to discredit anyone who does not believe your line of bullshit.
Elm--
I comprehend plenty. As for Robert, well he is special. Needs Cad to hold his hand.
"All of those were from statements made by Joe and Harlow and printed in those very newspapers that you claim are so factual," you say. If you actually attributed cites to those publications I would believe you, but you don't and didn't.
Post a Comment