JoPar_v2 Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 2 minutes ago, x-BillzeBubba said: No way to know, but perhaps Shady got the jewelry on loan, and she didn't know it? So to her, it's hers as a gift. Doubt it but could be No I think your suggestion is very plausible. Men are constantly trying to impress women. Why not fib and give her the jewelry to her as a gift, rather than admit he’s just passing loaners on to her? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 2 minutes ago, Peter said: The point that I made was that she has no right to stay there other than at the will of the owner. Georgia law recognizes this. Why you went out the way to disagree is beyond me. Because your point is wrong and stupid. She has tenants' rights - 60 days notification, during which she can stay. Then there's another 30 or so for the eviction proceedings, another 30 or so the courts would grant her to clear out after they decide she has to go, then another month after that period to schedule the sheriff to come and remove her. And that's if she doesn't appeal, which extends it even further. During which time, SHE HAS THE RIGHT, BY LAW, TO STAY THERE. Which is something you'd already know IF YOU READ THE WHOLE THREAD, YOU IDIOT. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPP Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 No further thoughts on this topic yet but im just writing to get this thing @ 200! Just want to do my part.... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince88 Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 6 minutes ago, Gugny said: It's becoming clearer and clearer that McCoy had something to do with orchestrating this hit. Or is it more clear? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Royale with Cheese Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 1 minute ago, dave mcbride said: Oh please. Your opinion of her character is irrelevant anyway. The only thing that matters is that the place she was living in was invaded, and she got the crap beaten out of her. Its all irrelevant because it’s a message board. Your opinions are irrelevant too bud. Thats not the only thing that matters. There is a possibility of someone being falsely accused. Maybe that doesn’t matter to you.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starr Almighty Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 17 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said: I think it’s the 2nd one but not sure It has to be the 2nd one otherwise why would he ask for it to be returned Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 4 minutes ago, x-BillzeBubba said: No way to know, but perhaps Shady got the jewelry on loan, and she didn't know it? So to her, it's hers as a gift. Doubt it but could be A possibility I hadn't considered. And she strikes me as being not-quite-bright-enough to be entirely capable of not hearing the explanation "It was never a gift, it was a loan, I need it back." 6 minutes ago, dave mcbride said: Oh please. Your opinion of her character is irrelevant anyway. The only thing that matters is that the place she was living in was invaded, and she got the crap beaten out of her. There's a lot more than that that matters...but her character isn't relevant to her getting beaten and robbed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 it's just not the same reading the story on ESPN without all the illuminating comments anymore... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fansince88 Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 Just saw this. She clearly did not want to move out! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 7 minutes ago, Peter said: The point that I made was that she has no right to stay there other than at the will of the owner. Georgia law recognizes this. Why you went out the way to disagree is beyond me. Is that why the Georgia police made sure to explain to Shady that he can't just kick her out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 9 minutes ago, Gugny said: It's becoming clearer and clearer that McCoy had something to do with orchestrating this hit. It would take a low-watt light bulb like McCoy to order a hit and have it end up with the target literally being hit with a gun. Just now, GG said: Is that why the Georgia police made sure to explain to Shady that he can't just kick her out? No, that was because they're married... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
x-BillzeBubba Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 3 minutes ago, JoPar_v2 said: No I think your suggestion is very plausible. Men are constantly trying to impress women. Why not fib and give her the jewelry to her as a gift, rather than admit he’s just passing loaners on to her? Well one reason would be that loaners need to be returned so....if he did, he's was just asking for trouble, which he definitely got Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloSol Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 2 minutes ago, DC Tom said: As I said yesterday: the combined mental acuity of everyone involved is such that I doubt they could collectively butter toast. That indicts or clears no one. It just makes this a whole great big furball of stupid. You think it's not necessary to clarify that? If I say nothing more than "Yes, she's crazy," there's more than a few people who'll call it "victim blaming" and accuse me of saying she deserved it. Tell it to those !@#$s, not me. You are acting like a white knight when it is not needed. Both sides of this are over reacting. So far we have 0 proof of anything, so speculation and theories about the victim are not Victim Blaming, they are speculations and theories. Assuming McCoy has anything to do with this is the same thing, because there is 0 evidence. Again everything is speculation and theory at this point. All we have is a potential crime, a beaten women, a friends Instagram post, a guess by a scorned ex, a statement from McCoy that says it is a baseless accusation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 Just now, BuffaloSol said: You are acting like a white knight when it is not needed. Both sides of this are over reacting I'm not acting like a white knight. I'm protecting myself from overreactive fools. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Real Buffalo Joe Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 11 minutes ago, BuffaloSol said: Thank god people are finally strong enough to proclaim on a message board that women don't deserve to be beaten just because they are crazy. But let's also be clear: Water is Wet Wrong. Water isn't wet. Wetness is a description of our experience of water; what happens to us when we come into contact with water in such a way that it impinges on our state of being. We, or our possessions, 'get wet'. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starr Almighty Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 2 minutes ago, DC Tom said: A possibility I hadn't considered. And she strikes me as being not-quite-bright-enough to be entirely capable of not hearing the explanation "It was never a gift, it was a loan, I need it back." If there was a bitter breakup she may think shady was lying about it being loaned and being petty by asking for it back. She can also say hey they lent it to you not me, figure it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 2 minutes ago, DC Tom said: It would take a low-watt light bulb like McCoy to order a hit and have it end up with the target literally being hit with a gun. No, that was because they're married... I thought they were in a common law family home? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoPar_v2 Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 2 minutes ago, x-BillzeBubba said: Well one reason would be that loaners need to be returned so....if he did, he's was just asking for trouble, which he definitely got Hey I never said I thought McCoy was particularly smart ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 1 minute ago, DC Tom said: Because your point is wrong and stupid. She has tenants' rights - 60 days notification, during which she can stay. Then there's another 30 or so for the eviction proceedings, another 30 or so the courts would grant her to clear out after they decide she has to go, then another month after that period to schedule the sheriff to come and remove her. And that's if she doesn't appeal, which extends it even further. During which time, SHE HAS THE RIGHT, BY LAW, TO STAY THERE. Which is something you'd already know IF YOU READ THE WHOLE THREAD, YOU IDIOT. You are picking a fight for no reason at all. She is a tenant at will and the law provides a procedure for her to get the hell out within a certain period of time. The timing is totally at the will of the owner. She has no has no lease or rights beyond what the owner affords her. Once she is advised to move out, the clock ticks . . . . It appears that she has stayed well beyond the 60 days in any event. I am not going to call you and idiot (no matter what I may think about the subject) because that would not be good form. I will say that this argument is idiotic though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 12, 2018 Share Posted July 12, 2018 1 minute ago, The Real Buffalo Joe said: Wrong. Water isn't wet. Wetness is a description of our experience of water; what happens to us when we come into contact with water in such a way that it impinges on our state of being. We, or our possessions, 'get wet'. This is true, and surprisingly perspicacious. But - and this is important to note - that still doesn't mean that crazy women deserve to be beaten. 1 minute ago, Peter said: You are picking a fight for no reason at all. She is a tenant at will and the law provides a procedure for her to get the hell out within a certain period of time. The timing is totally at the will of the owner. She has no has no lease or rights beyond what the owner affords her. Once she is advised to move out, the clock ticks . . . . It appears that she has stayed well beyond the 60 days in any event. That's not how it works. That's not how any of this works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts