|
Post by SarahLee on Mar 19, 2010 13:03:10 GMT -5
dex I have gone back and forth with you for a few days on this subject, and still you haven't said anything that would show you have a clue. I've asked fair questions,soley based on your assertions and you answered with corny one liners, or BS talk about recieving Christmas cards,or a 19 year old newspaper articles,or listing and describing David Ruffins relationships.. You dare to delve into the personal lives of people you do not know,and make statements with great authority on things you know nothing about. You speak as if your opinions are fact. You speak of a relationship (David and Diane,and David and Murrell) as if you were a participant,or at the least friendly enough with the parties involved to know what was going on You have clearly based your "theory" on hear say information, Your "gut"or just plain gossip. Then you proceed to defame people as if you can prove any of the things you claim. Your actions are wreckless not well meaning or professional. Your attempt to solve a homocide,that has never been classified as a homocide,displays a real disconnect between you and reality. It's mind boggling that you would sincerly belive you were up to the task. I'm sure in your "studies" you're familiar with the 24/24 rule. It refers to 24 HOURS before and after an crime not 24 YEARS. Even though you have bashed friends/acquaintances of mine The people I feel sorry for are the few you have fooled/conned into believing you. You haved conned a few,but the biggest Con was done on you. I say that because you are believing other peoples words, that fit into your fantasy,without knowing if its truth or fiction. Not any of these so called informants to you,would stand in a court of law and repeat anything they have said to you. Not one has gone to law enforcement with their "suspicions",nieither have you for that matter. A sensible person would ask "why" they are talking to a internet investigator but not the police.You can't give them ALL polygraphs can you? While you're hell bent of this vendetta you have against Diane Showers,but know that she's living her life and very well at that. She has had offers to write about her life with David,but has declined,although I wish she would. But unless and Until she write or authorizes a books written about them,the details of their relationship will never be known.She's not parked on the internet sharing her memories. So it's not attention she is seeking. She's definitely NOT the Attention Whore in this senario. You are. You're not on a truth finding mission as you would like people to think. Your's is one of "proving" You assetions right.It's you seeking attention,and you don't seem to mind playing fast and loose with the truth. Sleezy way for one to live doncha think? I say all this to say,I'm through. Unlike you I have accomlished what I set out to do, That being exposing you for the liar,fraud and wannabe you are. LMAO! Of couse I didn't have to convince the members here,they already saw you for what you are. I am not willing to waste anymore of my time with your contradictions,being evasive and your dumb double talk. So I bid you ado.
|
|
|
Post by drex on Mar 19, 2010 13:49:04 GMT -5
No one is making you respond. I like it when you ramble on and on and on. You ask and I answer. I agree with you on one issue, due to the large NUMBERS OF INCONSISTENCIES between what was printed in Philadelphia v. other major city newspapers....what's is SO wrong with seeking and learing the truth to the HOLES these inconsistencies leave? Why the hostility? I am but a nobody but with enough sense to see 1+2 didn't = 3 in these accounts. How do you think I know about David's OCD's using his pipe or that the same man who introduced David to DS in 1989 at his home was ignored at a funeral of a mutual friend? How would I know there were traces of heroin in David's system, or that David was over-heard arguing with a particular man in Philly right before he left for Europe. None of this was in any of the articles you protest way too loudly about. Did I mention there were traces of heroin in his system? Or, DS is pictured riding in the back of a limo owned by the last person who had possesion of the CASH, all one-hundred dollar bills? Or, allegedly the limo owner had the briefcase retrieved after Eddie K called at 9:30a [when he could have 'retrieved' ] it at 4a after Donald Brown returned the limo). Or that even though DS and the limo owner knew David was dead and his CASH unaccounted for, neither mentioned the MISSING CASH MONEY or having possession of the briefcase during their Saturday interview that went into SUNDAY'S NEWSPAPER....hum?
|
|
|
Post by SarahLee on Mar 20, 2010 18:19:25 GMT -5
No one is making you respond. I like it when you ramble on and on and on.I find it odd that you would enjoy my "rambling" siince Your lack of character, is the subject of it. You ask and I answer.Not exactly. You very seldom respond to the question asked or the statements made. Your responses usually consist of stupid one liners or babbling about something random,like the Christmas card thing. You're very evasive,but most dishonest people are. Liars Hate to give detail and are often evasive.....what's is SO wrong with seeking and learing the truth to the HOLES these inconsistencies leave? You're not seeking the truth. What you're doing is seeking answers that fit what you have predetermined to have happened. Your conclusions are based on your limited understanding. But the "truth" according to drex is a lie within itself,because you are a liar. Why the hostility?I'm not being hostile. Although maybe I should be in light of the lies you're trying to spread about people I care about. But instead I've tried to learn "from you" the basis of this garbage you recite. To no avail I might add. I think you're a fraud,and that's not hostility,that's how I truly feel. I am but a nobody but with enough sense to see 1+2 didn't = 3 in these accounts. You're half right! You are a nobody. But a person with "sense" You're not. A person with "sense"doesn't state their opinions as if they were fact. A person with sense doesn't attribute words to a person that were never said. A person with sense doesnt accuse people of splitting money,without having proof. How do you think I know about David's OCD's using his pipe or that the same man who introduced David to DS in 1989 at his home was ignored at a funeral of a mutual friend?YOU don't KNOW. You were told this. But you don't KNOW how much of what you have been told is truth,embellishment,or straight up lies. Hearsay is NOT knowing, Is there a court of law in the US that accepts hearsay? How would I know there were traces of heroin in David's system, The only way you could KNOW that is to have seen the coroners report. Its unclear what right you you have to see it,unless the family shared it with you. You're not a member of law enforcement,or the medical community,so unless the family shared it with you. You either paid for it or got it some other sleezy way. Because you are sleezy. or that David was over-heard arguing with a particular man in Philly right before he left for Europe. Again HEARSAY! You couldn't possibly know this to be fact. David is not here to confirm this and you probably didn't "hear" this from the "particular man" in Philly . If it was before he left for Europe,what damn difference doest that make? None of this was in any of the articles you protest way too loudly about. But it's still just as unreliable as the articles you quote. People lie,of course you know that ,because you do. Like I said before,the people you claim told you these things would not repeat them to 1-the police or 2-in a court of law,so what good is it? If you listed these things you supposedly "know" as to show your skills in investigatoin, try again. You can't hang your "investigator hat" on Gossip. I Protest??? On the contrary I stated the Truth of the matter. It's no secret you have based your assumptions on NEWSPAPER atricles. You have posted them all over the internet. Did I mention there were traces of heroin in his system?Several times. BUT how is that information giong to help your "lost" cause? You don't know how it got there. So what good does it do YOU to know that? He didn't die from a heroin overdose. Or, DS is pictured riding in the back of a limo owned by the last person who had possesion of the CASH, all one-hundred dollar bills?It was 'reported" their were hundred dollar bills. But again hearsay. How do you know that's true? Diane being photographed in Murrells limo means nothing. Now if she or Murrell was photographed at the crack house,or in the limo ride to the hospitial that's a different story. But that's NOT the story is it? Or, allegedly the limo owner had the briefcase retrieved after Eddie K called at 9:30a [when he could have 'retrieved' ] it at 4a after Donald Brown returned the limo). IF the money was in the briefcase and If the briefcase was left at the crack house. It was going to be "empty" no matter what time it was retrieved. But YOU said in a previous post "the money was tucked safely away somewhere. You said I do not believe the briefcase was left behind, with or without the cash David gave Murrell for safekeeping. I believe the briefcase and the money and its contents were "safely" hidden away, just not with Mr. David or at the alleged crackhouse Which is it? Or that even though DS and the limo owner knew David was dead and his CASH unaccounted for, neither mentioned the MISSING CASH MONEY or having possession of the briefcase during their Saturday interview that went into SUNDAY'S NEWSPAPER....hum? Maybe it wasn't missing. Maybe they knew where the money was.Or maybe it was mentioned but not reported. Can you prove Eddie and Dennis did NOT retrive their share of the money? If David was carrying around aprox 40G (nobody knows the amount of money that was left) in a briefcase,into a crack house,then the money was long gone,probably before David reached the hospitial. If Murrell retrived the briefcase with the money in it,which is unlikey, he either kept it or gave it to Diane. I hope it was the latter. How do you know the money wasn't "missing" before David died? Eddie and Dennis had been calling Philly daily inquiring about the money since David's return from Europe. They had people looking for David. Why did David hold onto the money for 2 weeks? Why didn't he wire EK and DE their money instead of letting Murrell hold it? Eddie left someone in Europe to collect his share. Why wasn't "that person " given Eddies share of the money? See the things you claim to know,are not the things you need to know. Bottom line is If you can't prove a thing happened,It's the same as if it didn't happen. Which is exactly where you find yourself. Many theorys but NO Proof.
|
|
|
Post by Drex on Mar 21, 2010 10:39:45 GMT -5
No one is making you respond. I like it when you ramble on and on and on.I find it odd that you would enjoy my "rambling" siince Your lack of character, is the subject of it. You ask and I answer.Not exactly. You very seldom respond to the question asked or the statements made. Your responses usually consist of stupid one liners or babbling about something random,like the Christmas card thing. You're very evasive,but most dishonest people are. Liars Hate to give detail and are often evasive.....what's is SO wrong with seeking and learing the truth to the HOLES these inconsistencies leave? You're not seeking the truth. What you're doing is seeking answers that fit what you have predetermined to have happened. Your conclusions are based on your limited understanding. But the "truth" according to drex is a lie within itself,because you are a liar. Why the hostility?I'm not being hostile. Although maybe I should be in light of the lies you're trying to spread about people I care about. But instead I've tried to learn "from you" the basis of this garbage you recite. To no avail I might add. I think you're a fraud,and that's not hostility,that's how I truly feel. I am but a nobody but with enough sense to see 1+2 didn't = 3 in these accounts. You're half right! You are a nobody. But a person with "sense" You're not. A person with "sense"doesn't state their opinions as if they were fact. A person with sense doesn't attribute words to a person that were never said. A person with sense doesnt accuse people of splitting money,without having proof. How do you think I know about David's OCD's using his pipe or that the same man who introduced David to DS in 1989 at his home was ignored at a funeral of a mutual friend?YOU don't KNOW. You were told this. But you don't KNOW how much of what you have been told is truth,embellishment,or straight up lies. Hearsay is NOT knowing, Is there a court of law in the US that accepts hearsay? How would I know there were traces of heroin in David's system, The only way you could KNOW that is to have seen the coroners report. Its unclear what right you you have to see it,unless the family shared it with you. You're not a member of law enforcement,or the medical community,so unless the family shared it with you. You either paid for it or got it some other sleezy way. Because you are sleezy. or that David was over-heard arguing with a particular man in Philly right before he left for Europe. Again HEARSAY! You couldn't possibly know this to be fact. David is not here to confirm this and you probably didn't "hear" this from the "particular man" in Philly . If it was before he left for Europe,what damn difference doest that make? None of this was in any of the articles you protest way too loudly about. But it's still just as unreliable as the articles you quote. People lie,of course you know that ,because you do. Like I said before,the people you claim told you these things would not repeat them to 1-the police or 2-in a court of law,so what good is it? If you listed these things you supposedly "know" as to show your skills in investigatoin, try again. You can't hang your "investigator hat" on Gossip. I Protest??? On the contrary I stated the Truth of the matter. It's no secret you have based your assumptions on NEWSPAPER atricles. You have posted them all over the internet. Did I mention there were traces of heroin in his system?Several times. BUT how is that information giong to help your "lost" cause? You don't know how it got there. So what good does it do YOU to know that? He didn't die from a heroin overdose. Or, DS is pictured riding in the back of a limo owned by the last person who had possesion of the CASH, all one-hundred dollar bills?It was 'reported" their were hundred dollar bills. But again hearsay. How do you know that's true? Diane being photographed in Murrells limo means nothing. Now if she or Murrell was photographed at the crack house,or in the limo ride to the hospitial that's a different story. But that's NOT the story is it? Or, allegedly the limo owner had the briefcase retrieved after Eddie K called at 9:30a [when he could have 'retrieved' ] it at 4a after Donald Brown returned the limo). IF the money was in the briefcase and If the briefcase was left at the crack house. It was going to be "empty" no matter what time it was retrieved. But YOU said in a previous post "the money was tucked safely away somewhere. You said I do not believe the briefcase was left behind, with or without the cash David gave Murrell for safekeeping. I believe the briefcase and the money and its contents were "safely" hidden away, just not with Mr. David or at the alleged crackhouse Which is it? Or that even though DS and the limo owner knew David was dead and his CASH unaccounted for, neither mentioned the MISSING CASH MONEY or having possession of the briefcase during their Saturday interview that went into SUNDAY'S NEWSPAPER....hum? Maybe it wasn't missing. Maybe they knew where the money was.Or maybe it was mentioned but not reported. Can you prove Eddie and Dennis did NOT retrive their share of the money? If David was carrying around aprox 40G (nobody knows the amount of money that was left) in a briefcase,into a crack house,then the money was long gone,probably before David reached the hospitial. If Murrell retrived the briefcase with the money in it,which is unlikey, he either kept it or gave it to Diane. I hope it was the latter. How do you know the money wasn't "missing" before David died? Eddie and Dennis had been calling Philly daily inquiring about the money since David's return from Europe. They had people looking for David. Why did David hold onto the money for 2 weeks? Why didn't he wire EK and DE their money instead of letting Murrell hold it? Eddie left someone in Europe to collect his share. Why wasn't "that person " given Eddies share of the money? See the things you claim to know,are not the things you need to know. Bottom line is If you can't prove a thing happened,It's the same as if it didn't happen. Which is exactly where you find yourself. Many theorys but NO Proof. You want to know HOW MUCH I know. So you bable on and try to explain it away as you have PUBLISHED articles, not my words or quotes. Stay focused, I have taken PUBLISHED quotes and account of the events that lead up to and after David's death and questioned them. That's it. Period. Had the quotes and comments not been made to police and reporters, there would be nothing to question. They gave their accounts and there are many inconsistencies in several publications and I question which account is fact. And, I do agree with you, the money was NEVER missing. Two people knew where it was all along. And that's just mean and evil for them to do that to David, Eddie, Dennis or their children.
|
|
|
Post by SarahLee on Mar 21, 2010 11:53:18 GMT -5
You want to know HOW MUCH I know. NO,I know HOW much YOU know. That's why I have detailed it in my previous post. YOU know what you have HEARD,without proof that its factual. I'd say that puts YOU in the don't know shyt category. Come on now,truth is if you really knew anthing you would have shared it with law enforcement. If any of the people supposedly giving you information,they would have done the same. Because YOU don't have the authority to "charge" anyone with a crime, so YOU knowing a crime was committed and NOT going to the authorities would be the real crime. So you bable on and try to explain it away as you have PUBLISHED articles, not my words or quotes. Hold up! I have published reports?? YOU rely on media reports,NOT I. I've read them of course,but my intelligence will not allow me to accept everything reported in the media as FACT. Explain it away??? I have no reason to explain anything,I'm not investigating anything or anybody. I have no Burden to prove anything...YOU DO. BTW we do have your words,they are posted all over the internet. When you "publish" hearsay,it is your words. These people that are supposedly "giving" you this information,arent doing it publically, for good reason,they weren't there. Stay focused, I have taken PUBLISHED quotes and account of the events that lead up to and after David's death and questioned them. That's it. Period. Not exactly, You have taken PUBLISHED quotes,and drawn conclusions that cause you to ignorantly make accusations. Don't YOU even bother to read what you write? I'm very focused,but not on the events of that night. I'm focused on a internet Hack,that lies and back peddles on the garbage she has thrown around. NOT any of your "precious" PUBLISHED accounts implicate Diane or Murrell in anyway with David's death,or having the "missing" money. But YOU have. Had the quotes and comments not been made to police and reporters, there would be nothing to question. They gave their accounts and there are many inconsistencies in several publications and I question which account is fact.Again Not exactly! You have posted as if you know what is fact. You have takien what you deem as inconsistencies and pointed fingers at people YOU don't know,have never met and have never spoken to.You have defamed Diane Showers with innuendo,based soley on your limited knowledge of events. BTW why do you think the police didn't notice the same inconsisticies you did? Aren't they trained to notice that type of thing? BTW how could you asertain what was factual without speaking to the people that were interviewed? You have made statements regarding a relationship,that you couldn't possibly have factual information about. You have dubbed Diane Showers as a "woman scorned" and misquoted her,based on either your stupidity or hearsay. There is a big leap between "questioning" and 'accusing". How do you know David said "I'm out of here"? How could you possibly know he and Diane were broken up? How could you possibly know about an argument between the couple? I'll answer for you. YOU DON'T!!!! Yet you repeat it as if YOU do. And, I do agree with you, the money was NEVER missing. Two people knew where it was all along.There you go again spouting BS you don't know,and can't prove. I said maybe the money wasn't missing,OR maybe the money was missing even before David died. I have no proof of either. Do you? Who are the two people? I hope Diane was one of them. Better her than the crack heads in the crack house. And that's just mean and evil for them to do that to David, Eddie, Dennis or their children. Who is them? How do you know Eddie and Dennis didn't get their share? They both remained friendly with Diane. They never accused anybody,and it was their money. Neither of them made a issue of the money,after David's death. Have you figured out why David held the money for 2 weeks ? Or how much of the money was spent before David's death? Or Why Murrell was holding the money in the first place? Why do you assume that the 40G was in tact before David's death? I repeat, the things you claim to know,are not the things you need to know.
|
|
|
Post by SarahLee on Mar 21, 2010 13:29:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by BroMan on Mar 21, 2010 16:03:11 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Brandy on Mar 21, 2010 20:47:57 GMT -5
SL let her stay in this thread by herself cause she sitting up here calling herself trying to pick your brain and your words apart to fit that quack investigation. broman amen
|
|
|
Post by Drex on Mar 21, 2010 21:24:09 GMT -5
SL let her stay in this thread by herself cause she sitting up here calling herself trying to pick your brain and your words apart to fit that quack investigation. broman amen A lady from Columbus Ohio and my facebook page said it best, "Why didn't they just take the money and leave David with us..." that says it all.
|
|
|
Post by SarahLee on Mar 21, 2010 23:21:34 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by SarahLee on Mar 21, 2010 23:22:46 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by drex on Mar 22, 2010 11:05:35 GMT -5
My theory questions how he received the traces of heroin, and would explain the scratches on his knees. I wonder if it was forced up his anus?
|
|
|
Post by BroMan on Mar 22, 2010 11:06:19 GMT -5
SL let her stay in this thread by herself cause she sitting up here calling herself trying to pick your brain and your words apart to fit that quack investigation. broman amen A lady from Columbus Ohio and my facebook page said it best, "Why didn't they just take the money and leave David with us..." that says it all. KICK ROCKS!I THANKS DAT SEZ IT ALL!!!
|
|
|
Post by Brandy on Mar 22, 2010 15:54:26 GMT -5
I believe it is over too..hell it was over before it even started I can't even get mad at the intrusiveness of the crazy people no more it's becoming funny watching them lose what's left of their mind
|
|
|
Post by FOR REAL TALK on Mar 22, 2010 19:35:12 GMT -5
I BELIEVE DR WAS ROBBED TOO. BUT TURN AROUND IS FAIR PLAY HE WAS ROBBING DE AND EK. 40 GRAND IN THE HANDS OF A CRACKHEAD MAKES YOU WONDER WHAT DE AND EK WAS HIGH ON. DR WAS SMOKING THAT MONEY UP DAILY. SHOPPING, FLASHING,PARTYING. HE DIDNT MESS UP ALL OF IT BUT THE MONEY LEFT WASNT CLOSE TO 40 GRAND. SORRY DR FANS.NO HURT INTENDED. BUT LETS KEEP IT 100. DE WAS NO DIFFERENT THAN THE CRACKHEADS HE KICKED IT WITH.
|
|