Tues April 15 Daily Discussion

[SavannahStar]

Good morning, everyone! Time for a new day, a new thread.

Hope y'all got your taxes in! :D

[crymeariver2006]

http://www.jdnews.com/news/laurean_56066___article.html/county_mexico.html


Extradition Procedure Underway For Laurean




....had his first appearance in front of a judge in Mexico over the weekend, said Capt. Rick Sutherland of the Onslow County Sheriff's Department.

The judge recommended extradition, Sutherland said, adding there are steps to be taken and "we do not know what (Laurean) will want to do."

Laurean has representation in Mexico, said Jacksonville lawyer Wally Paramore, who has been appointed as Laurean's attorney by the state's Capital Defender's Office.

[cuppajoe]

Morning - taxes in. Still reading back from yesterday. Do we know if he waived estradiction?

[cuppajoe]

Sorry that should be extradition.

[CANDYKISSES]

Good morning.

Here we go cryme. I wonder what kind of lawyer he has in Mexico and if Parramore will be talking to him today?

I believe he will be back here in short order, but not before the military puts their information in on what charges they may or may not be seeking to bring him to trial on.

JMO tho.:read:

[martha]

Thanks crym for the inf on the due date sounds right to me. hope we hear when he will be brought back to us. :rose:

[crymeariver2006]

Originally posted by CANDYKISSES
Good morning.

Here we go cryme. I wonder what kind of lawyer he has in Mexico and if Parramore will be talking to him today?

I believe he will be back here in short order, but not before the military puts their information in on what charges they may or may not be seeking to bring him to trial on.

JMO tho.:read: [/*]

I think Paramore wants to talk with the Mexican attorney ASAP. And yes, the MC has to offer up their charges before the extradition is set in stone so we should be hearing shortly what, if any, charges they are persuing.

Cesar, as of now, still has the right to fight extradition.

(IMO, I don't think he will....but that's just a guess).

[martha]

Originally posted by SavannahStar
Good morning, everyone! Time for a new day, a new thread.

Hope y'all got your taxes in! :D [/*] Hi everyone my tax man is slow had it to him for 2 months hope it is ready today don;t want to be taken to jail will they let me have a computer in jail? lol:rose:

[CANDYKISSES]

Originally posted by martha
Thanks crym for the inf on the due date sounds right to me. hope we hear when he will be brought back to us. :rose: [/*]

Good morning martha, I think those documents are very confusing from the AMW site, they seem to have a more complete set of incident reports and search warrants.

You have a narrative with a January due date, a confirmation of bipolar and a confirmation of AWOL.

Then in the next page you have confirmation NONE OF THAT IS CORRECT.

Can you imagine???

JMO.

Hope you are feeling better.

I think Cesar is coming to NC sooner rather than later. :read:

[crymeariver2006]

Originally posted by martha
Hi everyone my tax man is slow had it to him for 2 months hope it is ready today don;t want to be taken to jail will they let me have a computer in jail? lol:rose: [/*]

We must have the same guy! Not to worry, ours always has an extension ready just in case.

[CANDYKISSES]

Originally posted by crymeariver2006


I think Paramore wants to talk with the Mexican attorney ASAP. And yes, the MC has to offer up their charges before the extradition is set in stone so we should be hearing shortly what, if any, charges they are persuing.

Cesar, as of now, still has the right to fight extradition.

(IMO, I don't think he will....but that's just a guess). [/*]

I wonder when the USMC will be putting their charges together? From my POV, I would think it is contingent on that if we believe DA Hudson has already put his together and addressed the death penalty being off the table. I tend to believe he had that in check, but he did tell Lindell Kay it's possible other charges could be added on.

Do you know if he has that option after extradition if they are lesser crimes? Just curious about what the treaty really does include.

JMO tho.:shrug:

[martha]

I think he is hating to tell me how much i owe lol:rose:

[crymeariver2006]

I don't know about that.

I do know that I have written CW to merge these two threads. LOL, I can't keep up with one, much less two!

[CANDYKISSES]

I guess this could be the I hate doing taxes thread for the day. :lol:

I can put a bunch of @#$%#@#$@#$%#$#@@$% on this one...cuz I hate it.

[Kim]

Back from my sleep study.Going over last nights posts.
I noticed discussion about her due date.The person she went to boot camp with who ran into her in november said Maria was 8 months prego at that time.Was this somethign Maria beleived.And with her mom due to arive shortly for the birth of the baby(dec.IIRC) and the dates being changed by military? I am confused.someone help me out here!

Also on the DNA when my son showed me his military ID there is a square in it (silver looking).He told me that contained his DNA.IMO all the marines would carry the same ID cards right?

I am also confused about the JDN reporter indicating maybe the baby belonged to someone else (senior officer) yet she was beleived to be carrying on a relationship with cesar? How does all this come into play I am completely lost! Are they indicating she used Cesars name as being the father out of fear of it really belonging to a senior officer who may be influential or very high ranking? somebody please straighten me out.

[SavannahStar]

Originally posted by crymeariver2006
I don't know about that.

I do know that I have written CW to merge these two threads. LOL, I can't keep up with one, much less two! [/*]

Thank you, cryme. I always hesitate to start the morning thread thinking someone else will do it at the exact same time.....sure enough....:)

[martha]

Originally posted by crymeariver2006
I don't know about that.

I do know that I have written CW to merge these two threads. LOL, I can't keep up with one, much less two! [/*] thaks for doing that i can't keep up anyway. i try but i am going to have to be out so hope both or put togeather.:rose:

[martha]

maybe this is why they need new dna maybe the baby is not cl if it is someone highter up boy they may be in trouble if they find out who it is. just guessing:rose:

[martha]

Originally posted by CANDYKISSES
I guess this could be the I hate doing taxes thread for the day. :lol:

I can put a bunch of @#$%#@#$@#$%#$#@@$% on this one...cuz I hate it. [/*] yep CK I am with you on this.:rose:

[Kim]

UPDATE off the cuff has added a questions and answers section to their site for Capt. Sutherland to answer as he pleases!

http://onslowcrime.encblogs.com/?p=60

[henry]

:D see what happens when i've got other things to do! also lkay has a new site up if not posted on the "other" thread:

http://onslowcrime.encblogs.com/

[caejde]

Originally posted by martha
maybe this is why they need new dna maybe the baby is not cl if it is someone highter up boy they may be in trouble if they find out who it is. just guessing:rose: [/*]

I doubt they would test anyone else. They dont' know who to test. And if it is negative, always that possibility the person isn't even in the military.

[Kim]

Lord I am going to get banned again!!!!hammer
I accidently clicked new thread when trying to post this (I AM NEW!)
UPDATE off the cuff has added a questions and answers section to their site for Capt. Sutherland to answer as he pleases!

http://onslowcrime.encblogs.com/?p=60

[donna]

Originally posted by martha
Hi everyone my tax man is slow had it to him for 2 months hope it is ready today don;t want to be taken to jail will they let me have a computer in jail? lol:rose: [/*]

:seeya: ... Good morning, everyone!

Martha, I mailed my taxes in last night! LOL, I do not think they will let you have a computer in jail, but I promise to write you a letter every day!

Been gone, so I have to go finish reading yesterday's thread!
BBL.

[henry]

hah! you beat me to it - oh, good morning! hope this willl be a place, as he says, for serious and inquiring minds . . . will we see your questions over there as well?

[crymeariver2006]

Originally posted by martha
maybe this is why they need new dna maybe the baby is not cl if it is someone highter up boy they may be in trouble if they find out who it is. just guessing:rose: [/*]

I don't think that will turn out to be the case, Martha.

[Kim]

Originally posted by henry
hah! you beat me to it - oh, good morning! hope this willl be a place, as he says, for serious and inquiring minds . . . will we see your questions over there as well? [/*]
YEP :lol: I am KDB The fact that that table was sold around the time of the murder and THEY didnt want anyone to come to the house to look at it implicates Maria knew something IMO afterall Marines are definitly trained to defend themself.Why would they worry about a young girl/woman coming to look at a table Christina advertised? IMO

[henry]

Originally posted by Coldwater


Be sure you keep your questions and answers over there, unless you get the posters permission the only thing you can post here is the link. All posts quoted on here, even partial, w/o the author's permission will be deleted and cause for banning as it is against copyright and rules. [/*]

thank you for the reminder and thank you for your patience!

[Charlotte]

Originally posted by Kim


I am also confused about the JDN reporter indicating maybe the baby belonged to someone else (senior officer) yet she was beleived to be carrying on a relationship with cesar? How does all this come into play I am completely lost! Are they indicating she used Cesars name as being the father out of fear of it really belonging to a senior officer who may be influential or very high ranking? somebody please straighten me out. [/*]

Kim, the JDN reporter didn't indicate anything in particular about the baby's paternity or about the words "senior officer" -- he said to look closely at the incident report as there is something there that was generally dismissed at the time, but that may turn out to be very important.

Everything said since then about the paternity, senior officer, etc has been posters (at the Off the Cuff site and here) speculating as to what it was in the incident report that he was hinting at.
Lindell Kay, the reporter, said to look for something... but he didn't give any hint at all as to what. The rest is all speculation as to what he meant.

[Kim]

Originally posted by Charlotte


Kim, the JDN reporter didn't indicate anything in particular about the baby's paternity or about the words "senior officer" -- he said to look closely at the incident report as there is something there that was generally dismissed at the time, but that may turn out to be very important.

Everything said since then about the paternity, senior officer, etc has been posters (at the Off the Cuff site and here) speculating as to what it was in the incident report that he was hinting at.
Lindell Kay, the reporter, said to look for something... but he didn't give any hint at all as to what. The rest is all speculation as to what he meant. [/*]

Hopefully the speculation is far off.

[AmyO]

Good morning everyone! :seeya: Hubby's birthday today. The poor guy is a tax baby! LOL

[Kim]

Welp I am out of here.I didnt get any sleep during my sleep study.
When I come back I hope to see all of our questions answered I have already started to dream huh!:D

[Charlotte]

Is it just me, or has the link to the court documents for this case at the AMW site been disabled??

If it has, I wonder why?

ETA http://www.amw.com/pdf/lauterbachPDF.pdf

http://www.amw.com/fugitives/case.cfm?id=52333

[AmyO]

Originally posted by Charlotte
Is it just me, or has the link to the court documents for this case at the AMW site been disabled??

If it has, I wonder why?

ETA http://www.amw.com/pdf/lauterbachPDF.pdf

http://www.amw.com/fugitives/case.cfm?id=52333 [/*]
Interesting. Maybe the link on their side is just messed up. That's what it looks like to me. The link is pointed to an incorrect location on their server.

[martha]

Originally posted by donna


:seeya: ... Good morning, everyone!

Martha, I mailed my taxes in last night! LOL, I do not think they will let you have a computer in jail, but I promise to write you a letter every day!

Been gone, so I have to go finish reading yesterday's thread!
BBL. [/*]Thanks Donna you a doll. i am so far behind i will never catch up so I just try to get in on all the new inf/:rose:

[strick10]

Originally posted by Charlotte


Kim, the JDN reporter didn't indicate anything in particular about the baby's paternity or about the words "senior officer" -- he said to look closely at the incident report as there is something there that was generally dismissed at the time, but that may turn out to be very important.

Everything said since then about the paternity, senior officer, etc has been posters (at the Off the Cuff site and here) speculating as to what it was in the incident report that he was hinting at.
Lindell Kay, the reporter, said to look for something... but he didn't give any hint at all as to what. The rest is all speculation as to what he meant. [/*]

Yup nothing but speculation.....

[nuttintodo]

I am bringing this over from last night discussion:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by mini-me
Wasn't there a garden shed or some thing like that on the property.[/*]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

At the Laurean's, yes I do believe there is.

At DD's I don't know because when I rode by I couldn't see into his backyard.

And unless I'm sorely mistakened, anytime a SW is being obtained to search a house and/or property, they apply to search any and all buildings/structures along with the land around them.

jmoo

[Charlotte]

Originally posted by AmyO

Interesting. Maybe the link on their side is just messed up. That's what it looks like to me. The link is pointed to an incorrect location on their server. [/*]

Ah, it looks like the whole AMW site is messed up.

It's either undergoing some problems, or is in the midst of upgrading or something. Many of the pics they had up are disabled too, but it's not just on CL's section of the site, it's on every suspect's. Must be something at their end. (Hope they get it fixed soon.)

[alter ego]

Originally posted by CANDYKISSES


I wonder when the USMC will be putting their charges together? From my POV, I would think it is contingent on that if we believe DA Hudson has already put his together and addressed the death penalty being off the table. I tend to believe he had that in check, but he did tell Lindell Kay it's possible other charges could be added on.

Do you know if he has that option after extradition if they are lesser crimes? Just curious about what the treaty really does include.

JMO tho.:shrug: [/*]

Article 17. RULE OF SPECIALITY
1. A person extradited under the present Treaty shall not be detained, tried or
punished in the territory of the requesting Party for an offense other than that for
which extradition has been granted nor be extradited by that Party to a third State
http://untreaty.un.org/unts/60001_120000/5/34/00009695.pdf

[daniel green]

Originally posted by SavannahStar
Good morning, everyone! Time for a new day, a new thread.

Hope y'all got your taxes in! :D [/*]

Good morning, SS.

Tax day. Sigh.

[nuttintodo]

Originally posted by Charlotte
Is it just me, or has the link to the court documents for this case at the AMW site been disabled??

If it has, I wonder why?

ETA http://www.amw.com/pdf/lauterbachPDF.pdf

http://www.amw.com/fugitives/case.cfm?id=52333 [/*]

It does appear that way.

I saved my copy way back when and only use the link as we are required to do so here.

But honestly there is at least a couple of pages missing from the JDNews' version.

And WRAL still has their copy up (at least as of this posting):
http://www.wral.com/asset/news/local/2008/01/10/2284685/2119-marinesearchwarrant.swf

[crymeariver2006]

Originally posted by nuttintodo
I am bringing this over from last night discussion:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by mini-me
Wasn't there a garden shed or some thing like that on the property.[/*]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

At the Laurean's, yes I do believe there is.

At DD's I don't know because when I rode by I couldn't see into his backyard.

And unless I'm sorely mistakened, anytime a SW is being obtained to search a house and/or property, they apply to search any and all buildings/structures along with the land around them.

jmoo [/*]

I thought the SW in question was the one for Daniel Durham's house. Have we ever been shown the search warrant for the Laureans' house?

:shrug:

[nuttintodo]

Originally posted by crymeariver2006


I thought the SW in question was the one for Daniel Durham's house. Have we ever been shown the search warrant for the Laureans' house?

:shrug: [/*]

Nope the SW for the Laurean's house was sealed. IIRC it was reported they were sealed due to the mishandling or the previous SW's.

I only put the part about the Laurean's house outbuilding just in case mini-me was thinking of the Laurean's instead of DD's house.

jmoo

are you snug as a bug in a rug? :cool:

[daniel green]

Originally posted by CANDYKISSES


Good morning martha, I think those documents are very confusing from the AMW site, they seem to have a more complete set of incident reports and search warrants.

You have a narrative with a January due date, a confirmation of bipolar and a confirmation of AWOL.

Then in the next page you have confirmation NONE OF THAT IS CORRECT.

snipped: [/*]

Good morning, Candy.

I have not caught up and probly won't be able to any time soon.

So, the AMW site has good info or bad? Worth looking at?

Has there been anything new in last 24 hrs?

Thank you!

[crymeariver2006]

Originally posted by nuttintodo


Nope the SW for the Laurean's house was sealed. IIRC it was reported they were sealed due to the mishandling or the previous SW's.

I only put the part about the Laurean's house outbuilding just in case mini-me was thinking of the Laurean's instead of DD's house.

jmoo

are you snug as a bug in a rug? :cool: [/*]

Your photobucket site has a wealth of information!

Long live the rug!

(Seriously, I'm freezing this morning!)



:D

[CANDYKISSES]

Originally posted by alter ego


Article 17. RULE OF SPECIALITY
1. A person extradited under the present Treaty shall not be detained, tried or
punished in the territory of the requesting Party for an offense other than that for
which extradition has been granted nor be extradited by that Party to a third State
http://untreaty.un.org/unts/60001_120000/5/34/00009695.pdf [/*]

Thank you. So they would need to get it in before he is sent back. Hmmm...maybe we will get some real information soon from the USMC.

Hopeful here....:o

[CANDYKISSES]

Originally posted by daniel green


Good morning, Candy.

I have not caught up and probly won't be able to any time soon.

So, the AMW site has good info or bad? Worth looking at?

Has there been anything new in last 24 hrs?

Thank you! [/*]

Good morning, I was amazed at what was confirmed on one page and not confirmed on the next.

Check your email.

Nothink per se new, but some rumblings about the USMC and if they will be presenting charges too and what is in the process as we await extradition.

He does have an attorney now in Mexico from what I read tho.

JMO.

[alter ego]

Originally posted by CANDYKISSES


Thank you. So they would need to get it in before he is sent back. Hmmm...maybe we will get some real information soon from the USMC.

Hopeful here....:o [/*]

Hmm, they might not have much they can add:

Article 5. POLITICAL AND MILITARY OFFENSES
...
3. Extradition shall not be granted when the offense for which extradition is re
quested is a purely military offense.
http://untreaty.un.org/unts/60001_120000/5/34/00009695.pdf

[Marcia3]

Good morning everybody...I've been trying to :read: yesterday's posts from where I left off, but it seems like an uphill climb and I'm not energetic enough today to handle it!

Some interesting discussion, though, and now this morning we have an update on the extradition process.

Thanks, alter ego, for the info on what the MC can do with him in terms of charges. So unless they go after him for something that is not just a military offense, they cannot go after him at all?

[Charlotte]

Originally posted by Marcia3
Good morning everybody...I've been trying to :read: yesterday's posts from where I left off, but it seems like an uphill climb and I'm not energetic enough today to handle it!

Some interesting discussion, though, and now this morning we have an update on the extradition process.

Thanks, alter ego, for the info on what the MC can do with him in terms of charges. So unless they go after him for something that is not just a military offense, they cannot go after him at all? [/*]

I'm thinking this could be why the rape investigation has been closed. It was strictly a military investigation, and for the MC to charge him with it now (difficult enough to do without ML to testify in military court, even if the baby's DNA is his), could interfere with the extradition process.

But if that's the case, why are they still after his DNA? :confused:

[Charlotte]

Some thoughts on ML's conception and due dates changing...

At the MC presser, Lt. Col. Hill said that she was confirmed to be pregnant on June 27th, with medical personnel estimating her conception date to be May 14th.

Later in the PC, he said that on Nov. 5th she 'readjusted her statement' that her pregnancy was a result of the rape (but didn't say why), though she continued to assert that she was raped by Laurean.

In the MC's response letter to Rep. Turner, Lt. Gen. Kramlich said that she was found to be pregnant on June 27th (no mention of conception date), and that on Nov. 5th she informed the military
prosecutor that she was certain the baby was not CL's (not just not from the rape, but not CL's at all) based upon a recent OBGYN exam and "recalculated conception date."

In LE's search warrant/incident report documents, it was said that OCSD's Sergeant Cavanaugh had "discovered" that her due date was Feb. 14th, but Det. Dubois (who wrote the reports) also said that she was due to give birth within two weeks from the time she disappeared, which would have put her due date in late December or early January, at the latest.

Her mother believed her to be due around Jan. 7th, IIRC. She was planning on being there with her daughter before the end of December, in order to be there for the birth.

So, according to the military, ML's conception date was initially pegged at May 14th, but was changed after an OBGYN exam that had most likely taken place in late October. What was the new conception date that they came up with at that time, and with what corresponding due date?

OCSD may have been informed of a Jan. or so due date by Mary L., but then "discovered" a Feb. 14th due date (I'm guessing from the military). It's a straight nine "calendar months" from May 14 to Feb 14.

Was the Feb. 14 due date that Sergeant Cavanaugh "discovered" the original due date based on the original May 14 conception date, or was this the new, "recalculated" due date after her October OBGYN exam? If it was the new one, what was the corresponding "recalculated" conception date?

Maria alleged that her pregnancy was the result of a rape that occurred in the first half of April. She didn't back away from that based on the "initial" estimated conception date of May 14th -- it was only after being given a "recalculated" conception date in perhaps October that she changed her statement about the baby being from the rape (according to the MC PC) or from CL at all (according to the response letter to Turner).

What date was she given in the fall that would have convinced her that the baby was not CL's, let alone from the alleged rape, since the initial May 14 conception date didn't convince her that the baby wasn't from an event in early April?

I'd like to know the actual conception and due dates (both the original estimates and the "recalculated" ones from the military) and whatever Mary L. had believed to be the correct dates and why. It would clear up a lot of my own speculations. JMO

[peachdaquari]

Originally posted by Charlotte


I'm thinking this could be why the rape investigation has been closed. It was strictly a military investigation, and for the MC to charge him with it now (difficult enough to do without ML to testify in military court, even if the baby's DNA is his), could interfere with the extradition process.

But if that's the case, why are they still after his DNA? :confused: [/*] motive?? thats all I can come up with

[alter ego]

Originally posted by Charlotte


I'm thinking this could be why the rape investigation has been closed. It was strictly a military investigation, and for the MC to charge him with it now (difficult enough to do without ML to testify in military court, even if the baby's DNA is his), could interfere with the extradition process.

But if that's the case, why are they still after his DNA? :confused: [/*]
Rape is not a military offense...but desertion is....

[CANDYKISSES]

Originally posted by alter ego

Rape is not a military offense...but desertion is.... [/*]

That's exactly what I was thinking too.

It won't be long before we know what the USMC has in mind IMO. :shrug:

[Charlotte]

Originally posted by peachdaquari
motive?? thats all I can come up with [/*]

Yes, using the DNA to determine motive would apply, but then why would the MC be the ones doing the DNA testing for paternity instead of LE doing it?

Then again, that may have changed now, and it's going to be LE gathering CL's DNA for the testing? I'm not sure now who said they might go to Mexico to get the DNA from him if extradition gets dragged out for a long time.

[strick10]

Originally posted by alter ego

Rape is not a military offense...but desertion is.... [/*]

I'm not following you alter ego. How can rape by a military member not be considered a military offense. It's covered by article 120 under the UCMJ.

[alter ego]

Originally posted by Marcia3
Good morning everybody...I've been trying to :read: yesterday's posts from where I left off, but it seems like an uphill climb and I'm not energetic enough today to handle it!

Some interesting discussion, though, and now this morning we have an update on the extradition process.

Thanks, alter ego, for the info on what the MC can do with him in terms of charges. So unless they go after him for something that is not just a military offense, they cannot go after him at all? [/*]
Does not appear so :shrug:

[strick10]

Originally posted by Charlotte


Yes, using the DNA to determine motive would apply, but then why would the MC be the ones doing the DNA testing for paternity instead of LE doing it?

Then again, that may have changed now, and it's going to be LE gathering CL's DNA for the testing? I'm not sure now who said they might go to Mexico to get the DNA from him if extradition gets dragged out for a long time. [/*]

I believe the military is conducting the DNA testing due to the fact that they were the ones holding the DNA from the baby. If NCIS is seeking CALs DNA then the government will be the ones to obtain CALs DNA. The MC still has an interest in the paternity as they did while the alleged rape case was ongoing but I don't know why other than providing the LE a possible motive.

[alter ego]

Originally posted by strick10


I'm not following you alter ego. How can rape by a military member not be considered a military offense. It's covered by article 120 under the UCMJ. [/*]
It's not a 'purely military offense'
It is also a 'Criminal offense' under UCMJ, not a "purley military offense"

[Charlotte]

Originally posted by strick10


I believe the military is conducting the DNA testing due to the fact that they were the ones holding the DNA from the baby. If NCIS is seeking CALs DNA then the government will be the ones to obtain CALs DNA. The MC still has an interest in the paternity as they did while the alleged rape case was ongoing but I don't know why other than providing the LE a possible motive. [/*]

Thanks, strick10. I'm just confused now as to whether the military can/will be charging him with anything, and if they're no longer pursuing the rape allegation, why they would still be involved with the DNA testing. Wouldn't their interest in it be removed at that point?

I'm thinking that the baby's DNA material or test results could be turned over to LE now, and that they (LE) could then also obtain and perform the testing on CL's DNA and compare the two for paternity, if they chose to do all that for showing motive.

If the military is still involved enough to want the DNA for purposes of their own, what might that mean? I'm not asking you directly, just voicing my confusion on all this.

[strick10]

Originally posted by alter ego

It's not a 'purely military offense'
It is also a 'Criminal offense' under UCMJ, not a "purley military offense" [/*]

Are you meaning an offense directly aimed at the military?

[strick10]

Originally posted by Charlotte


Thanks, strick10. I'm just confused now as to whether the military can/will be charging him with anything, and if they're no longer pursuing the rape allegation, why they would still be involved with the DNA testing. Wouldn't their interest in it be removed at that point?

I'm thinking that the baby's DNA material or test results could be turned over to LE now, and that they (LE) could then also obtain and perform the testing on CL's DNA and compare the two for paternity, if they chose to do all that for showing motive.

If the military is still involved enough to want the DNA for purposes of their own, what might that mean? I'm not asking you directly, just voicing my confusion on all this. [/*]

I'm sure the military is going to charge him with at a minimum w/ desertion. IIRC the rape case has been closed but NCIS is still assisting the LE w/ their investigation so perhaps providing them a motive by possibly proving that CAL is the babies father is just one way of helping the LE. The MC's interest in this case will not be removed until it's all over or they can no longer provide the LE any viable assistance IMO. CAL is still an active duty Marine and Maria was also a Marine. Government property per se. At first I also was confused as to why NCIS would want the DNA but I'm begining to see that it may be to ensure there are no questions about the testing itself. Perhaps the LE asked the MC to provide them the paternity. There's no telling, but I personally don't think there's anything shady going on.

[gaelicpeas]

IIRC, early on, the DNA testing was turned over to the military. I can't remember why, though. Maybe Lynn can find the link (pretty please with sugar on top!).

Personally, I think an independent DNA test will be requested by CL's lawyer, also.

jmo

[strick10]

Originally posted by W_D_1



A rape can be committed by non military personnel but desertion can only be committed by military personnel which would make it a military offense. Atleast that's how I'm reading it. [/*]

If that's the way alter meant it then I understand. I just wasn't getting it with the way it was worded.

[alter ego]

Originally posted by strick10


Are you meaning an offense directly aimed at the military? [/*]
Not necessarily.

Like 'conduct unbecoming' is a purely military offense. As is desertion.

A 'purely military offense' is basically an act that would not be a criminal offense if committed by a civilian.

[alter ego]

Originally posted by strick10


If that's the way alter meant it then I understand. I just wasn't getting it with the way it was worded. [/*]

Sorry

[strick10]

Want to go back to the discussion yesterday regarding the military ID/CAC card whereinas a poster was told by her son that the bar code in the back of the card contained the holders DNA. That poster should make her son drop and give her 20! MW5 and caedje commented that DNA was not in that bar code and I agreed then and still hold that position. Providing a link so that clarification will be made.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Access_Card

[strick10]

Originally posted by alter ego


Sorry [/*]

No sorry needed. My bad for reading too much into it.

[Squawk Box]

Originally posted by strick10


I believe the military is conducting the DNA testing due to the fact that they were the ones holding the DNA from the baby. If NCIS is seeking CALs DNA then the government will be the ones to obtain CALs DNA. The MC still has an interest in the paternity as they did while the alleged rape case was ongoing but I don't know why other than providing the LE a possible motive. [/*]

Strick, IIRC according to the ME autopsy report it says part of the umbilical cord as well as some matter from the baby was retained for DNA testing. That would mean the county is doing the DNA or their murder charges. Of course they still need Cesar's DNA.

jmo

[strick10]

Originally posted by Squawk Box


Strick, IIRC according to the ME autopsy report it says part of the umbilical cord as well as some matter from the baby was retained for DNA testing. That would mean the the county is doing the DNA. Of course they still need Cesar's DNA.

jmo [/*]

I think you're recollection is right Squawk. So why is the government wanting to collect and test CALs DNA. Wouldn't the LE do that? Maybe both will be testing the DNA?

[Squawk Box]

Originally posted by strick10


I think you're recollection is right Squawk. So why is the government wanting to collect and test CALs DNA. Wouldn't the LE do that? Maybe both will be testing the DNA? [/*]

I don't know if they are, but both can do it I guess. The county is doing it for the murder case. imo

[strick10]

http://www.witntv.com/home/headlines/17691354.html

If you're here nuttin can you capture CALs right arm tattoo from this video. I'm trying to determine how much of his tattoo is visable in the longer short sleeved shirt he's wearing. This seems to be about the same length as the shirt captured at the atm. All I can see for sure is the hole in the upper back of his shirt. I'm not fully convinced that it was CAL at the atm. TIA.

[Squawk Box]

I have to catch up. I had no internet or phone since yesterday at noon. Just got it restored.

I always thought Cesar would wave extradition and I sure hope he does.

IIRC Mexico does not like to extradite if someone has to face a military tribunal. I think it was worded that way. I am hoping the MC does not file charges and just lets this go to the State of NC.

I don't know where I read that.

JMO

[mini-me]

Originally posted by strick10


I think you're recollection is right Squawk. So why is the government wanting to collect and test CALs DNA. Wouldn't the LE do that? Maybe both will be testing the DNA? [/*]Could it be they need current DNA because it will be needed for trial. They must show chain of custody. Or something like that.

[strick10]

Originally posted by mini-me
Could it be they need current DNA because it will be needed for trial. They must show chain of custody. Or something like that. [/*]

Could be but I'd have to think both the military and the state would show the chain of custody. Maybe by having 2 different organizations test the DNA it will ease the speculation of foul play from either.....I dunno. If the baby wasn't CALs I'm gonna have a fainting spell.

[Marcia3]

Originally posted by Squawk Box
I have to catch up. I had no internet or phone since yesterday at noon. Just got it restored.

I always thought Cesar would wave extradition and I sure hope he does.

IIRC Mexico does not like to extradite if someone has to face a military tribunal. I think it was worded that way. I am hoping the MC does not file charges and just lets this go to the State of NC.

I don't know where I read that.

JMO [/*]

ITA...hope he waives extradition and that the MC doesn't add to the list of charges IF that means any delay in the process. LWOP in a NC prison won't be like a day at the beach by any stretch of the imagination, so IF CAL is tried and convicted on the civilian charges and gets that kind of sentence, IMO justice will be served.

[Marcia3]

Originally posted by strick10


Could be but I'd have to think both the military and the state would show the chain of custody. Maybe by having 2 different organizations test the DNA it will ease the speculation of foul play from either.....I dunno. If the baby wasn't CALs I'm gonna have a fainting spell. [/*]

I'm getting my smelling salts out of the closet, 'cuz I will also hit the floor like a lead balloon if CAL is not Gabriel's father.

Assuming that the impending birth of Gabriel was the motive for CAL to kill Maria, imagine how stunned he will be if he is not the father!

[IvySterling]

Originally posted by strick10
http://www.witntv.com/home/headlines/17691354.html

If you're here nuttin can you capture CALs right arm tattoo from this video. I'm trying to determine how much of his tattoo is visable in the longer short sleeved shirt he's wearing. This seems to be about the same length as the shirt captured at the atm. All I can see for sure is the hole in the upper back of his shirt. I'm not fully convinced that it was CAL at the atm. TIA. [/*]
I'm not nuttin, but here are a couple
http://i30.tinypic.com/v66slx.jpg
http://i25.tinypic.com/16m0qav.jpg

[peachdaquari]

Originally posted by Charlotte


Thanks, strick10. I'm just confused now as to whether the military can/will be charging him with anything, and if they're no longer pursuing the rape allegation, why they would still be involved with the DNA testing. Wouldn't their interest in it be removed at that point?

I'm thinking that the baby's DNA material or test results could be turned over to LE now, and that they (LE) could then also obtain and perform the testing on CL's DNA and compare the two for paternity, if they chose to do all that for showing motive.

If the military is still involved enough to want the DNA for purposes of their own, what might that mean? I'm not asking you directly, just voicing my confusion on all this. [/*] I just thought of something (maybe), perhaps it has to do with....ohhh what do they call that?? "chain of custody" or something like that re evidence?? I dunno, just a plain ole housewife guessing :shrug:

[IvySterling]

Originally posted by Marcia3


I'm getting my smelling salts out of the closet, 'cuz I will also hit the floor like a lead balloon if CAL is not Gabriel's father.

Assuming that the impending birth of Gabriel was the motive for CAL to kill Maria, imagine how stunned he will be if he is not the father! [/*]
IF the DNA proves Cesar is NOT the father, maybe he learned that on the fatal day :shrug:

[strick10]

Originally posted by IvySterling

I'm not nuttin, but here are a couple
http://i30.tinypic.com/v66slx.jpg
http://i25.tinypic.com/16m0qav.jpg [/*]

Thank you so much Ivy! I appreciate it!

[Squawk Box]

Originally posted by strick10


Thank you so much Ivy! I appreciate it! [/*]

Can the military just dishonorably discharge him and be done with it?

[peachdaquari]

Originally posted by peachdaquari
I just thought of something (maybe), perhaps it has to do with....ohhh what do they call that?? "chain of custody" or something like that re evidence?? I dunno, just a plain ole housewife guessing :shrug: [/*] I apologize mini me, I read back and see that you already suggested that

[Marcia3]

Originally posted by IvySterling

IF the DNA proves Cesar is NOT the father, maybe he learned that on the fatal day :shrug: [/*]

There's a twist I haven't considered...

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by IvySterling

IF the DNA proves Cesar is NOT the father, maybe he learned that on the fatal day :shrug: [/*]

Maybe he knew he wasn't the father but had not learned that Maria had then told the Corps in November that he wasn't?
:eek:

imoo

[Marcia3]

Originally posted by GentleBreeze


Maybe he knew he wasn't the father but had not learned that Maria had then told the Corps in November that he wasn't?
:eek:

Another possibility.

imoo [/*]

[mini-me]

Originally posted by peachdaquari
I apologize mini me, I read back and see that you already suggested that [/*]That's okay at least we think alike.

[strick10]

Originally posted by Squawk Box


Can the military just dishonorably discharge him and be done with it? [/*]

They have to have something to discharge him. Desertion is enough. Can't just discharge him for no reason.

[strick10]

Originally posted by GentleBreeze


Maybe he knew he wasn't the father but had not learned that Maria had then told the Corps in November that he wasn't?
:eek:

imoo [/*]

:eek: Is right!

http://www.jdnews.com/news/happen_56005___article.html/coordinated_effort.html

District Attorney Dewey Hudson said the Marine Corps was waiting to receive Laurean's DNA, and he knew military authorities were holding off testing any other possible father for Lauterbach's unborn baby.

Hmmmmmm.........

[martha]

Originally posted by IvySterling

IF the DNA proves Cesar is NOT the father, maybe he learned that on the fatal day :shrug: [/*]you know that went thru my mind too. maybe ml told his it was not his baby and all this time he thought it was. cl said he loved ml and may have not known she was seeing someone elce???? just wondering boy things may get awful when we start to find out the truth about all this. :rose:

[peachdaquari]

Originally posted by IvySterling

IF the DNA proves Cesar is NOT the father, maybe he learned that on the fatal day :shrug: [/*] hmmmmmm, could also go to motive I would think

[Squawk Box]

Originally posted by strick10


They have to have something to discharge him. Desertion is enough. Can't just discharge him for no reason. [/*]


Say he is in a civilian jail facing murder charges like Cesar, can they just charge him with desertion and discharge him without a hearing or anything like that? Or if he is found guilty and gets LWOP can they just go ahead with the paperwork just to get rid of him?

[alter ego]

Originally posted by IvySterling

IF the DNA proves Cesar is NOT the father, maybe he learned that on the fatal day :shrug: [/*]But I thought he denied ever having sex with Maria :shrug:

[strick10]

Originally posted by Squawk Box



Say he is in a civilian jail facing murder charges like Cesar, can they just charge him with desertion and discharge him without a hearing or anything like that? Or if he is found guilty and gets LWOP can they just go ahead with the paperwork just to get rid of him? [/*]

Yes they can in both instances. I'd have to think there would be a hearing of some sort and I don't think CAL would have to be there at the hearing for the MC to render a discharge JMO though.

[Marcia3]

Originally posted by alter ego
But I thought he denied ever having sex with Maria :shrug: [/*]

Yes, he did. Doesn't mean he was telling the truth, but he did deny it when questioned, IIRC.

[IvySterling]

Originally posted by alter ego
But I thought he denied ever having sex with Maria :shrug: [/*]
LOL, yes he did, like most young guys would have.

IMO he/Cesar never thought CSL would ever know, then BOOM, Maria files a Rape allegation!

[mini-me]

Originally posted by strick10


Yes they can in both instances. I'd have to think there would be a hearing of some sort and I don't think CAL would have to be there at the hearing for the MC to render a discharge JMO though. [/*]What will happen to CSL for not telling MC she was in contact with CSL? Shouldn't she be charged for that.

[SavannahStar]

Originally posted by peachdaquari
hmmmmmm, could also go to motive I would think [/*]

I think that's exactly what Ivy is saying.

[alter ego]

Originally posted by strick10


They have to have something to discharge him. Desertion is enough. Can't just discharge him for no reason. [/*]
whoa....desertion isn't enough to warrant a discharge but it was enough to execute Private Eddie Slovik in 1945?

[CANDYKISSES]

Originally posted by strick10


:eek: Is right!

http://www.jdnews.com/news/happen_56005___article.html/coordinated_effort.html

District Attorney Dewey Hudson said the Marine Corps was waiting to receive Laurean's DNA, and he knew military authorities were holding off testing any other possible father for Lauterbach's unborn baby.

Hmmmmmm......... [/*]

This coupled with the statement by the Lt. General in his letter to Turner are enought to make you think.

“On November 5, 2007, Lance Cpl. Lauterbach informed the military prosecutor she was certain the child was not Cpl. Laurean’s based upon a recent Obstetrics Gynecological examination and recalculation of the conception date,” reads the letter from Lt. Gen. Richard S. Kramlich, director of Marine Corps Staff.

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/2008/04/marine_laureancaptured_041008w/

Just imagine what a blow that would be if she came over to tell him something like that?

JMO.

[strick10]

Originally posted by alter ego

whoa....desertion isn't enough to warrant a discharge but it was enough to execute Private Eddie Slovik in 1945? [/*]

Desertion is enough alter, my post states that.......how times have changed, I don't think they'll execute anyone for desertion at this day and age.

[alter ego]

Originally posted by strick10


Desertion is enough alter, my post states that.......how times have changed, I don't think they'll execute anyone for desertion at this day and age. [/*]I'm sorry, strick, I misread :o

[strick10]

Originally posted by mini-me
What will happen to CSL for not telling MC she was in contact with CSL? Shouldn't she be charged for that. [/*]

I personally can't say for sure what will happen to CSL, but I will be surprised and upset if the MC does not react to her communicating w/ a deserter and not reporting it. Lynn has a great link regarding this in the links board.

[alter ego]

Originally posted by CANDYKISSES


This coupled with the statement by the Lt. General in his letter to Turner are enought to make you think.

“On November 5, 2007, Lance Cpl. Lauterbach informed the military prosecutor she was certain the child was not Cpl. Laurean’s based upon a recent Obstetrics Gynecological examination and recalculation of the conception date,” reads the letter from Lt. Gen. Richard S. Kramlich, director of Marine Corps Staff.

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/2008/04/marine_laureancaptured_041008w/

Just imagine what a blow that would be if she came over to tell him something like that?

JMO. [/*]

Did he think the child was his :shrug:

[strick10]

Originally posted by CANDYKISSES


This coupled with the statement by the Lt. General in his letter to Turner are enought to make you think.

“On November 5, 2007, Lance Cpl. Lauterbach informed the military prosecutor she was certain the child was not Cpl. Laurean’s based upon a recent Obstetrics Gynecological examination and recalculation of the conception date,” reads the letter from Lt. Gen. Richard S. Kramlich, director of Marine Corps Staff.

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/2008/04/marine_laureancaptured_041008w/

Just imagine what a blow that would be if she came over to tell him something like that?

JMO. [/*]
That could push him over the edge especially since she'd alleged the rape and since there probably was physical contact between them CAL may have believed the baby was his from the get go. To me this means that either Maria didn't want to admit to her and CAL having consensual relations in May or she had relations with someone else . . .

[Kel65]

Originally posted by mini-me
What will happen to CSL for not telling MC she was in contact with CSL? Shouldn't she be charged for that. [/*]

Even if the military wanted to just sweep Christina's behavior, in regard to communicating with a fugitive/deserter under the rug, I think they would have a hard time doing it. I say this because this case is so high profile. I believe they are backed in a corner and they have to do something, otherwise it will set a very bad precedent that will be sure to haunt them for a long time to come. JMO

[SavannahStar]

Originally posted by strick10

That could push him over the edge especially since she'd alleged the rape and since there probably was physical contact between them CAL may have believed the baby was his from the get go. To me this means that either Maria didn't want to admit to her and CAL having consensual relations in May or she had relations with someone else . . . [/*]

Who is the "her" in your last sentence, strick?

[strick10]

Originally posted by Kel65


Even if the military wanted to just sweep Christina's behavior, in regard to communicating with a fugitive/deserter under the rug, I think they would have a hard time doing it. I say this because this case is so high profile. I believe they are backed in a corner and they have to do something, otherwise it will set a very bad precedent that will be sure to haunt them for a long time to come. JMO [/*]

I couldn't agree more kel65. However, I think this would not be swept under the rug even if this case wasn't high profiled. I don't think we'll hear what the MC decides in regards to CSL. A Marine is a Marine and the MC does not play favoritism. The MC will not baby CSL. If there is wrong committed then the charge and punishment is handed. I can visualize the Marines already saying "burn her". We'll see....

[strick10]

Originally posted by SavannahStar


Who is the "her" in your last sentence, strick? [/*]

Her is Maria SS. My writing isn't the best, still write in military style sometimes, and after I re-read I can see it was ill written......sorry. Meant to say that Maria didn't want them to know

[strick10]

Originally posted by strick10


Her is Maria SS. My writing isn't the best, still write in military style sometimes, and after I re-read I can see it was ill written......sorry. Meant to say that Maria didn't want them to know [/*]

ETA: And I'm still jacking that up ...grr. Her is no one. Her should be them.

[SavannahStar]

Originally posted by strick10


Her is Maria SS. My writing isn't the best, still write in military style sometimes, and after I re-read I can see it was ill written......sorry. Meant to say that Maria didn't want them to know [/*]

After I re-read it a couple of times, I got what you meant! Sorry. LOL!

[SavannahStar]

Originally posted by strick10


I couldn't agree more kel65. However, I think this would not be swept under the rug even if this case wasn't high profiled. I don't think we'll hear what the MC decides in regards to CSL. A Marine is a Marine and the MC does not play favoritism. The MC will not baby CSL. If there is wrong committed then the charge and punishment is handed. I can visualize the Marines already saying "burn her". We'll see.... [/*]

I wonder if this is in the process of happening yet? It's a known fact now that she communicated with Cesar while he was on the run. And we can assume, I guess, she never told MC. This wouldn't have anything at all to do with the murder charge against Cesar......so what would they be waiting for? If, in fact, they have not done anything as yet.

[Kel65]

ITA agree with you Strick. I don't think that the USMC would sweep it under the rug if they could. I put the "if they could" out there hypothetically speaking.

I'd be very suprised if something isn't already in the works regarding the termination of her military career. If she receives a dishonorable discharge, it is going to be hard for her employment wise. IIRC, she would not be eligible fo Federal employment if the discharge is dishonorable. I think dishonorable discharges affect other benefits too, don't they?

JMO and speculating.

[strick10]

Originally posted by SavannahStar


I wonder if this is in the process of happening yet? It's a known fact now that she communicated with Cesar while he was on the run. And we can assume, I guess, she never told MC. This wouldn't have anything at all to do with the murder charge against Cesar......so what would they be waiting for? If, in fact, they have not done anything as yet. [/*]

Be nice to know if the MC has already reacted to this issue. They may already have the ball rolling and we just don't know. I believe that if she had told the MC she was in touch with CAL the MC would've passed that info to the LE as they are assisting in the investigation. They wanted CAL back as much as the LE did. They would not hide something that would've helped in finding him and that I believe.... and if they knew and kept mum, which I doubt, heads are going to roll. CSL didn't want anyone to know she was in communication w/ CAL IMO.

[Kim]

Originally posted by Charlotte
Some thoughts on ML's conception and due dates changing...

At the MC presser, Lt. Col. Hill said that she was confirmed to be pregnant on June 27th, with medical personnel estimating her conception date to be May 14th.

I'd like to know the actual conception and due dates (both the original estimates and the "recalculated" ones from the military) and whatever Mary L. had believed to be the correct dates and why. It would clear up a lot of my own speculations. JMO [/*]

I also wonder ... it hasnt been said that she always made up lies about "being pregnant" obviously she concluded she was pregnant before the date they came up with.I am wondering if she said it was not cesars to just stop all the prceedings or stop all the suspicsion die to a change of heart?:shrug: I really wish we had an answer to the DNA

[strick10]

Originally posted by Kel65
ITA agree with you Strick. I don't think that the USMC would sweep it under the rug if they could. I put the "if they could" out there hypothetically speaking.

I'd be very suprised if something isn't already in the works regarding the termination of her military career. If she receives a dishonorable discharge, it is going to be hard for her employment wise. IIRC, she would not be eligible fo Federal employment if the discharge is dishonorable. I think dishonorable discharges affect other benefits too, don't they?

JMO and speculating. [/*]

Any benefits that the Marine would've rated if they are dishonorable discharged would be null and void.

http://www.answers.com/topic/military-discharge?cat=biz-fin

Bad Conduct (BCD)
Unlike an administrative discharge, a Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) is a punitive discharge that can only be given by a court-martial as punishment to an enlisted service-member. Bad conduct discharges are often preceded by a period of confinement in a military prison. The discharge itself is not executed until completion of both confinement and the appellate review process. Virtually all veterans' benefits are forfeited by a bad conduct discharge

[Kim]

Originally posted by strick10
Want to go back to the discussion yesterday regarding the military ID/CAC card whereinas a poster was told by her son that the bar code in the back of the card contained the holders DNA. That poster should make her son drop and give her 20! MW5 and caedje commented that DNA was not in that bar code and I agreed then and still hold that position. Providing a link so that clarification will be made.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Access_Card [/*]
Maybe I'll make him clean my house instead ! :lol:

[strick10]

Originally posted by Kim

Maybe I'll make him clean my house instead ! :lol: [/*]

Sounds like fair punishment to me! :lol:

[Kel65]

Originally posted by strick10


Any benefits that the Marine would've rated if they are dishonorable discharged would be null and void.

http://www.answers.com/topic/military-discharge?cat=biz-fin

Bad Conduct (BCD)
Unlike an administrative discharge, a Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) is a punitive discharge that can only be given by a court-martial as punishment to an enlisted service-member. Bad conduct discharges are often preceded by a period of confinement in a military prison. The discharge itself is not executed until completion of both confinement and the appellate review process. Virtually all veterans' benefits are forfeited by a bad conduct discharge [/*]

I wonder how feasible it would be for to get a General discharge, if this is the only mark on her record? You know her lawyer will try. JMO

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by strick10


Be nice to know if the MC has already reacted to this issue. They may already have the ball rolling and we just don't know. I believe that if she had told the MC she was in touch with CAL the MC would've passed that info to the LE as they are assisting in the investigation. They wanted CAL back as much as the LE did. They would not hide something that would've helped in finding him and that I believe.... and if they knew and kept mum, which I doubt, heads are going to roll. CSL didn't want anyone to know she was in communication w/ CAL IMO. [/*]

Whatever they are doing they will not do it publicly but I do think they are taking her actions or inactions, I should say, very seriously. Truth, honor and commitment are very important to Corps. She not only was communicating with an international fugitive from justice but she was deceitful and betrayed the very employer, who writes her paycheck, who was searching for him too. She knew that everyone was looking for him and spending many man hours and money as well yet she did nothing. She fessed up when she knew they had the goods on her when they came in and seized the computer.

I would certainly think she has violated the Military Code of Conduct.

imoo

[Kel65]

Originally posted by GentleBreeze


Whatever they are doing they will not do it publicly but I do think they are taking her actions or inactions, I should say, very seriously. Truth, honor and commitment are very important to Corps. She not only was communicating with an international fugitive from justice but she was deceitful and betrayed the very employer, who writes her paycheck, who was searching for him too. She knew that everyone was looking for him and spending many man hours and money as well yet she did nothing. She fessed up when she knew they had the goods on her when they came in and seized the computer.

I would certainly think she has violated the Military Code of Conduct.

imoo [/*]

If the Emricks are innocent in all of this, I hope that their military careers don't get put the ringer too for Christina using their computer. JMO

[strick10]

Originally posted by Kel65


I wonder how feasible it would be for to get a General discharge, if this is the only mark on her record? You know her lawyer will try. JMO [/*]

There's just no telling Kel65. Maybe we'll learn what the MC is thinking and doing in regards to this in the very near future.

[Marcia3]

Originally posted by Kel65


If the Emricks are innocent in all of this, I hope that their military careers don't get put the ringer too for Christina using their computer. JMO [/*]

Even if they knew about her communications with CAL and still did nothing?

[mini-me]

Originally posted by strick10


Any benefits that the Marine would've rated if they are dishonorable discharged would be null and void.

http://www.answers.com/topic/military-discharge?cat=biz-fin

Bad Conduct (BCD)
Unlike an administrative discharge, a Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) is a punitive discharge that can only be given by a court-martial as punishment to an enlisted service-member. Bad conduct discharges are often preceded by a period of confinement in a military prison. The discharge itself is not executed until completion of both confinement and the appellate review process. Virtually all veterans' benefits are forfeited by a bad conduct discharge [/*]Maybe she will use her diaries as an excuse. Not being in a good frame of mind to make proper reasoning about right or wrong.

[strick10]

Originally posted by GentleBreeze


Whatever they are doing they will not do it publicly but I do think they are taking her actions or inactions, I should say, very seriously. Truth, honor and commitment are very important to Corps. She not only was communicating with an international fugitive from justice but she was deceitful and betrayed the very employer, who writes her paycheck, who was searching for him too. She knew that everyone was looking for him and spending many man hours and money as well yet she did nothing. She fessed up when she knew they had the goods on her when they came in and seized the computer.

I would certainly think she has violated the Military Code of Conduct.

imoo [/*]

Realizing that communicating w/ a fugitive is not illegal in NC wonder what the Feds reaction and thoughts to this little myspace issue is.

[Kel65]

Originally posted by Marcia3


Even if they knew about her communications with CAL and still did nothing? [/*]

No, if they knew and it can be proved, they should be in trouble too. JMO

[CANDYKISSES]

Originally posted by Kim


I also wonder ... it hasnt been said that she always made up lies about "being pregnant" obviously she concluded she was pregnant before the date they came up with.I am wondering if she said it was not cesars to just stop all the prceedings or stop all the suspicsion die to a change of heart?:shrug: I really wish we had an answer to the DNA [/*]

What do you mean by her concluding she was pregnant before they did?:confused:

[Kel65]

Originally posted by strick10


Realizing that communicating w/ a fugitive is not illegal in NC wonder what the Feds reaction and thoughts to this little myspace issue is. [/*]

I was wondernig about that too. Can anyone find info on if it is illegal in the Federal world? I'll do some looking too.

She is probably in deep with the USMC and the Feds. I wonder if the USMC goes after her the wrong doing, if the Feds will back off, assuming they consider the lack of disclosure regarding the communication illegal too.

JMO and speculating.

[Kel65]

Originally posted by mini-me
Maybe she will use her diaries as an excuse. Not being in a good frame of mind to make proper reasoning about right or wrong. [/*]

Maybe that will help her attain a General vs. a dishonorable. Who knows?

JMO

[Kim]

Originally posted by CANDYKISSES


What do you mean by her concluding she was pregnant before they did?:confused: [/*]
Unless My memory is faling me or I missunderstan (possible)
Didnt she start saying she was pregnant in May or somewhere along there? If she wasnt due until Feb or w/e she wouldnt have even known she was pregnant.?

[strick10]

Originally posted by mini-me
Maybe she will use her diaries as an excuse. Not being in a good frame of mind to make proper reasoning about right or wrong. [/*]

:lol:

Sorry......couldn't resist. Something tells me she didn't start her diary(ies) until after CAL left. If she plans to use her diaries as an excuse she's alot smarter than I've given her credit for.

[Squawk Box]

I don't think anything will be done to Christina. She has been through so much and been so mixed up with the truth and her love for Cesar.barf

I can accept her being mixed up because her life ended as she knew it. Very hard to accept.

If they would do anything it would be a very mild slap on the wrist. I believe she intends to stay in the military in order to raise her child.

She did nothing to aid or abet him that we know of so it is not against the law. If it is against the Military Code of Conduct, we don't know it.

jmo

[Kel65]

Originally posted by strick10


There's just no telling Kel65. Maybe we'll learn what the MC is thinking and doing in regards to this in the very near future. [/*]

If she used USMC computers to communicate with CAL, they will probably give her a dishonorable vs. a general, is my guess. JMO

[Kel65]

Originally posted by Squawk Box
I don't think anything will be done to Christina. She has been through so much and been so mixed up with the truth and her love for Cesar.barf

I can accept her being mixed up because her life ended as she knew it. Very hard to accept.

If they would do anything it would be a very mild slap on the wrist. I believe she intends to stay in the military in order to raise her child.

She did nothing to aid or abet him that we know of so it is not against the law. If it is against the Military Code of Conduct, we don't know it.

jmo [/*]

The USMC is not going to baby and coddle her IMO.

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by strick10


Realizing that communicating w/ a fugitive is not illegal in NC wonder what the Feds reaction and thoughts to this little myspace issue is. [/*]

It is not against the State laws of NC but I am sure that the MC may have other rules, codes and expectations from their personnel that does frown upon this action and most definitely think it is grossly unbecoming. Especially when the fugitive happens to be a Marine deserter being looked for by the military.

I don't know about Internet laws and the feds. I guess we have to wait and see.

imoo

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by Kel65


The USMC is not going to baby and coddle her IMO. [/*]

You certainly are right about that.:patriot:

[Squawk Box]

Originally posted by Kel65


If she used USMC computers to communicate with CAL, they will probably give her a dishonorable vs. a general, is my guess. JMO [/*]

I don't believe there is an issue with military computers being used. She used her sister's computer. jmo

[crymeariver2006]

Originally posted by Kim

Unless My memory is faling me or I missunderstan (possible)
Didnt she start saying she was pregnant in May or somewhere along there? If she wasnt due until Feb or w/e she wouldnt have even known she was pregnant.? [/*]

IIRC, Lisa said she found out about the pregnancy in July. Same with Maria's friend who reportedly asked "Is it a good thing or a bad thing?". This was also in July.

July is also when Christina found out.

I'd never heard where she was telling anybody in May.

:shrug:

[Marcia3]

Originally posted by Kel65


The USMC is not going to baby and coddle her IMO. [/*]

Nor should they, IMO. If a standard is going to exist, it has to be the same for everyone, again IMO. CSL shouldn't be an exception just because she happens to be married to a fugitive whom she still professes to love.

[crymeariver2006]

Originally posted by Squawk Box


I don't believe there is an issue with military computers being used. She used her sister's computer. jmo [/*]

Until her sister's computer was seized.

If she communicated with him or attempted to communicate with him AFTER that, we don't know whose computer she used.

[mini-me]

Originally posted by strick10


:lol:

Sorry......couldn't resist. Something tells me she didn't start her diary(ies) until after CAL left. If she plans to use her diaries as an excuse she's alot smarter than I've given her credit for. [/*]I think it was her lawyer who told her to keep a diary for future use in court. Quite some years ago I was in a head on collision and my daughter died in the crash. Driver of other car feel asleep at the wheel. My lawyer told me to keep a daily diary of thoughts feeling etc. It was to be used in court. I had an 18 month old at the time. So that's why I think she was told to do a diary.

[Marcia3]

Originally posted by Squawk Box


I don't believe there is an issue with military computers being used. She used her sister's computer. jmo [/*]

So far as we know?

[Squawk Box]

Originally posted by Marcia3


Nor should they, IMO. If a standard is going to exist, it has to be the same for everyone, again IMO. CSL shouldn't be an exception just because she happens to be married to a fugitive whom she still professes to love. [/*]

IMO this is a very unusual case. Maybe she will have to see a military shrink and that input would play a role in any punishment.

I think the MC is tough, but not inhumane.

jmo

[KKKKKKatie]

Originally posted by mini-me
I think it was her lawyer who told her to keep a diary for future use in court. Quite some years ago I was in a head on collision and my daughter died in the crash. Driver of other car feel asleep at the wheel. My lawyer told me to keep a daily diary of thoughts feeling etc. It was to be used in court. I had an 18 month old at the time. So that's why I think she was told to do a diary. [/*]

So sorry for your loss :(

[Ionmhainn]

Originally posted by strick10


:lol:

Sorry......couldn't resist. Something tells me she didn't start her diary(ies) until after CAL left. If she plans to use her diaries as an excuse she's alot smarter than I've given her credit for. [/*]

Yes, the diaries seem very convenient, don't they? I really can't understand the law here re aiding and abetting, and wish I knew how to find the actual wording. It seems to me that I would feel "aided" if someone was in contact with me while I was "on the lam"...not telling LE where I was and offering the emotional support I might need in order to tough it out. Why is it that only money is seen as "helping?"

[crymeariver2006]

Originally posted by Kel65


No, if they knew and it can be proved, they should be in trouble too. JMO [/*]

I'm thinking Amber or her husband is the one who alerted LE about the communications. This is a couple (married less than a year) who was suddenly in the position of housing Christina and a child, whose home was being watched, and their mail and other communications being monitored. Even if it were my sister, I'd have a hard time listening to the "woe is me" and believing I was helping her, all the while I was only enabling her in her misdeeds.

Enough might have been enough.

All JMO though

[CANDYKISSES]

Originally posted by Kel65


The USMC is not going to baby and coddle her IMO. [/*]

I hope not kel, she's gotten more than enough of that by now, and if they don't know how UNTRUSTWORTHY their "cooperating witness" really is, then shame on them.

But I have faith in Ed Brown....he will sew this one up imo. :beer:

jmo

[Squawk Box]

Originally posted by mini-me
I think it was her lawyer who told her to keep a diary for future use in court. Quite some years ago I was in a head on collision and my daughter died in the crash. Driver of other car feel asleep at the wheel. My lawyer told me to keep a daily diary of thoughts feeling etc. It was to be used in court. I had an 18 month old at the time. So that's why I think she was told to do a diary. [/*]

So sorry for your loss.

I agree with you. I thought the DA mentioned it was a journal she kept starting as soon as Cesar left. I could be wrong.

jmo

[crymeariver2006]

Originally posted by Ionmhainn


Yes, the diaries seem very convenient, don't they? I really can't understand the law here re aiding and abetting, and wish I knew how to find the actual wording. It seems to me that I would feel "aided" if someone was in contact with me while I was "on the lam...not telling LE where I was and offering the emotional support I might need in order to tough it out. Why is it that only money is seen as "helping?" [/*]

I think somewhere in Lynn's link (or it may have been caejde's) it says something about even "offering comfort" to a deserter is a punishable offense.

;)

[Marcia3]

Originally posted by mini-me
I think it was her lawyer who told her to keep a diary for future use in court. Quite some years ago I was in a head on collision and my daughter died in the crash. Driver of other car feel asleep at the wheel. My lawyer told me to keep a daily diary of thoughts feeling etc. It was to be used in court. I had an 18 month old at the time. So that's why I think she was told to do a diary. [/*]

I am so sorry to hear of your loss.

:rose:

[strick10]

Originally posted by Kel65


If she used USMC computers to communicate with CAL, they will probably give her a dishonorable vs. a general, is my guess. JMO [/*]

IMO I don't think just that fact alone that she may have used government computers to communicate w/ CAL will render a discharge.

[Squawk Box]

Originally posted by crymeariver2006


I think somewhere in Lynn's link (or it may have been caejde's) it says something about even "offering comfort" to a deserter is a punishable offense.

;) [/*]

I have a feeling it wasn't comforting she offered.;) I think it was much more of this.:flamemad:

jmo of course.

[Ionmhainn]

Originally posted by crymeariver2006


I think somewhere in Lynn's link (or it may have been caejde's) it says something about even "offering comfort" to a deserter is a punishable offense.

;) [/*]

Yes, I do recall that it could mean trouble via the USMC, but I was thinking about NC law. I just don't get it.:shrug:

[Marcia3]

Originally posted by Squawk Box


IMO this is a very unusual case. Maybe she will have to see a military shrink and that input would play a role in any punishment.

I think the MC is tough, but not inhumane.

jmo [/*]

Unusual, yes. But I would be surprised if the MC sends her to a psychiatrist and leaves it at that if she was deliberately disobeying a command. JMO

[Kel65]

Originally posted by crymeariver2006


Until her sister's computer was seized.

If she communicated with him or attempted to communicate with him AFTER that, we don't know whose computer she used. [/*]

I do have to say that if she did use USMC computers, especially after the "seizure" of her sisters' computer by the Feds, then she really isn't too bright.

When my husband was still active duty, he had to put his ID card into the card reader on his computer when he used it. I thnk they call it smart card techology or something to that effect. I think it would be relatively easy to track her computer usage, while at work. Hopefully, people where she works are diligent enough to lock their computer, while they are not in their office.

JMO

[crymeariver2006]

Originally posted by Squawk Box


I have a feeling it wasn't comforting she offered.;) I think it was much more of this.:flamemad:

jmo of course. [/*]

Really? That's why she didn't report it then. She didn't want them to see the language she was using with him?

:D

[Squawk Box]

Originally posted by crymeariver2006


Really? That's why she didn't report it then. She didn't want them to see the language she was using with him?

:D [/*]

I wouldn't doubt it.:D

[Marcia3]

Originally posted by crymeariver2006


Really? That's why she didn't report it then. She didn't want them to see the language she was using with him?

:D [/*]

LOL

:biggrin:

[strick10]

Originally posted by mini-me
I think it was her lawyer who told her to keep a diary for future use in court. Quite some years ago I was in a head on collision and my daughter died in the crash. Driver of other car feel asleep at the wheel. My lawyer told me to keep a daily diary of thoughts feeling etc. It was to be used in court. I had an 18 month old at the time. So that's why I think she was told to do a diary. [/*]

Sorry for your loss mini..........

Her lawyer could've told her to maintain a diary so that she could remember things later on maybe. Probably somewhat healing for her to write her thoughts down.

[Squawk Box]

Originally posted by crymeariver2006


Really? That's why she didn't report it then. She didn't want them to see the language she was using with him?

:D [/*]

I agree and that's her reason with the MC too. She won't be disciplined. jmo:D

[Ionmhainn]

Originally posted by Squawk Box


I have a feeling it wasn't comforting she offered.;) I think it was much more of this.:flamemad:

jmo of course. [/*]

There may well have been anger expressed, but it's still "contact", and that would be important to anyone in CL's position, in my opinion. She was willing to communicate with him, and obviously not within her role of CW as she did not inform LE.
jmo

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by Squawk Box


I have a feeling it wasn't comforting she offered. I think it was much more of this.:flamemad:

jmo of course. [/*]

I think it was some of this ( :( ) and a whole lot of this (:rose: )

imoo

[crymeariver2006]

Originally posted by GentleBreeze


I think it was some of this ( :( ) and a whole lot of this (:rose: )

imoo [/*]

I think it was a whole lot of these: :rose:

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by Squawk Box


I agree and that's her reason with the MC too. She won't be disciplined. jmo:D [/*]

Yeah they are just going to pat her on top of the head.:lol:

imoo

[mini-me]

Originally posted by Squawk Box


So sorry for your loss.

I agree with you. I thought the DA mentioned it was a journal she kept starting as soon as Cesar left. I could be wrong.

jmo [/*]It could have been a journal. I used diary because it had been used on this board before. This case grabs at me and even after reading everything I can on it I still think there is so much we are not being told. I just want justice for Maria.

[Kel65]

Originally posted by strick10


Sorry for your loss mini..........

Her lawyer could've told her to maintain a diary so that she could remember things later on maybe. Probably somewhat healing for her to write her thoughts down. [/*]

Strick, I think you are right about be advised to keep a diary/journal to remember things later on. I've heard more than one person say they were advised to do so, one being my brother who was going through a divorce and fighting for joint custody of his child.

JMO

[strick10]

Originally posted by crymeariver2006


I think somewhere in Lynn's link (or it may have been caejde's) it says something about even "offering comfort" to a deserter is a punishable offense.

;) [/*]

http://hqinet001.hqmc.usmc.mil/pp&o/PS/psl/corrections/absenteeCollection.asp

Can my friends and family get in trouble for helping me while I’m in a deserter status?

Yes!

According to the US Code, Title 18, Part I, Chapter 67, Paragraph 1381, there are significant penalties that may be levied on those who assist deserters, as noted below:

“Whoever entices or procures, or attempts or endeavors to entice or procure any person in the Armed forces of the United States, or who has been recruited for service therein, to desert therefrom, or aids any such person in deserting or in attempting to desert from such service, or:

Whoever harbors, conceals, protects, or assists any such person who may have deserted from such service, knowing him to have deserter therefrom, or refuses to give up and deliver such person on the demand of any officer authorized to receive him:

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.”

Just a refresher.

[Squawk Box]

Originally posted by crymeariver2006


I think it was a whole lot of these: :rose: [/*]

No, more of this.:cuss:

[Squawk Box]

Originally posted by GentleBreeze


Yeah they are just going to pat her on top of the head.:lol:

imoo [/*]

Her next evaluation will be "stellar". ;)

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by Squawk Box


No, more of this.:cuss: [/*]

I don't think so. Hudson said it was OBVIOUS she was still very much in love with her husband.

imoo

[Squawk Box]

Originally posted by mini-me
It could have been a journal. I used diary because it had been used on this board before. This case grabs at me and even after reading everything I can on it I still think there is so much we are not being told. I just want justice for Maria. [/*]

:rose:

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by Squawk Box


Her next evaluation will be "stellar". ;) [/*]

Her next evaluation will put her out the door imo.

imoo

[crymeariver2006]

Originally posted by strick10


http://hqinet001.hqmc.usmc.mil/pp&o/PS/psl/corrections/absenteeCollection.asp

Can my friends and family get in trouble for helping me while I’m in a deserter status?

Yes!

According to the US Code, Title 18, Part I, Chapter 67, Paragraph 1381, there are significant penalties that may be levied on those who assist deserters, as noted below:

“Whoever entices or procures, or attempts or endeavors to entice or procure any person in the Armed forces of the United States, or who has been recruited for service therein, to desert therefrom, or aids any such person in deserting or in attempting to desert from such service, or:

Whoever harbors, conceals, protects, or assists any such person who may have deserted from such service, knowing him to have deserter therefrom, or refuses to give up and deliver such person on the demand of any officer authorized to receive him:

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.”

Just a refresher. [/*]

I read that one, but caejde offered one later that said "offering comfort"...that's why I posted what I did. I hope she posted it on the links thread so I don't have to go wading!

BRB

[mini-me]

Originally posted by strick10


Sorry for your loss mini..........

Her lawyer could've told her to maintain a diary so that she could remember things later on maybe. Probably somewhat healing for her to write her thoughts down. [/*]Yes that is true but I was told to go to therapy to handle my feeling etc. Which I did and it helped. I wonder if CSL is getting any medical treatment to help her cope.

[SavannahStar]

Originally posted by strick10


Sorry for your loss mini..........

Her lawyer could've told her to maintain a diary so that she could remember things later on maybe. Probably somewhat healing for her to write her thoughts down. [/*]

I think it's just as logical that she could have done it on her own.

We just don't know. I would not assume her attorney told her to keep a diary.

[strick10]

Originally posted by Kel65


I do have to say that if she did use USMC computers, especially after the "seizure" of her sisters' computer by the Feds, then she really isn't too bright.

When my husband was still active duty, he had to put his ID card into the card reader on his computer when he used it. I thnk they call it smart card techology or something to that effect. I think it would be relatively easy to track her computer usage, while at work. Hopefully, people where she works are diligent enough to lock their computer, while they are not in their office.

JMO [/*]

It's called the CAC card. Anyone w/ authorization to access particular DOD computers can access any of them in most cases dependant on what their CAC card authorizes them to access. Like your husband they use the CAC card to gain authorized entrance and of course times/dates of access are recorded. This is a brilliant move on the military.

[strick10]

Originally posted by Squawk Box


I agree and that's her reason with the MC too. She won't be disciplined. jmo:D [/*]

I'm not too sure about that Squawk. We'll just have to wait and see.

[Squawk Box]

Originally posted by strick10


http://hqinet001.hqmc.usmc.mil/pp&o/PS/psl/corrections/absenteeCollection.asp

Can my friends and family get in trouble for helping me while I’m in a deserter status?

Yes!

According to the US Code, Title 18, Part I, Chapter 67, Paragraph 1381, there are significant penalties that may be levied on those who assist deserters, as noted below:

“Whoever entices or procures, or attempts or endeavors to entice or procure any person in the Armed forces of the United States, or who has been recruited for service therein, to desert therefrom, or aids any such person in deserting or in attempting to desert from such service, or:

Whoever harbors, conceals, protects, or assists any such person who may have deserted from such service, knowing him to have deserter therefrom, or refuses to give up and deliver such person on the demand of any officer authorized to receive him:

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.”

Just a refresher. [/*]

I don't see any of this applying to her or the situation.:shrug:

[SavannahStar]

Originally posted by strick10


http://hqinet001.hqmc.usmc.mil/pp&o/PS/psl/corrections/absenteeCollection.asp

Can my friends and family get in trouble for helping me while I’m in a deserter status?

Yes!

According to the US Code, Title 18, Part I, Chapter 67, Paragraph 1381, there are significant penalties that may be levied on those who assist deserters, as noted below:

“Whoever entices or procures, or attempts or endeavors to entice or procure any person in the Armed forces of the United States, or who has been recruited for service therein, to desert therefrom, or aids any such person in deserting or in attempting to desert from such service, or:

Whoever harbors, conceals, protects, or assists any such person who may have deserted from such service, knowing him to have deserter therefrom, or refuses to give up and deliver such person on the demand of any officer authorized to receive him:

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.”

Just a refresher. [/*]

I think there is wiggle room there. (Devil's advocate :chicken: )

[Kel65]

Originally posted by Squawk Box


I don't see any of this applying to her or the situation.:shrug: [/*]

I wouldn't be so sure Squawk, there are some pretty broad words in there. JMO

[strick10]

Originally posted by Squawk Box


Her next evaluation will be "stellar". ;) [/*]

No way.....:eek:

[Squawk Box]

Originally posted by GentleBreeze


I don't think so. Hudson said it was OBVIOUS she was still very much in love with her husband.

imoo [/*]

I agree and I think she was, but you can be very much in love even though you are hurt. :cuss: :flamemad: :punch: does not mean you are not in love. jmo

[daniel green]

Originally posted by CANDYKISSES


Good morning, I was amazed at what was confirmed on one page and not confirmed on the next.

Check your email.

Nothink per se new, but some rumblings about the USMC and if they will be presenting charges too and what is in the process as we await extradition.

He does have an attorney now in Mexico from what I read tho.

JMO. [/*]

Thank you!

I just read it.

So ML's mother did tell LE that ML was bipolar and had a history of compulsive lying and that one could not tell what was true with her. ML's mother also said that ML was not having troubles or concerns.

There was a key left at Durham's house, along with the note.

Oh, and ML's medical records confirm the Feb 14 due date.

It is strange that ML's mother said ML was not under stress.

[SavannahStar]

Originally posted by Squawk Box


I agree and I think she was, but you can be very much in love even though you are hurt. :cuss: :flamemad: :punch: does not mean you are not in love. jmo [/*]

I sure don't know how anyone could disagree with that.

[daniel green]

Originally posted by SavannahStar


I think it's just as logical that she could have done it on her own.

We just don't know. I would not assume her attorney told her to keep a diary. [/*]

I agree.

I am sure that her lawyer would have told her NOT to do it, had he known.

[Ionmhainn]

Originally posted by Kel65


I wouldn't be so sure Squawk, there are some pretty broad words in there. JMO [/*]

I agree...could conceal be stretched to cover "whereabouts"...and did any officer ever ask her if she knew where he was? I still say that being in contact with him could be considered to be "assisting."
mo.

[Squawk Box]

Originally posted by daniel green


I agree.

I am sure that her lawyer would have told her NOT to do it, had he known. [/*]


I don't think her lawyer minds her journal writings. It is just embarrassing to Christina, I bet.

[crymeariver2006]

Originally posted by crymeariver2006


I read that one, but caejde offered one later that said "offering comfort"...that's why I posted what I did. I hope she posted it on the links thread so I don't have to go wading!

BRB [/*]

Found it...

Originally posted by caejde


Could she be charged with Article 78-Accessory after the Fact?
“Any person subject to this chapter who, knowing that an offense punishable by this chapter has been committed, receives, comforts, or assists the offender in order to hinder or prevent his apprehension, trial, or punishment shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.”
http://usmilitary.about.com/library...fo/mcm/bl78.htm [/*]

Although it does appear as caejde was asking IF Christina could be charged by the MC as an Accessory after the Fact.

More ????

[strick10]

Originally posted by crymeariver2006


I read that one, but caejde offered one later that said "offering comfort"...that's why I posted what I did. I hope she posted it on the links thread so I don't have to go wading!

BRB [/*]

You mean Article 78? I remember seeing caedjes post. If this isn't it I'll have to go back and look.

Text. “Any person subject to this chapter who, knowing that an offense punishable by this chapter has been committed, receives, comforts, or assists the offender in order to hinder or prevent his apprehension, trial, or punishment shall be punished as a court-martial may direct

http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinfo/mcm/bl78.htm

[strick10]

Originally posted by Squawk Box


I don't see any of this applying to her or the situation.:shrug: [/*]

So you don't see that she protected him by not letting the MC know she was communicating w/ him?

[SavannahStar]

Originally posted by strick10


You mean Article 78? I remember seeing caedjes post. If this isn't it I'll have to go back and look.

Text. “Any person subject to this chapter who, knowing that an offense punishable by this chapter has been committed, receives, comforts, or assists the offender in order to hinder or prevent his apprehension, trial, or punishment shall be punished as a court-martial may direct

http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinfo/mcm/bl78.htm [/*]

I dunno. So broad. I still think there is a lot of wiggle room.

[Kel65]

Originally posted by strick10


You mean Article 78? I remember seeing caedjes post. If this isn't it I'll have to go back and look.

Text. “Any person subject to this chapter who, knowing that an offense punishable by this chapter has been committed, receives, comforts, or assists the offender in order to hinder or prevent his apprehension, trial, or punishment shall be punished as a court-martial may direct

http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinfo/mcm/bl78.htm [/*]

IMO there was some hindering going on.

[crymeariver2006]

Originally posted by strick10


You mean Article 78?

Text. “Any person subject to this chapter who, knowing that an offense punishable by this chapter has been committed, receives, comforts, or assists the offender in order to hinder or prevent his apprehension, trial, or punishment shall be punished as a court-martial may direct

http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinfo/mcm/bl78.htm [/*]

Lot of great minds thinking alike today.

So would desertion be the offense known to have been committed by Cesar and Christina's failure to report his whereabouts or the contact be considered an accessory?

[strick10]

Tag cryme!!!!

[crymeariver2006]

Originally posted by Kel65


IMO there was some hindering going on. [/*]

And probably more than a little comforting.

IMO

I don't think she wanted him found. I just don't. But if that's true, then why?

JMO of course.

[Kel65]

Originally posted by SavannahStar


I dunno. So broad. I still think there is a lot of wiggle room. [/*]

I think the broad words do allow wiggle room either way. However, I think that the wiggling won't be favorable towards CSL. JMO based onmy experience around the USMC.

[crymeariver2006]

Originally posted by Ionmhainn


I agree...could conceal be stretched to cover "whereabouts"...and did any officer ever ask her if she knew where he was? I still say that being in contact with him could be considered to be "assisting."
mo. [/*]

I agree with you. Besides, as a Marine herself, Christina was well aware of the definition of deserter and what was expected. They may have told her to report any communications, but she should have been very aware of what her responsibility was without being told.

[SavannahStar]

Originally posted by crymeariver2006


And probably more than a little comforting.

IMO

I don't think she wanted him found. I just don't. But if that's true, then why?

JMO of course. [/*]

I don't think she wanted him found either. As to why, I think it's pretty apparent. We were told how she was "torn" and that she still loved him. Him being found would mean prison, probably for life. As little as they had together in the past three months (communicating via Myspace) was more than what they would ever have if he were caught and tried and convicted.

IMO.

[mini-me]

Originally posted by strick10


So you don't see that she protected him by not letting the MC know she was communicating w/ him? [/*]Maybe she didn't tell because she didn't want him caught, and maybe it was in her best interest for him to stay in Mexico. You never know.JMO

[caejde]

Originally posted by crymeariver2006


Lot of great minds thinking alike today.

So would desertion be the offense known to have been committed by Cesar and Christina's failure to report his whereabouts or the contact be considered an accessory? [/*]

That's what I think.

[strick10]

Originally posted by crymeariver2006


Lot of great minds thinking alike today.

So would desertion be the offense known to have been committed by Cesar and Christina's failure to report his whereabouts or the contact be considered an accessory? [/*]

Yes. Article 85 and is classified as a felony....

http://www.bragg.army.mil/ProvostMarshal/ProvostMarshalDocs/AWOL%20and%20Deserters.pdf

RE: Paragraph 3.

I thought Art. 85 was probablya felony but can't find anything in the MC manuals that states so. Army manuals are just as good I suppose...

[caejde]

Originally posted by SavannahStar


I don't think she wanted him found either. As to why, I think it's pretty apparent. We were told how she was "torn" and that she still loved him. Him being found would mean prison, probably for life. As little as they had together in the past three months (communicating via Myspace) was more than what they would ever have if he were caught and tried and convicted.

IMO. [/*]

At least in prison she can get visitation. As it stood with him being on the run she would have never seen him again.

[crymeariver2006]

Originally posted by SavannahStar


I don't think she wanted him found either. As to why, I think it's pretty apparent. We were told how she was "torn" and that she still loved him. Him being found would mean prison, probably for life. As little as they had together in the past three months (communicating via Myspace) was more than what they would ever have if he were caught and tried and convicted.

IMO. [/*]

They still write letters in prison and I believe they still have visiting days. And I think they also allow phone calls home if you have good behavior.

:shrug:

[CANDYKISSES]

Originally posted by daniel green


Thank you!

I just read it.

So ML's mother did tell LE that ML was bipolar and had a history of compulsive lying and that one could not tell what was true with her. ML's mother also said that ML was not having troubles or concerns.

There was a key left at Durham's house, along with the note.

Oh, and ML's medical records confirm the Feb 14 due date.

It is strange that ML's mother said ML was not under stress.



[/*]

That is what i saw in the narrative too Daniel. :shrug:

That is way contradictory and definitely not in the story they are telling now IMO.

You can't bring a knife to a gun fight and that's the situation I see Mary in once the whole case is put together if she decides to take them on in a public way. JMO tho.

MW will not be able to hide behind the words of Mary herself and no matter what, they were damaging to say the least IMO.

I think the USMC has been kind in their presentation but soon the gloves will come off depending on what the DNA reveals and all He** will break loose over some of the accusations that have been levied against them.

I'll bet the USMC would really like to chat with Cesar about now.

JMO. :o

[crymeariver2006]

Originally posted by strick10


Yes. Article 85 and is classified as a felony....

http://www.bragg.army.mil/ProvostMarshal/ProvostMarshalDocs/AWOL%20and%20Deserters.pdf

RE: Paragraph 3.

I thought Art. 85 was probablya felony but can't find anything in the MC manuals that states so. Army manuals are just as good I suppose... [/*]

Thank you!

Every time I start reading those manuals, I start clicking other links and get so involved....pretty soon I forget what I was looking for!

[CANDYKISSES]

Originally posted by caejde


At least in prison she can get visitation. As it stood with him being on the run she would have never seen him again. [/*]

But not if one goes to the military prison and the other goes to a civillian prison.

How would they handle that visitation? :confused:

JMO and just thinking about what they might have been fearing IF she was found guilty of having something to do with this through the military. You know by offering comfort to a deserter.

JMO.:o

[SavannahStar]

Originally posted by crymeariver2006


They still write letters in prison and I believe they still have visiting days. And I think they also allow phone calls home if you have good behavior.

:shrug: [/*]

I don't think she probably would have thought of it that way. I think she would have thought LWOP would be worse than him on the run. At least he was "free".

(Caveat that this is not how I personally believe; I am trying to "project" myself into Christina's position, from things we know about her and about Cesar. ALL SPECULATION on my part, in other words.)

[strick10]

Originally posted by SavannahStar


I don't think she wanted him found either. As to why, I think it's pretty apparent. We were told how she was "torn" and that she still loved him. Him being found would mean prison, probably for life. As little as they had together in the past three months (communicating via Myspace) was more than what they would ever have if he were caught and tried and convicted.

IMO. [/*]

So can I safely say that they both discussed how they would keep in touch via myspace before CAL left? I mean CSL wouldn't use her current myspace page to communicate as she probably knew LE would be looking at that so they had to have had discussed other names in which to find each other.

[caejde]

Originally posted by CANDYKISSES


But not if one goes to the military prison and the other goes to a civillian prison.

How would they handle that visitation? :confused:

JMO and just thinking about what they might have been fearing IF she was found guilty of having something to do with this through the military. You know by offering comfort to a deserter.

JMO.:o [/*]

Still have letter writing...

[crymeariver2006]

Originally posted by CANDYKISSES


But not if one goes to the military prison and the other goes to a civillian prison.

How would they handle that visitation? :confused:

JMO and just thinking about what they might have been fearing IF she was found guilty of having something to do with this through the military. You know by offering comfort to a deserter.

JMO.:o [/*]

True, wonder if her attorney advised her she might face charges from the MC even if she wouldn't from the state? She seemed to be fully aware of the "line in the sand" as far as the state was concerned.....

[Babes]

Originally posted by CANDYKISSES


This coupled with the statement by the Lt. General in his letter to Turner are enought to make you think.

“On November 5, 2007, Lance Cpl. Lauterbach informed the military prosecutor she was certain the child was not Cpl. Laurean’s based upon a recent Obstetrics Gynecological examination and recalculation of the conception date,” reads the letter from Lt. Gen. Richard S. Kramlich, director of Marine Corps Staff.

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/2008/04/marine_laureancaptured_041008w/

Just imagine what a blow that would be if she came over to tell him something like that?

JMO. [/*]

IMO i think the child belongs to Cesar Laurean but Maria is doing this so she can stop her rape case against Cesar.

[SavannahStar]

Originally posted by strick10


So can I safely say that they both discussed how they would keep in touch via myspace before CAL left? I mean CSL wouldn't use her current myspace page to communicate as she probably knew LE would be looking at that so they had to have had discussed other names in which to find each other. [/*]

:confused:

No, I don't agree with that.

[strick10]

Originally posted by crymeariver2006


Thank you!

Every time I start reading those manuals, I start clicking other links and get so involved....pretty soon I forget what I was looking for! [/*]

I hear you loud and clear! Reference after reference till I start having MC flashbacks.

[Mitzy2]

Originally posted by strick10


Yes. Article 85 and is classified as a felony....

http://www.bragg.army.mil/ProvostMarshal/ProvostMarshalDocs/AWOL%20and%20Deserters.pdf

RE: Paragraph 3.

I thought Art. 85 was probablya felony but can't find anything in the MC manuals that states so. Army manuals are just as good I suppose... [/*] Perhaps LE has requested the MC not to take any action against Christina until they get CL back on US soil. Could be the reason for the PC sanatizing and " conflicted by love" comments made by the DA :shrug:

[strick10]

Originally posted by crymeariver2006


True, wonder if her attorney advised her she might face charges from the MC even if she wouldn't from the state? She seemed to be fully aware of the "line in the sand" as far as the state was concerned..... [/*]
You mean the same attorney that told the world that the MC had ordered CSL not to talk about the case other than to the LE and then to find out that the MC had not ordered her to keep mum but rather advised her not to publicly talk about the case. Wonder if her attorney knew they were communicating before they were found.

[crymeariver2006]

Originally posted by SavannahStar


I don't think she probably would have thought of it that way. I think she would have thought LWOP would be worse than him on the run. At least he was "free".

(Caveat that this is not how I personally believe; I am trying to "project" myself into Christina's position, from things we know about her and about Cesar. ALL SPECULATION on my part, in other words.) [/*]

My caveat in "projecting" myself into Christina's position....I don't want him found 'cause he'll talk.

A man that you looooooove so much being on the run, free to meet up with any woman any minute and you have no way of knowing anything about it, as opposed to being in a place where there are no more "other women" and he's fed and given medical care? That doesn't compute with me, but hey.....

[strick10]

Originally posted by SavannahStar


:confused:

No, I don't agree with that. [/*]

I'm not saying this in a mocking or disrespectful way, but if CSLs feelings for CAL are/were that deep that she just had to communicate with him wouldn't the only way they would do this would be if they both discussed it before CAL left?

[crymeariver2006]

Originally posted by strick10

You mean the same attorney that told the world that the MC had ordered CSL not to talk about the case other than to the LE and then to find out that the MC had not ordered her to keep mum but rather advised her not to publicly talk about the case. Wonder if her attorney knew they were communicating before they were found. [/*]

Boy, if he DIDN'T know....I'm sure the "come to Jesus" meeting he had with Christina went something like this...:cuss:

[Babes]

Originally posted by Squawk Box
I don't think anything will be done to Christina. She has been through so much and been so mixed up with the truth and her love for Cesar.barf

I can accept her being mixed up because her life ended as she knew it. Very hard to accept.

If they would do anything it would be a very mild slap on the wrist. I believe she intends to stay in the military in order to raise her child.

She did nothing to aid or abet him that we know of so it is not against the law. If it is against the Military Code of Conduct, we don't know it.

jmo [/*]

She's 25 years old w/ a kid. She should know what is right and what isnt. At that age, her main priority is her kid. By talking to a "deserter" and a wanted murderer - she's putting everything at risk. Yeah she didnt give him money - but maybe she didnt give him money because she doesnt want him to get caught - or she really doesnt have money at all. She was able to chat with Cesar without telling LE and that tells me that she could do more at their back given a good chance.

I could see from many of your previous post how you feel about Christina but hey if you are her mother or father - will you feel good about what she did lately? Talking to Cesar without telling LE about it considering she's supposed to be a cooperating witness?

[strick10]

Originally posted by Mitzy2
Perhaps LE has requested the MC not to take any action against Christina until they get CL back on US soil. Could be the reason for the PC sanatizing and " conflicted by love" comments made by the DA :shrug: [/*]

We don't know if the MC has or hasn't taken any action against CSL. I doubt the MC would take orders from the LE. Two different cases two different jurisdictions. DA's PC comments were unique. Since I'm not a legal eagle I don't know if his public defensive comments will hurt anything in the case. I just found it kinda weird.

[Babes]

Originally posted by crymeariver2006




A man that you looooooove so much being on the run,[/*]

I wonder if her ( Xtina ) heart is bleeding so much after this man just tell the entire world that he loved Maria :confused:

[baywench]

Hey everyone,

At the risk of sounding incredibly lazy.....is it worth my catching up on the Sunday and Monday boards? Anything about where CL was getting his financing from? Those people would be charged. JMO

[Mitzy2]

Originally posted by strick10


We don't know if the MC has or hasn't taken any action against CSL. I doubt the MC would take orders from the LE. Two different cases two different jurisdictions. DA's PC comments were unique. Since I'm not a legal eagle I don't know if his public defensive comments will hurt anything in the case. I just found it kinda weird. [/*] TY, for responding. I wasn't thinking along the lines of "An Order" from LE, just cooperation from the MC. From reading up thread it does appear Christina could be in a world of trouble from MC. JMO

[Squawk Box]

Originally posted by Babes


I wonder if her ( Xtina ) heart is bleeding so much after this man just tell the entire world that he loved Maria :confused: [/*]

I hope it helps her come to her senses about him. She needs to do that for the sake of her child. It is very dangerous when Cesar loves someone, look what happened to Maria. jmo

[SavannahStar]

Originally posted by Babes


I wonder if her ( Xtina ) heart is bleeding so much after this man just tell the entire world that he loved Maria :confused: [/*]

I am of the opinion that that did not come as a surprise to her.

[strick10]

Originally posted by baywench
Hey everyone,

At the risk of sounding incredibly lazy.....is it worth my catching up on the Sunday and Monday boards? Anything about where CL was getting his financing from? Those people would be charged. JMO [/*]

Well Bay IMO there have been some pretty good things discussed but nothing that has broken the case if that makes sense. Don't believe CAL was receiving any financial help. He had $1.00 in his pocket and it was said he worked at the internet cafe from time to time for cash.

[Marcia3]

Originally posted by crymeariver2006


My caveat in "projecting" myself into Christina's position....I don't want him found 'cause he'll talk.

A man that you looooooove so much being on the run, free to meet up with any woman any minute and you have no way of knowing anything about it, as opposed to being in a place where there are no more "other women" and he's fed and given medical care? That doesn't compute with me, but hey..... [/*]

Maybe CSL was willing to let go of CAL in a physical sense because she thought his freedom was better than prison. I don't know if I'm making any sense here, but maybe she was willing to live with the idea of him being with other women while he was on the run because at least he would be free and not locked up.

I can see it from both POVs, but at her age, I would probably have wanted my husband to turn himself in as opposed to running. I just don't know if CSL would feel the same way.

[Babes]

Originally posted by Squawk Box


I hope it helps her come to her senses about him. She needs to do that for the sake of her child. It is very dangerous when Cesar loves someone, look what happened to Maria. jmo [/*]

She has to move on with her life. If she's innocent on this then leaving the area and the Marines might be better and she can start a new life with her kid somewhere else. I am pretty sure her parents will help her.

[IvySterling]

Originally posted by Babes


She has to move on with her life. If she's innocent on this then leaving the area and the Marines might be better and she can start a new life with her kid somewhere else. I am pretty sure her parents will help her. [/*]
Speaking of the Shifletts, I wonder how they feel about learning CSL was communicating with Cesar all this time???

[Babes]

Originally posted by strick10


Well Bay IMO there have been some pretty good things discussed but nothing that has broken the case if that makes sense. Don't believe CAL was receiving any financial help. He had $1.00 in his pocket and it was said he worked at the internet cafe from time to time for cash. [/*]

I dont think he needs a lot of money to live in that area but - i do think that he would like to have some money so he can go back to USA. Isnt LE said that he's thinking of going to Las Vegas Nevada?

[Marcia3]

Originally posted by IvySterling

Speaking of the Shifletts, I wonder how they feel about learning CSL was communicating with Cesar all this time??? [/*]

I've wondered about this, too, given the words CSL's dad used in their interviews with CBS Morning News right after CAL took off. MR Shiflett was none too happy with CAL at that point, IIRC.

[Babes]

Originally posted by IvySterling

Speaking of the Shifletts, I wonder how they feel about learning CSL was communicating with Cesar all this time??? [/*]

I am pretty sure that they are so embarassed about this. Geesh - if i am on their position - i will curse Christina non-stop

[IvySterling]

Originally posted by Marcia3


I've wondered about this, too, given the words CSL's dad used in their interviews with CBS Morning News right after CAL took off. MR Shiflett was none too happy with CAL at that point, IIRC. [/*]
No, he wasn't, but remember he was repeating with Christina had told THEM (being at work when the murder occurred and trying to talk Cesar into staying) :rolleyes:

[Babes]

Originally posted by SavannahStar


I am of the opinion that that did not come as a surprise to her. [/*]


Maybe :)

[Marcia3]

Originally posted by IvySterling

No, he wasn't, but remember he was repeating with Christina had told THEM (being at work when the murder occurred and trying to talk Cesar into staying) :rolleyes: [/*]

I remember...they must be wondering which way is up and which way is down right about now. Or maybe they are supportive of their daughter and still pizzed off at CAL?

[nuttintodo]

Originally posted by IvySterling

Speaking of the Shifletts, I wonder how they feel about learning CSL was communicating with Cesar all this time??? [/*]

Probably not to good..... but then they have CSL's side of the story so who knows.....

jmoo

[SavannahStar]

Originally posted by strick10


I'm not saying this in a mocking or disrespectful way, but if CSLs feelings for CAL are/were that deep that she just had to communicate with him wouldn't the only way they would do this would be if they both discussed it before CAL left? [/*]

No, I don't think so.

[Babes]

Originally posted by IvySterling

No, he wasn't, but remember he was repeating with Christina had told THEM (being at work when the murder occurred and trying to talk Cesar into staying) :rolleyes: [/*]

yeah - i remember - they said that Xtina was @ work and not @ the party :(

[strick10]

Originally posted by Babes


I dont think he needs a lot of money to live in that area but - i do think that he would like to have some money so he can go back to USA. Isnt LE said that he's thinking of going to Las Vegas Nevada? [/*]

No you probably don't need alot of money to live in that area but it's obvious he was broke otherwise he wouldn't have been living off the food in the orchards. I've also heard that CAL was wanting to go the Las Vegas and was needing money to make the trip. Wonder if that cabin he was living in belonged to any of his relatives?

[Mitzy2]

Originally posted by Babes


I am pretty sure that they are so embarassed about this. Geesh - if i am on their position - i will curse Christina non-stop [/*] I would have loved to hear that phone conversation:eek: She prob. got a lot of grief for putting her sister and brother-in-law in that type of a situation as well. JMO

[SavannahStar]

Originally posted by crymeariver2006


My caveat in "projecting" myself into Christina's position....I don't want him found 'cause he'll talk.

A man that you looooooove so much being on the run, free to meet up with any woman any minute and you have no way of knowing anything about it, as opposed to being in a place where there are no more "other women" and he's fed and given medical care? That doesn't compute with me, but hey..... [/*]

Well suffice to say I don't agree with that at all....and re your first sentence, of course I would think this would be your opinion since you believe Christina is guilty.......of something.

[strick10]

Paloma Leal Marin, a local woman who became friendly with him, talked about their acquaintance.

"He never said anything, they were just normal chats. He talked about his sister, that his sister helped him out with money, I think," said Marin.

http://www.aptnvideo.net/pages/browse/player/player_script.jsp;jsessionid=42D9CB719D64C29951EFE 4A0ADA6D4C7?item=88657

Gosh, I hope his sister didn't really help him out with money.

[Mitzy2]

Originally posted by strick10


No you probably don't need alot of money to live in that area but it's obvious he was broke otherwise he wouldn't have been living off the food in the orchards. I've also heard that CAL was wanting to go the Las Vegas and was needing money to make the trip. Wonder if that cabin he was living in belonged to any of his relatives? [/*] I read that was CL's Uncle's property, but can't recall for the life of me where I saw it at this time.:shrug:

[Marcia3]

Originally posted by Mitzy2
I read that was CL's Uncle's property, but can't recall for the life of me where I saw it at this time.:shrug: [/*]

I saw that, too, I think it was in an article in our local paper last weekend...

[crymeariver2006]

Originally posted by SavannahStar


Well suffice to say I don't agree with that at all....and re your first sentence, of course I would think this would be your opinion since you believe Christina is guilty.......of something. [/*]

Yes, and your opinion is that she is guilty.....of nothing.

You gave your caveat and I gave mine. No need for chastising.

[SavannahStar]

Originally posted by crymeariver2006


Yes, and your opinion is that she is guilty.....of nothing.

You gave your caveat and I gave mine. No need for chastising. [/*]

No chastising there at all.....just a response to your post.

[nuttintodo]

Originally posted by strick10
Paloma Leal Marin, a local woman who became friendly with him, talked about their acquaintance.

"He never said anything, they were just normal chats. He talked about his sister, that his sister helped him out with money, I think," said Marin.

http://www.aptnvideo.net/pages/browse/player/player_script.jsp;jsessionid=42D9CB719D64C29951EFE 4A0ADA6D4C7?item=88657

Gosh, I hope his sister didn't really help him out with money. [/*]

I hope not either. But I am thinking Western Union has most likely been checked.

jmoo

[crymeariver2006]

Originally posted by strick10
Paloma Leal Marin, a local woman who became friendly with him, talked about their acquaintance.

"He never said anything, they were just normal chats. He talked about his sister, that his sister helped him out with money, I think," said Marin.

http://www.aptnvideo.net/pages/browse/player/player_script.jsp;jsessionid=42D9CB719D64C29951EFE 4A0ADA6D4C7?item=88657

Gosh, I hope his sister didn't really help him out with money. [/*]

She could have sent the money via another relative to give to him. I think when RS said they had cut off his resources, this may have been one of them.

I wonder if resources meant plural sources or plural times in sending him money?

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by Mitzy2
I read that was CL's Uncle's property, but can't recall for the life of me where I saw it at this time.:shrug: [/*]

Did the villagers say that an old woman came to visit him often and they thought it may have been his grandmother?

Yes the rancho was his Uncle's place.

imoo

[strick10]

Originally posted by GentleBreeze


Did the villagers say that an old woman came to visit him often and they thought it may have been his grandmother?

Yes the rancho was his Uncle's place.

imoo [/*]

I don't recall the grandmother part. Gonna have to go look as I missed that one.