May 1 - 21

[Babes]

Originally posted by martha
Ha I bet he would love that. I think she has been told to keep her mouth shut by her lawyers. Most lawyers don;t want you to do any talking if they or resp you. I do think they or trying to work up a show on this case tho. jmho:rose: [/*]

She's hard headed. IMO she's a woman who will disobey her lawyer just like how she managed all her crap w/ Cesar at myspace and Yahoo Messenger and not telling LE about it ---

Ooppps did i say she didnt tell LE about it? Yeah - That's the new definition of "cooperating witness" - not 100% providing LE the information they needed barf barf

[Babes]

Originally posted by GentleBreeze


Oooooh I just bet they would love that.

imoo [/*]

:lol: Someone needs to email Greta and have her go to Mexico - I am sure she doesnt want MSNBC to get the first interview of Cesar

What do you think are the top 5 questions these media people will ask Cesar?

Hmmm my top 5 questions are:

1. Who killed Maria?
2. Why did you bury Maria on your backyard and not somewhere else?
3. Are you the father of Maria's baby?
4. What is the "proof" you are talking about?
5. And of course - Is your wife telling the truth about her no involvement on this case?

So what's your top 5? :hat:

[henry]

ditto on the questions babes . . . i'd only add a double header to your 1st one . . . why?

[caejde]

Originally posted by Charlotte


I dunno... the MC is now saying that when Maria reported her allegations in May, she told them of two sexual encounters with Laurean -- one in March that she herself told them was consensual, and the other in April that she said was rape. That's in the letter from Lt. Gen. Kramlich to Rep. Turner. Answer #1, paragraph 2.

Was it misreported early on that both instances were claimed by her to be rape? Or did the MC say that very thing at one time, only to say something different now?

If so, why?

Are they re-writing history? Lying? Correcting misinformation? I think the actual number of alleged rapes reported by Maria to anyone concerned needs to be settled before anyone further uses supposed facts as ammunition against a grieving mother.

Right now, the MC is stating to a member of Congress that Maria reported one sexual assualt.

Kinda like what you said her mother recalls Maria telling her on the phone, no? ;)

JMO [/*]

From what I remember from the press conference back in January, it was said she reported 2 incidences and it was determined the first was consensual. I dont' have a link so....JMO.

[Jan Powell]

My #1 question to CL would be: Have you retained or been assigned an International lawyer specializing in extradition?

#2 question: Do you or your attorney anticipate federal charges?

#3 question: If you were guaranteed no federal charges, would you voluntarily return to face state charges?

#4 question: You face LWOP in the US courts if found guilty and 20 to 50 years plus in Mexico if found guilty, where do you want to spend the rest of your life?

[alter ego]

Originally posted by Jan Powell
My #1 question to CL would be: Have you retained or been assigned an International lawyer specializing in extradition?

#2 question: Do you or your attorney anticipate federal charges?

#3 question: If you were guaranteed no federal charges, would you voluntarily return to face state charges?

#4 question: You face LWOP in the US courts if found guilty and 20 to 50 years plus in Mexico if found guilty, where do you want to spend the rest of your life? [/*]

I missed the part about getting 20-50 if found guilty in Mexico. What is that all about?

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by Babes


:lol: Someone needs to email Greta and have her go to Mexico - I am sure she doesn't want MSNBC to get the first interview of Cesar

What do you think are the top 5 questions these media people will ask Cesar?

Hmmm my top 5 questions are:

1. Who killed Maria?
2. Why did you bury Maria on your backyard and not somewhere else?
3. Are you the father of Maria's baby?
4. What is the "proof" you are talking about?
5. And of course - Is your wife telling the truth about her no involvement on this case?

So what's your top 5? :hat: [/*]

1. How long have you been in love with Maria?
2. Were you and Maria alone when all of this happened?
3. Why did Maria select El Paso as her destination?
4. Did she tell you specifically what happened that made her plans fall through? If so what was it?
5. Do you have knowledge and evidence that would show you are not the murderer of Maria and Gabriel?

imoo

[martha]

Good morning everyone just droped in to see if there is any news. I am going to Sam's club with my son to get groc. today so I will be back later on today. you all have a very good day and I will check back tonight to see if we have anything new. I hate beening away from my computer ha. I wonder if we have a new baby today? bye everyone :rose:

[martha]

Originally posted by GentleBreeze


1. How long have you been in love with Maria?
2. Were you and Maria alone when all of this happened?
3. Why did Maria select El Paso as her destination?
4. Did she tell you specifically what happened that made her plans fall through? If so what was it?
5. Do you have knowledge and evidence that would show you are not the murderer of Maria and Gabriel?

imoo [/*] Hi sweet pie good to see you this morning I like your questions. I wish he would ans these. My head is full of ques I would love to ask him. I am not sure he will ever come back to the states if he can just get 20 years in mexico. Hope everything is ok your way. bye for now I will be back later tonight. :rose:

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by martha
Hi sweet pie good to see you this morning I like your questions. I wish he would ans these. My head is full of ques I would love to ask him. I am not sure he will ever come back to the states if he can just get 20 years in mexico. Hope everything is ok your way. bye for now I will be back later tonight. :rose: [/*]

Good Morning, sweet lady!

Enjoy your outing with your son.

Maybe some news will come soon.

imoo:seeya:

[martha]

Hi sweet pie, yep I hope we get some news today. Sam's club is about one hour from my house my son need groc. I will be back on later . have a good day:rose:

[CANDYKISSES]

Originally posted by caejde


From what I remember from the press conference back in January, it was said she reported 2 incidences and it was determined the first was consensual. I dont' have a link so....JMO. [/*]

That's my memory too Caejde. I also remember Mary and Uncle Peter both stating she didn't know him, had no social contact and had been asked that by her mother. But now we are hearing something much different.

I think Maria didn't want her family to know the details of her relationship with Cesar from what we've seen and heard.

JMO, but no I don't liken it to what we have heard from Mary. After all, she is her mother and I would think her word could be representative of what her daughter was thinking. But if she only told Mary of April 10th, then what's left to think about that?

I don't know.....:o

[Babes]

Originally posted by GentleBreeze


1. How long have you been in love with Maria?
2. Were you and Maria alone when all of this happened?
3. Why did Maria select El Paso as her destination?
4. Did she tell you specifically what happened that made her plans fall through? If so what was it?
5. Do you have knowledge and evidence that would show you are not the murderer of Maria and Gabriel?

imoo [/*]

I like your questions 2 and 5 :biggrin:

[Jan Powell]

Originally posted by alter ego


I missed the part about getting 20-50 if found guilty in Mexico. What is that all about? [/*]

Because he's a Mexian national, instead of extraditing him if he fights it, the US and Mexico can Article 4 try him there.

[strick10]

Originally posted by Jan Powell


Because he's a Mexian national, instead of extraditing him if he fights it, the US and Mexico can Article 4 try him there. [/*]

The US can try him in a foreign country? What does Article 4 entail? I don't know what it entails. Thanks.

[nelkirk]

Originally posted by Charlotte

I dunno... the MC is now saying that when Maria reported her allegations in May, she told them of two sexual encounters with Laurean -- one in March that she herself told them was consensual, and the other in April that she said was rape. That's in the letter from Lt. Gen. Kramlich to Rep. Turner. Answer #1, paragraph 2.

Was it misreported early on that both instances were claimed by her to be rape? Or did the MC say that very thing at one time, only to say something different now?

If so, why?

Are they re-writing history? Lying? Correcting misinformation? I think the actual number of alleged rapes reported by Maria to anyone concerned needs to be settled before anyone further uses supposed facts as ammunition against a grieving mother.

Right now, the MC is stating to a member of Congress that Maria reported one sexual assualt.

Kinda like what you said her mother recalls Maria telling her on the phone, no?

JMO

Originally posted by caejde
From what I remember from the press conference back in January, it was said she reported 2 incidences and it was determined the first was consensual. I dont' have a link so....JMO.

From the January 15 Marine Corps Press Conference:
http://www.nbc17.com/midatlantic/ncn/news.apx.-content-articles-NCN-2008-01-15-0028.html

On May 11th, 2007, LCpl Lauterbach confides in her Officer-in-Charge two incidents of a sexual nature with Cpl Laurean. After some initial discussions, the command’s Uniform Victim Advocate meets with LCpl Lauterbach and explains the Victim Advocate Program to her. The UVA takes LCpl Lauterbach to the Naval Criminal Investigative Service office aboard Camp Lejeune to file a formal complaint. LCpl Lauterbach reports to NCIS an alleged sexual encounter with Cpl Laurean on March 26, 2007, and a second encounter approximately two weeks later. LCpl Lauterbach alleged she had been raped by Cpl Laurean. The command’s UVA accompanies LCpl Lauterbach to the medical department for a medical exam. Due to the length of time that elapsed between the alleged assault and the complaint, a forensic examination, or rape kit, is not performed. However, a “Well Woman” exam is performed to include a pregnancy test. The pregnancy test result is negative.

NCIS opens a rape investigation.

General Kramlich states: LCPL Maria Lauterbach reported two sexual encounters with CPL. Cesar Laurean. The first incident was alleged to have occurred on March 26, 2007, and the second on an undetermined date in early April 2007.

Also in A1 General Kramlich states: In May 2007, when LCPL Lauterbach formally made allegations of rape against CPL Laurean, the command was only made aware of two reported sexual encounters.--one sexual encounter that was characterized as consensual by LCPL Lauterbach and the other alleged by her to be rape.
http://media.mgnetwork.com/nct/images/links/marinequestions.pdf


So in answer to your questions:
Was it misreported early on that both instances were claimed by her to be rape? Or did the MC say that very thing at one time, only to say something different now? NO and NO

If so, why? The MC's early statements are consistent with General Kramlich's reply to Rep Turner...

Are they re-writing history? NO
Lying? NO
Correcting misinformation? NO
I think the actual number of alleged rapes reported by Maria to anyone concerned needs to be settled before anyone further uses supposed facts as ammunition against a grieving mother. There were two encounters one characterized by the victim to be consensual and one that the victim alleged to be rape.

Her mother states that her daughter called her and said that she had been attacked on April 10, 2007.

The MC statements show that LCPL Maria Lauterbach may have been inconsistent in her report to her family...

While she told the MC that she chose to engage in a sexual encounter with Cpl Cesar Laurean on March 26, 2007 and that there was a second sexual encounter after the March 26, 2007 encounter and that she did not give her consent. (Actually it was reported by NCIS that she told him no and he stopped)

She neglected to tell her mother (and family) that she had consented to have sex with CPL Laurean on March 26, 2007 and then refused to have sex with him on a second sexual encounter in early April 2007.

[strick10]

Thanks Nelkirk!

[nelkirk]

Originally posted by strick10


The US can try him in a foreign country? What does Article 4 entail? I don't know what it entails. Thanks. [/*]

Under the treaty we have with Mexico if they have the same law in Mexico that we have here in the US and if they believe that his rights under Mexican Law (dual citizenship) or if they feel that his human rights will be violated, Mexico can choose to try him under their legal system and sentence him under their legal system. Remember that their system is Napoleonic: A person is guilty until proven innocent. Also the Mexican court has already it's readiness to grant extradition...the US State Department along with the US Department of Justice are working with their Mexican counterparts on a treaty in this case as to who will have jurisdiction.

[s.breda]

I believe he will be extradited to the U.S., tried in the U.S., and put in a U.S. prison.

Why in the world would Mexico want to spend one red cent on trying him there. Not a chance. imo

Why in the world would the U.S. be working on a treaty in reference to this case when a treaty is already in effect? That makes no sense to me. jmo

[martha]

Originally posted by Babes


She's hard headed. IMO she's a woman who will disobey her lawyer just like how she managed all her crap w/ Cesar at myspace and Yahoo Messenger and not telling LE about it ---

Ooppps did i say she didnt tell LE about it? Yeah - That's the new definition of "cooperating witness" - not 100% providing LE the information they needed barf barf [/*]Yep I guess she might be a little hard headed/ you or so funny Babes. I guess nothing has happened with cl today. I was going to check the news sight but lost the link to it. Hope you all have had a good day/ :rose:

[martha]

Originally posted by s.breda
I believe he will be extradited to the U.S., tried in the U.S., and put in a U.S. prison.

Why in the world would Mexico want to spend one red cent on trying him there. Not a chance. imo

Why in the world would the U.S. be working on a treaty in reference to this case when a treaty is already in effect? That makes no sense to me. jmo [/*] Do you think it will take years to get him back to the states? If he fight it I can understand why it would take a long time but if not then I don;t see why they can;t just go pick him up. The way I understand it we have taken the death pen. of the board? :rose:

[Kel65]

There has been a lot of what seems to be incorrect or contradictory information regarding this case. Starting with the misreporting of Mary as Maria's step mother.

IIRC, during the USMC press conference in January, early on in the conference LtCol Hill made the statement that Maria was born in Orange City , Florida. Orange City is in Volusia County, FL (central Florida). Maria' death certificate indicates that she was born in Manatee County, which is on the west coast of Florida south of Tampa. So, which is correct? Why would the USMC report something contradictory to what is on the death certificate? As a purely curious inquiring mind, I'd like to know.

Not that this has any real bearing on Maria's tragic murder, but it does demonstrate yet another miscommunication about this case. Just an observation.

JMO

Edited to correct the word miscommunicated to miscommunication.

[martha]

you or right it may not matter in this case but if they keep on letting out stuff that is not true then it could mess up the trial if we ever have one. A good DA will have a field day with some of this stuff if it gets in. I have seen and heard of the smallest little thing getting someone off just because people were not careful what they were saying. It makes me wonder if we will ever get the whole truth in this case.:rose:

[IvySterling]

Originally posted by Kel65
There has been a lot of what seems to be incorrect or contradictory information regarding this case. Starting with the misreporting of Mary as Maria's step mother.

IIRC, during the USMC press conference in January, early on in the conference LtCol Hill made the statement that Maria was born in Orange City , Florida. Orange City is in Volusia County, FL (central Florida). Maria' death certificate indicates that she was born in Manatee County, which is on the west coast of Florida south of Tampa. So, which is correct? Why would the USMC report something contradictory to what is on the death certificate? As a purely curious inquiring mind, I'd like to know.

Not that this has any real bearing on Maria's tragic murder, but it does demonstrate yet another miscommunication about this case. Just an observation.[/*]
I think the Military has the true Birth info. from her Birth Certificate, and the Death Certificate was information obtained from Mary...................my hunch anyway as my brother had to show his BC upon joining the Military.

[daniel green]

Originally posted by nelkirk




From the January 15 Marine Corps Press Conference:
http://www.nbc17.com/midatlantic/ncn/news.apx.-content-articles-NCN-2008-01-15-0028.html



General Kramlich states:

Also in A1 General Kramlich states:
http://media.mgnetwork.com/nct/images/links/marinequestions.pdf


So in answer to your questions:
NO and NO

The MC's early statements are consistent with General Kramlich's reply to Rep Turner...

NO
NO
NO
There were two encounters one characterized by the victim to be consensual and one that the victim alleged to be rape.

Her mother states that her daughter called her and said that she had been attacked on April 10, 2007.

The MC statements show that LCPL Maria Lauterbach may have been inconsistent in her report to her family...

While she told the MC that she chose to engage in a sexual encounter with Cpl Cesar Laurean on March 26, 2007 and that there was a second sexual encounter after the March 26, 2007 encounter and that she did not give her consent. (Actually it was reported by NCIS that she told him no and he stopped)

She neglected to tell her mother (and family) that she had consented to have sex with CPL Laurean on March 26, 2007 and then refused to have sex with him on a second sexual encounter in early April 2007. [/*]

You always impress me but this time--WOW.

Thank you!

[martha]

I don;t understand how it was rape if she ask him to stop and he did? I am just a country girl from miss but jmho I don;t think there was ever a rape in the first place. :shrug:

[Kel65]

Originally posted by martha
I don;t understand how it was rape if she ask him to stop and he did? I am just a country girl from miss but jmho I don;t think there was ever a rape in the first place. :shrug: [/*]

Martha-, I've often wondered the same thing. From what has been put out to the public, it sounds like it started off as consensual sex, she got cold feet told him to stop and he did. If this is true, then where is the violence and force to make it rape? JMO

[nelkirk]

Originally posted by Kel65
There has been a lot of what seems to be incorrect or contradictory information regarding this case. Starting with the misreporting of Mary as Maria's step mother.

IIRC, during the USMC press conference in January, early on in the conference LtCol Hill made the statement that Maria was born in Orange City , Florida. Orange City is in Volusia County, FL (central Florida). Maria' death certificate indicates that she was born in Manatee County, which is on the west coast of Florida south of Tampa. So, which is correct? Why would the USMC report something contradictory to what is on the death certificate? As a purely curious inquiring mind, I'd like to know.

Not that this has any real bearing on Maria's tragic murder, but it does demonstrate yet another miscommunication about this case. Just an observation.

JMO

Edited to correct the word miscommunicated to miscommunication. [/*]

The MC took whatever was in her SRB...it could have been what she told her Recruiter or what he took off her documentation.

Did Maria have her original birth certificate or did the state of Floria issue her an amended birth certificate due to the aoption process in that state.

Also there are other forms of documentation if a birth certificate is not available. Catholic baptismal records are valid for proof of birth in the absence of a birth certificate...

[hinman]

Originally posted by Kel65


Martha-, I've often wondered the same thing. From what has been put out to the public, it sounds like it started off as consensual sex, she got cold feet told him to stop and he did. If this is true, then where is the violence and force to make it rape? JMO [/*]I think many have wondered this.

I am not sure if to be considered rape there has to be violence though.

I have heard that once she said that she felt both incidence were rape they went ahead and investigated as that, which makes sense but I have to wonder if she was talking this over with someone and that is how it became the issue or if she went there with full intentions on rape charges being alleged.

My question has always been why a year and still an investigation when there is no evidence. I personally think if there was no evidence then the alleged rape should of been dropped and if there was evidence of an affair then that investigation could go on. Two different charges two different investigations.

Maybe someone could clear that up.

[CANDYKISSES]

Originally posted by martha
I don;t understand how it was rape if she ask him to stop and he did? I am just a country girl from miss but jmho I don;t think there was ever a rape in the first place. :shrug: [/*]

Martha, good evening! :rose:

It's not because you're a country girl from MS, there are many of us left with our jaws hanging on the allegation period IMO.

Given that Maria was allegedly in a VOTECH PROGRAM for CRIMINAL JUSTICE the two years prior to graduation, it's hard to believe this young woman could have been so uneducated in sexual assault, awareness and the importance of reporting. Plain and simple, I do not believe it. Then add on the education the USMC provides on sexual assault awareness and that only looks worse, not to mention the inconsistencies and information her mother provided.

None of it makes sense IMO Martha. I think we are looking at a troubled young woman who was nervous about possibly being pregnant even back in April and May. I see a strong possibility of regret sex being touted as rape allegations by what we have heard.

ALL JMO and that doesn't diminish my desire for justice for Maria and her unborn child in any way. :patriot:

[nelkirk]

Originally posted by hinman
I think many have wondered this.

I am not sure if to be considered rape there has to be violence though.

I have heard that once she said that she felt both incidence were rape they went ahead and investigated as that, which makes sense but I have to wonder if she was talking this over with someone and that is how it became the issue or if she went there with full intentions on rape charges being alleged.

My question has always been why a year and still an investigation when there is no evidence. I personally think if there was no evidence then the alleged rape should of been dropped and if there was evidence of an affair then that investigation could go on. Two different charges two different investigations.

Maybe someone could clear that up. [/*]

Who had the authority to decide when the investigation could be closed? NCIS was still investgation the allegations, even up to November NCIS was advising that no charges be made against CL. Until NCIS and JAG came to an agreement on whether charges would be filed on CL, the investigationn would remain open. For some reason NCIS and JAG wanted to wait until the baby was born even when ML told NCIS that she no longer believed that CL was the father of her child. Only NCIS and JAG know why they were so insistent on an Article 32 and the DNA of her child.

[strick10]

Originally posted by Kel65
There has been a lot of what seems to be incorrect or contradictory information regarding this case. Starting with the misreporting of Mary as Maria's step mother.

IIRC, during the USMC press conference in January, early on in the conference LtCol Hill made the statement that Maria was born in Orange City , Florida. Orange City is in Volusia County, FL (central Florida). Maria' death certificate indicates that she was born in Manatee County, which is on the west coast of Florida south of Tampa. So, which is correct? Why would the USMC report something contradictory to what is on the death certificate? As a purely curious inquiring mind, I'd like to know.

Not that this has any real bearing on Maria's tragic murder, but it does demonstrate yet another miscommunication about this case. Just an observation.

JMO

Edited to correct the word miscommunicated to miscommunication. [/*]

The MC took Marias info straight out of her service record book IMO. That type of personal info was provided by Maria when she enlisted. Her birth certificate was viewed to ensure the correct information was put into her service record book. Don't think the MC reported incorrectly.

Is the death certificate the doc that contained a different date of death as well? I can't remember. I strongly don't believe that the MC is not the one that provided the person issuing the death certificate that information.

[strick10]

Originally posted by martha
I don;t understand how it was rape if she ask him to stop and he did? I am just a country girl from miss but jmho I don;t think there was ever a rape in the first place. :shrug: [/*]

Martha I don't understand that either.

[Kel65]

Originally posted by strick10


The MC took Marias info straight out of her service record book IMO. That type of personal info was provided by Maria when she enlisted. Her birth certificate was viewed to ensure the correct information was put into her service record book. Don't think the MC reported incorrectly.

Is the death certificate the doc that contained a different date of death as well? I can't remember. I strongly don't believe that the MC is not the one that provided the person issuing the death certificate that information. [/*]

The only thing I can think of that would make sense of the inconsistency is that maybe Maria was born in Orange City and then when she was removed from her bio parents they were residing in Manatee county. Maybe that is where the adoptive birth certificate was done? It just seems like such a strange inconsistency. I have to think that there has to be some kind of rhyme or reason. Very strange. JMO

[hinman]

Originally posted by nelkirk


Who had the authority to decide when the investigation could be closed? NCIS was still investgation the allegations, even up to November NCIS was advising that no charges be made against CL. Until NCIS and JAG came to an agreement on whether charges would be filed on CL, the investigationn would remain open. For some reason NCIS and JAG wanted to wait until the baby was born even when ML told NCIS that she no longer believed that CL was the father of her child. Only NCIS and JAG know why they were so insistent on an Article 32 and the DNA of her child. [/*]Makes you wonder don't it. I would love to know why they wanted to wait until then.

I am not sure who would have the authority to decide when an investigation is over. They are still investigating it still is not over. It is just odd to me to have no evidence and a year later still be investigating.

I would of thought they would of pressed charges on Maria or how ever that works by then for reporting a false rape if there was not one.

[daniel green]

Originally posted by hinman
I think many have wondered this.

I am not sure if to be considered rape there has to be violence though.

snipped. [/*]

No.

[Kel65]

Originally posted by hinman
I think many have wondered this.

I am not sure if to be considered rape there has to be violence though.

I have heard that once she said that she felt both incidence were rape they went ahead and investigated as that, which makes sense but I have to wonder if she was talking this over with someone and that is how it became the issue or if she went there with full intentions on rape charges being alleged.

My question has always been why a year and still an investigation when there is no evidence. I personally think if there was no evidence then the alleged rape should of been dropped and if there was evidence of an affair then that investigation could go on. Two different charges two different investigations.

Maybe someone could clear that up. [/*]

It doesn't even sound like here was force. JMO

[strick10]

Originally posted by hinman
I think many have wondered this.

I am not sure if to be considered rape there has to be violence though.

I have heard that once she said that she felt both incidence were rape they went ahead and investigated as that, which makes sense but I have to wonder if she was talking this over with someone and that is how it became the issue or if she went there with full intentions on rape charges being alleged.

My question has always been why a year and still an investigation when there is no evidence. I personally think if there was no evidence then the alleged rape should of been dropped and if there was evidence of an affair then that investigation could go on. Two different charges two different investigations.

Maybe someone could clear that up. [/*]

She reported 2 dates for the rapes however admitted that the relations that happened in March was consensual. So there was only one date being investigated.

IMO the investigation took long because there was no physcial evidence and NCIS found inconsistencies with Marias statements. This long timeframe the case was open indicates to me that the MC and NCIS were going to be absolutely sure as to whether a rape did or did not happen. The only proof NCIS had was the babys birth at that point which extended the case even longer.

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by Kel65


Martha-, I've often wondered the same thing. From what has been put out to the public, it sounds like it started off as consensual sex, she got cold feet told him to stop and he did. If this is true, then where is the violence and force to make it rape? JMO [/*]

Didn't the MC say in their PC that the rape allegation had no violence of force in it?

It certainly seems now that men will have to become mind readers when trying to guess what is considered rape.

I just see no rape. If they were in the middle of the encounter and she told him to stop and Maria did say this is what happened then how in the world can that constitute rape?

I just never have understood that.

imoo

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by strick10


She reported 2 dates for the rapes however admitted that the relations that happened in March was consensual. So there was only one date being investigated.

IMO the investigation took long because there was no physical evidence and NCIS found inconsistencies with Marias statements. This long timeframe the case was open indicates to me that the MC and NCIS were going to be absolutely sure as to whether a rape did or did not happen. The only proof NCIS had was the baby's birth at that point which extended the case even longer. [/*]

I think only the MC would have even kept this case open. I still don't understand how Gabriel's DNA would prove the rape. It would prove he lied about have a sexual encounter with Maria but her story was so iffy imo that how could they determine even if Gabriel was his that this wasn't just a love triangle that went sour?

I think any State DA in North Carolina after the NiFong disaster would have been reluctant to put all their eggs in one basket based on the credibility of the accuser.

imoo

[CANDYKISSES]

Originally posted by GentleBreeze


Didn't the MC say in their PC that the rape allegation had no violence of force in it?

It certainly seems now that men will have to become mind readers when trying to guess what is considered rape.

I just see no rape. If they were in the middle of the encounter and she told him to stop and Maria did say this is what happened then how in the world can that constitute rape?

I just never have understood that.

imoo [/*]

I too wonder when the insanity will stop. This is another doozie that was very disturbing in how it was conveyed.

http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/041708WA.shtml

JMO tho. :shrug:

[martha]

Originally posted by GentleBreeze


Didn't the MC say in their PC that the rape allegation had no violence of force in it?

It certainly seems now that men will have to become mind readers when trying to guess what is considered rape.

I just see no rape. If they were in the middle of the encounter and she told him to stop and Maria did say this is what happened then how in the world can that constitute rape?

I just never have understood that.

imoo [/*] ITA I can;t understand how that could be rape. I think ml and cl had something going on anyway. cl has said he loved her. If he stoped when she ask him to then he must of cared for her other that just wanting to rape her. I guess I can;t see a man stoping if he is going to rape a woman. jmho I don;t see any rape. I think they were having an affair and maybe ml did not know he was married but she worked in personal and I would think she would have known he was married. most everyone I have known where I worked always had something to say about their family. that did not stop them from having an affair. It is hard not to talk about your family at your work place. No matter what was going on tho ml and her baby did not have to end up like they did. I go back to all of them being so very young and not thinking things out. If ml mother knew she was preg why in the world would she screen her calls. I would have wanted to talk to her every chance I got. to make sure she was ok. to make sure no one was been mean to her. I really need to stop guessing about this case it is so sad and I just hope someday we will have some idea of what really was going on with them. my heart still just breaks for ml and her baby.:rose:

[strick10]

Originally posted by GentleBreeze


I think only the MC would have even kept this case open. I still don't understand how Gabriel's DNA would prove the rape. It would prove he lied about have a sexual encounter with Maria but her story was so iffy imo that how could they determine even if Gabriel was his that this wasn't just a love triangle that went sour?

I think any State DA in North Carolina after the NiFong disaster would have been reluctant to put all their eggs in one basket based on the credibility of the accuser.

imoo [/*]

Well it's obvious that with a due date of Feb the baby wasn't a product of the rape. So you're right. They were going to nail both of them for false statements etc. IMO. Baby would prove not only an affair but also the fact that they had relations after the date in April Maria alleged the rape.

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by strick10


Well it's obvious that with a due date of Feb the baby wasn't a product of the rape. So you're right. They were going to nail both of them for false statements etc. IMO. Baby would prove not only an affair but also the fact that they had relations after the date in April Maria alleged the rape. [/*]

Bingo!

[baywench]

Originally posted by CANDYKISSES


I too wonder when the insanity will stop. This is another doozie that was very disturbing in how it was conveyed.

http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/041708WA.shtml

JMO tho. :shrug: [/*]

These kind of cases IMO make a mockery of real rape victims. If you are raped there is violence. Rape is not about sex, it is about control. If you have been raped (or molested) you don't have repressed memories etc, there's no doubt in your mind, you remember everything. THere are no wishy-washy moments. I am probably starting a powder keg, but these kinds of things and the woman who was involved in duke rape case put women back 200 years at least. JMO

[martha]

Originally posted by CANDYKISSES


I too wonder when the insanity will stop. This is another doozie that was very disturbing in how it was conveyed.

http://www.truthout.org/issues_06/041708WA.shtml

JMO tho. :shrug: [/*] boy CK that is a crazy case. I don;t understand that case. I have to wonder what a woman is thinking when she does something like this. just makes no sence to me.:rose:

[strick10]

Originally posted by baywench


These kind of cases IMO make a mockery of real rape victims. If you are raped there is violence. Rape is not about sex, it is about control. If you have been raped (or molested) you don't have repressed memories etc, there's no doubt in your mind, you remember everything. THere are no wishy-washy moments. I am probably starting a powder keg, but these kinds of things and the woman who was involved in duke rape case put women back 200 years at least. JMO [/*]
I agree bay.

[martha]

Originally posted by baywench


These kind of cases IMO make a mockery of real rape victims. If you are raped there is violence. Rape is not about sex, it is about control. If you have been raped (or molested) you don't have repressed memories etc, there's no doubt in your mind, you remember everything. THere are no wishy-washy moments. I am probably starting a powder keg, but these kinds of things and the woman who was involved in duke rape case put women back 200 years at least. JMO [/*] ITA I think it really hurts lady that really go thru a real rape. I wish the ones that or not rape would keep their mouth shut because it really hurts the ones that have gone thru with a real rape. Rape is hard enought to prove anyway. :rose:

[CANDYKISSES]

Originally posted by baywench


These kind of cases IMO make a mockery of real rape victims. If you are raped there is violence. Rape is not about sex, it is about control. If you have been raped (or molested) you don't have repressed memories etc, there's no doubt in your mind, you remember everything. THere are no wishy-washy moments. I am probably starting a powder keg, but these kinds of things and the woman who was involved in duke rape case put women back 200 years at least. JMO [/*]

Thank you Baybee! ;)

It's just crazy anymore the lengths we seem to want to go in an effort to protect much of what I consider regret sex. JMO tho. :patriot:

[CANDYKISSES]

Originally posted by martha
boy CK that is a crazy case. I don;t understand that case. I have to wonder what a woman is thinking when she does something like this. just makes no sence to me.:rose: [/*]

Me either Martha and these cases with no force, no coercion, NO WORD USE OF NO alleged and the excuses of feeling intimidated just scare me anymore. Waiting to report is another handicap we have to get away from. It's unfair to everyone involved from the defendant, to the alleged victim to the prosecutor from my POV.

JMO. :(

The wording used in the allegations as we know them doesn't have a ring of rape in my book.

[baywench]

Originally posted by CANDYKISSES


Me either Martha and these cases with no force, no coercion, NO WORD USE OF NO alleged and the excuses of feeling intimidated just scare me anymore. Waiting to report is another handicap we have to get away from. It's unfair to everyone involved from the defendant, to the alleged victim to the prosecutor from my POV.

JMO. :(

The wording used in the allegations as we know them doesn't have a ring of rape in my book. [/*]

It is just so frustrating Ck isn't it. There so many different points at which Maria could have made things clear. That makes me think she was confused about how she felt about things, not what happened. Unfortunately it has left an irrevocable doubt IMO

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by martha
ITA I can;t understand how that could be rape. I think ml and cl had something going on anyway. cl has said he loved her. If he stooped when she ask him to then he must of cared for her other that just wanting to rape her. I guess I can;t see a man stooping if he is going to rape a woman. jmho I don;t see any rape. I think they were having an affair and maybe ml did not know he was married but she worked in personal and I would think she would have known he was married. most everyone I have known where I worked always had something to say about their family. that did not stop them from having an affair. It is hard not to talk about your family at your work place. No matter what was going on tho ml and her baby did not have to end up like they did. I go back to all of them being so very young and not thinking things out. If ml mother knew she was preg why in the world would she screen her calls. I would have wanted to talk to her every chance I got. to make sure she was ok. to make sure no one was been mean to her. I really need to stop guessing about this case it is so sad and I just hope someday we will have some idea of what really was going on with them. my heart still just breaks for ml and her baby.:rose: [/*]

Good Evening Martha!

I think she knew he was married even before the first encounter. He worked in close proximity to her. I don't think he was trying to pretend he was single with Maria as she sat at one desk and then turn around and talk about his little daughter to Lisa who worked with them both. I think like any 20 year old she like and desired him and knew he was married but when they started having sex she knew she could get in trouble having an affair with a married man so she got cold feet. She told her friend that she was in a relationship she knew she had to get out of and boy this was one way she could distance herself from that.

I think if this constitutes rape then any of us who has sons, brothers or whomever should be very worried. If this constitutes rape there will be a lot of males out there who will be targeted like sitting ducks. She said that he ceased when she told him no so if he stops on her command he is still guilty of rape? That makes no commonsense and the thoughts of it are really quite frightening.

If the boundary definition is so murky, unclear and non-defining how can they possibly know the ground rules? Will this mean if the woman becomes disgruntled for numerous of reasons they can say the encounter the night before wasn't consensual?

To me by trying to protect the rights of women they are sacrificing the males rights to clearly understand the rules in the first place.

If that is all it takes where in the world will it end? Like I said when the men have to become mind readers something is very wrong and it seems that is exactly what Maria was expecting him to do.:shrug:

imoo

[strick10]

Originally posted by baywench


It is just so frustrating Ck isn't it. There so many different points at which Maria could have made things clear. That makes me think she was confused about how she felt about things, not what happened. Unfortunately it has left an irrevocable doubt IMO [/*]

I don't think Maria was confused. I think CAL made her super mad and her revenge was the rape allegations never thinking they would go that far. I think Maria was a strong young woman but once the wheels started turning faster and faster she couldn't find a way out so she just continued on possibly hoping that it would all just go away soon. Unfortunately it wasn't going to go away.

[baywench]

Originally posted by GentleBreeze


Good Evening Martha!

I think she knew he was married even before the first encounter. He worked in close proximity to her. I don't think he was trying to pretend he was single with Maria as she sat at one desk and then turn around and talk about his little daughter to Lisa who worked with them both. I think like any 20 year old she like and desired him and knew he was married but when they started having sex she knew she could get in trouble having an affair with a married man so she got cold feet. She told her friend that she was in a relationship she knew she had to get out of and boy this was one way she could distance herself from that.

I think if this constitutes rape then any of us who has sons, brothers or whomever should be very worried. If this constitutes rape there will be a lot of males out there who will be targeted like sitting ducks. She said that he ceased when she told him no so if he stops on her command he is still guilty of rape? That makes no commonsense and the thoughts of it are really quite frightening.

If the boundary definition is so murky, unclear and non-defining how can they possibly know the ground rules? Will this mean if the woman becomes disgruntled for numerous of reasons they can say the encounter the night before wasn't consensual?

To me by trying to protect the rights of women they are sacrificing the males rights to clearly understand the rules in the first place.

If that is all it takes where in the world will it end? Like I said when the men have to become mind readers something is very wrong and it seems that is exactly what Maria was expecting him to do.:shrug:

imoo [/*]

Incredible post GB, I totally agree!

[CANDYKISSES]

Originally posted by baywench


It is just so frustrating Ck isn't it. There so many different points at which Maria could have made things clear. That makes me think she was confused about how she felt about things, not what happened. Unfortunately it has left an irrevocable doubt IMO [/*]

Very poignant statement there Bay.

~~ Unfortunately it has left an irrevocable doubt IMO ~~

We will never know because the only one left to talk is not worthy of trust on this issue any way you look at it from my POV.

While I am not dismissing the idea that Cesar could sing like a bird when he is taken into US custody, we can never confirm what really went on in the spring of 2007 with Maria gone. :(

We are left seeking justice for her murder and a polarizing rape allegation hanging out there.
JMO.

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by CANDYKISSES


Very poignant statement there Bay.

~~ Unfortunately it has left an irrevocable doubt IMO ~~

We will never know because the only one left to talk is not worthy of trust on this issue any way you look at it from my POV.

While I am not dismissing the idea that Cesar could sing like a bird when he is taken into US custody, we can never confirm what really went on in the spring of 2007 with Maria gone. :(

We are left seeking justice for her murder and a polarizing rape allegation hanging out there.
JMO. [/*]

I actually think IF he talks and that is a big IF many things will become much clearer.

I do not think he will speak if he is just going to tell falsehoods. If he speaks then LE will benefit from it and get many answers for the questions, I believe, they struggle with while trying to put the entire puzzle pieces together and get it to match.

I do know this, for me, when he said "he loved her" it certainly made it easier to understand why Maria would come to his home.

Now I want to know what he meant by "proof."

imoo

[sunstar]

Originally posted by GentleBreeze


1. How long have you been in love with Maria?
2. Were you and Maria alone when all of this happened?
3. Why did Maria select El Paso as her destination?
4. Did she tell you specifically what happened that made her plans fall through? If so what was it?
5. Do you have knowledge and evidence that would show you are not the murderer of Maria and Gabriel?

imoo [/*]
Hi GB :seeya: I'll add a couple too ~
"WHEN was Maria killed?" and if it wasn't until Dec. 15, "what were her plans for spending the night of the 14th/15th until the bus left and why did she come back to your house?"

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by sunstar

Hi GB :seeya: I'll add a couple too ~
"WHEN was Maria killed?" and if it wasn't until Dec. 15, "what were her plans for spending the night of the 14th/15th until the bus left and why did she come back to your house?" [/*]

Great questions, Sun.....

imoo:seeya:

[baywench]

Originally posted by CANDYKISSES


Very poignant statement there Bay.

~~ Unfortunately it has left an irrevocable doubt IMO ~~

We will never know because the only one left to talk is not worthy of trust on this issue any way you look at it from my POV.

While I am not dismissing the idea that Cesar could sing like a bird when he is taken into US custody, we can never confirm what really went on in the spring of 2007 with Maria gone. :(

We are left seeking justice for her murder and a polarizing rape allegation hanging out there.
JMO. [/*]

The rape charge is polarizing, and although I sometimes think "What does it matter now?" it is the initial act (whether you think it is the rape or the reporting of it or both) that will set everything else in motion. It matters because of the motive, it matters because of infinite emotions that were involved, it matters whichever side you fall on. If you believe she was raped or not that she was murdered we all agree on. I thought when he was captured the argument would stop, but to my surprise it was still important. The scenarios are very different depending on how you see the rape issue. It matters. JMO

[sunstar]

Originally posted by GentleBreeze


Great questions, Sun.....

imoo:seeya: [/*]
I just wish there was some chance they'd be answered!! ;)

[martha]

Originally posted by baywench


Incredible post GB, I totally agree! [/*] ITA GB I think you or so right. You insight in this case is so good I hope cl will tell the truth. if he is going to get lwop he will have nothing to lose if he just tell the whole story and the truth about it.imho:rose:

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by baywench


The rape charge is polarizing, and although I sometimes think "What does it matter now?" it is the initial act (whether you think it is the rape or the reporting of it or both) that will set everything else in motion. It matters because of the motive, it matters because of infinite emotions that were involved, it matters whichever side you fall on. If you believe she was raped or not that she was murdered we all agree on. I thought when he was captured the argument would stop, but to my surprise it was still important. The scenarios are very different depending on how you see the rape issue. It matters. JMO [/*]

I agree the rape allegation will be very important in this case. It can provide a motive if he really was her rapist or it can make some puzzled if they think he was not and would make the motive harder to ascertain.

So I am sure the DA will use this as the triggering mechanism that resulted in her death in the end however we have no idea what the defense attorney will uncover before this goes to trial and he may say there is no motive because there was no rape and that Cesar actually loved her and they both continued to see each other discretely before this happened.

I actually think one of the most perplexing questions a jury will have to wrap their minds around is why would an accuser go to the very home of her alleged rapist. After all these months I still cannot make that mesh in my mind unless he wasn't her rapist at all.:shrug: Now the DA also can say the motive may have been because he had been falsely accused and his professional and his married life pretty much screwed then when she came there face to face with him.... in an uncontrollable rage he killed her.

But I also wonder how they are going to get in that allegation since he was never even charged with the crime. Imo it would be highly prejudicial to him in the murder trial so it will be interesting to see what a Judge lets in to make sure his rights to a fair trial are up held. I sure wouldn't want to be the Judge in this case that is so complex since they have to walk cautiously making sure the trial is not overturned if they get a conviction.

imoo

[baywench]

Originally posted by GentleBreeze


I agree the rape allegation will be very important in this case. It can provide a motive if he really was her rapist or it can make some puzzled if they think he was not and would make the motive harder to ascertain.

So I am sure the DA will use this as the triggering mechanism that resulted in her death in the end however we have no idea what the defense attorney will uncover before this goes to trial and he may say there is no motive because there was no rape and that Cesar actually loved her and they both continued to see each other discretely before this happened.

I actually think one of the most perplexing questions a jury will have to wrap their minds around is why would an accuser go to the very home of her alleged rapist. After all these months I still cannot make that mesh in my mind unless he wasn't her rapist at all.:shrug: Now the DA also can say the motive may have been because he had been falsely accused and his professional and his married life pretty much screwed then when she came there face to face with him.... in an uncontrollable rage he killed her.

But I also wonder how they are going to get in that allegation since he was never even charged with the crime. Imo it would be highly prejudicial to him in the murder trial so it will be interesting to see what a Judge lets in to make sure his rights to a fair trial are up held. I sure wouldn't want to be the Judge in this case that is so complex since they have to walk cautiously making sure the trial is not overturned if they get a conviction.

imoo [/*]

So true. Where did the info about him staying in Mexico and being charged come from? I must have missed that. I will have to lose my job when this goes to trial, we don't have trutv here either so I'll probably have to move. Sigh, I'll be unemployed anyway, might as well relocate to a more up to date county. LOL

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by baywench


So true. Where did the info about him staying in Mexico and being charged come from? I must have missed that. I will have to lose my job when this goes to trial, we don't have trutv here either so I'll probably have to move. Sigh, I'll be unemployed anyway, might as well relocate to a more up to date county. LOL [/*]

LOL I hear ya! I haven't been this interested in a case since Mary Winkler's. I think this may be one of the most intriguing cases I have ever kept up with. Everything is such a mystery..... so many things left hanging.

I have no idea where that info came from. I had read before iirc that Mexico hardly ever gives someone LWOP. I guess they feel they should do a stiff sentence and then have a chance to get out. They could decide to try him in Mexico from what I understand but I don't think that is going to happen. Seems like all the procedures are going forward to extradition. I sure would like to know what was said in the hearings they have to have in his behalf there though.

imoo

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by sunstar

I just wish there was some chance they'd be answered!! ;) [/*]

I don't think we are the only ones that wish that, Sun. This time for some strange reason I think OCSD hopes he does too. I have had that impression since the very first of the case. It makes me feel there are things that do not add up and won't add up unless Laurean tells his side of the story.

imoo

[Babes]

Hello Guys and Gals

I have a question - Did you read somewhere or any article if CL and Maria are also communicating in myspace or yahoo secretly?

[IvySterling]

Originally posted by GentleBreeze


I don't think we are the only ones that wish that, Sun. This time for some strange reason I think OCSD hopes he does too. I have had that impression since the very first of the case. It makes me feel there are things that do not add up and won't add up unless Laurean tells his side of the story.

imoo [/*]
GB, do you think anyone has ventured to Mexico to speak with Cesar, or was that all 'hype' over at enblogs?

[IvySterling]

Originally posted by Babes
Hello Guys and Gals

I have a question - Did you read somewhere or any article if CL and Maria are also communicating in myspace or yahoo secretly? [/*]
:confused: Did you mean were they?

[Babes]

Originally posted by IvySterling

:confused: Did you mean were they? [/*]


Yep - obviously - sorry english is my 2nd language so am not perfect on my grammar :D

[IvySterling]

Originally posted by Babes



Yep - obviously - sorry english is my 2nd language so am not perfect on my grammar :D [/*]
NP on the wording.

I still don't understand your post, that's how they found out where Cesar was through their Internet communications.

[Babes]

Originally posted by IvySterling

NP on the wording.

I still don't understand your post, that's how they found out where Cesar was through their Internet communications. [/*]


Right but are there any histories on myspace that Maria communicated with Cesar secretly in there before? I checked myspace and it looks like someone else is logging on Maria's myspace up to this date. Someone knows her password - I dont know how they were able to get it. ( Looks like Maria likes to share passwords and atm pin numbers to "friends" or families IMO .While Cesar's profile is "single" and there was no login since 1/5/08. It means nobody checked that account since 1/5/08 and maybe there are some answers or clue on his "private messages" in that account.

IMO LE should investigate both accounts not just the newer accounts they created in myspace and yahoo

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by IvySterling

GB, do you think anyone has ventured to Mexico to speak with Cesar, or was that all 'hype' over at enblogs? [/*]

I honestly don't know what to think about that anymore. We were told that we would be learning who was going yet that has been two weeks ago and not a word about it since.

I don't see what the big secretive deal would be no matter who it happens to be.

imoo

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by Babes
Hello Guys and Gals

I have a question - Did you read somewhere or any article if CL and Maria are also communicating in myspace or yahoo secretly? [/*]

Yes we heard that. We also heard about a week ago that they are releasing more search warrants and some that covers that very issue.

Suppose to be over 200 pages but there again that was the tip yet there has been no followup on that since.

imoo

[Babes]

Originally posted by GentleBreeze


Yes we heard that. We also heard about a week ago that they are releasing more search warrants and some that covers that very issue.

Suppose to be over 200 pages but there again that was the tip yet there has been no followup on that since.

imoo [/*]

Hi Gentlebreeze :seeya:


How come no one checked the Armando Laurean's profile? Last login was 1/5/2008.

[IvySterling]

Originally posted by GentleBreeze


I honestly don't know what to think about that anymore. We were told that we would be learning who was going yet that has been two weeks ago and not a word about it since.

I don't see what the big secretive deal would be no matter who it happens to be.

imoo [/*]
I think they post too many things without thinking, some for re-action, and some things they post are not factual.

The aren't LE, so what they blog about isn't put under microscope for accuracy I guess.

Nite all, will check in again tomorrow :seeya:

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by IvySterling

I think they post too many things without thinking, some for re-action, and some things they post are not factual.

The aren't LE, so what they blog about isn't put under microscope for accuracy I guess.

Nite all, will check in again tomorrow :seeya: [/*]

Night Ivy! I am turning in too!

Busy day! lol

imoo:seeya:

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by Babes


Hi Gentlebreeze :seeya:


How come no one checked the Armando Laurean's profile? Last login was 1/5/2008. [/*]

Surely the FBI checked his own myspace account.

I would hope so anyway.

imoo

[Charlotte]

Originally posted by nelkirk

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Charlotte

I dunno... the MC is now saying that when Maria reported her allegations in May, she told them of two sexual encounters with Laurean -- one in March that she herself told them was consensual, and the other in April that she said was rape. That's in the letter from Lt. Gen. Kramlich to Rep. Turner. Answer #1, paragraph 2.

Was it misreported early on that both instances were claimed by her to be rape? Or did the MC say that very thing at one time, only to say something different now?

If so, why?

Are they re-writing history? Lying? Correcting misinformation? I think the actual number of alleged rapes reported by Maria to anyone concerned needs to be settled before anyone further uses supposed facts as ammunition against a grieving mother.

Right now, the MC is stating to a member of Congress that Maria reported one sexual assualt.

Kinda like what you said her mother recalls Maria telling her on the phone, no?

JMO
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by caejde
From what I remember from the press conference back in January, it was said she reported 2 incidences and it was determined the first was consensual. I dont' have a link so....JMO.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



From the January 15 Marine Corps Press Conference:
http://www.nbc17.com/midatlantic/nc...01-15-0028.html


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On May 11th, 2007, LCpl Lauterbach confides in her Officer-in-Charge two incidents of a sexual nature with Cpl Laurean. After some initial discussions, the command’s Uniform Victim Advocate meets with LCpl Lauterbach and explains the Victim Advocate Program to her. The UVA takes LCpl Lauterbach to the Naval Criminal Investigative Service office aboard Camp Lejeune to file a formal complaint. LCpl Lauterbach reports to NCIS an alleged sexual encounter with Cpl Laurean on March 26, 2007, and a second encounter approximately two weeks later. LCpl Lauterbach alleged she had been raped by Cpl Laurean. The command’s UVA accompanies LCpl Lauterbach to the medical department for a medical exam. Due to the length of time that elapsed between the alleged assault and the complaint, a forensic examination, or rape kit, is not performed. However, a “Well Woman” exam is performed to include a pregnancy test. The pregnancy test result is negative.

NCIS opens a rape investigation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



General Kramlich states:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LCPL Maria Lauterbach reported two sexual encounters with CPL. Cesar Laurean. The first incident was alleged to have occurred on March 26, 2007, and the second on an undetermined date in early April 2007.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Also in A1 General Kramlich states:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In May 2007, when LCPL Lauterbach formally made allegations of rape against CPL Laurean, the command was only made aware of two reported sexual encounters.--one sexual encounter that was characterized as consensual by LCPL Lauterbach and the other alleged by her to be rape.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


http://media.mgnetwork.com/nct/imag...nequestions.pdf


So in answer to your questions:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Was it misreported early on that both instances were claimed by her to be rape? Or did the MC say that very thing at one time, only to say something different now?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NO and NO


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If so, why?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The MC's early statements are consistent with General Kramlich's reply to Rep Turner...


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Are they re-writing history?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NO

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lying?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NO

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Correcting misinformation?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NO

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think the actual number of alleged rapes reported by Maria to anyone concerned needs to be settled before anyone further uses supposed facts as ammunition against a grieving mother.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There were two encounters one characterized by the victim to be consensual and one that the victim alleged to be rape.

Her mother states that her daughter called her and said that she had been attacked on April 10, 2007.

The MC statements show that LCPL Maria Lauterbach may have been inconsistent in her report to her family...

While she told the MC that she chose to engage in a sexual encounter with Cpl Cesar Laurean on March 26, 2007 and that there was a second sexual encounter after the March 26, 2007 encounter and that she did not give her consent. (Actually it was reported by NCIS that she told him no and he stopped)

She neglected to tell her mother (and family) that she had consented to have sex with CPL Laurean on March 26, 2007 and then refused to have sex with him on a second sexual encounter in early April 2007.

[/*]

Nelkirk,

You agree that according to the MC, Maria alleged that only one of the two sexual encounters she had with Laurean was rape. Yet you also say that it was not misreported that she claimed both instances to be rape. How do you figure that the press saying -- apparently in error -- that she claimed two rapes, was not misreporting?

Obviously, the matter of how many times Maria said she was raped is not settled, at least not here. There are at least two posts after yours that reference Maria claiming two rapes.

My point remains that the MC is saying that Maria reported only one alleged rape to them, consistent with what Maria's mother has said she was also told by Maria, in reply to Candykisses' assertion claiming that Maria told her mother of one rape, and the MC of two. Simple as that. If questionable info being repeated conflicts with other info out there, it's subject to being pointed out, which is what I did. I appreciate your post supporting my contention.

As far as the idea that she neglected to tell her family of the consensual encounter, what makes you so sure of that? Has her family stated that? I must have missed it.

All I've seen is statements from her family denying that she had "some sort of friendly relationship" with Laurean AFTER the rape allegations, in response to that having been publicly suggested by the military as a way to explain why they hadn't viewed Laurean as a flight risk. If there are quotes from her family saying more or other than that, I haven't seen them, but I'd like to.

JMO

[nelkirk]

The question asked was "Was it misreported early on that both instances were claimed by her to be rape? Or did the MC say that very thing at one time, only to say something different now?"

http://www.nbc17.com/midatlantic/ncn/news.apx.-content-articles-NCN-2008-01-15-0028.html
On May 11th, 2007, LCpl Lauterbach confides in her Officer-in-Charge two incidents of a sexual nature with Cpl Laurean.

According to this same reference:
LCpl Lauterbach reports to NCIS an alleged sexual encounter with Cpl Laurean on March 26, 2007, and a second encounter approximately two weeks later. LCpl Lauterbach alleged she had been raped by Cpl Laurean.

LCpl Lauterbach goes to NCIS to make a statement regarding her pregnancy and belief that Cpl Laurean is the father as a result of the alleged rape.

However, she continues to maintain that she was raped by Cpl Laurean.

Again the queston was:Was it misreported early on that both instances were claimed by her to be rape? Or did the MC say that very thing at one time, only to say something different now?

No the MC did not misreport early on that both instances were claimed by her as rape...because it is obvious from the MC statements that Maria Lauterbach considered both of these encounters to be rape. The January 15, 2007 Press Conference account is the same as the account given by Gen. Kramlich. The links are given.

Since both accounts are the same the MC is not re-writing history, nor lying, nor correcting some misinformation.

My answer was based solely on the two links provided above. This is the MC's official statement, it speaks for itself.

In the above questions there was nothing to indicate that the question included any reference about what the press (media) had reported or misreported. Since most of the early reports by media outlets carried some degree of misinformation who knows what the press said.

I chose to believe the statements made by the USMC. Other posters are free to chose whom they wish to believe.

Maria reported two incidents of a sexual nature...the MC was investigating two incidents of a sexual nature...the NCIS was investigating two incidents of sexual nature...during the process of the investigation it was determined through the statements of Maria Lauterbach that one of those incidents might fall into the category of a consensual sexual encounter. But the MC/NCIS investigated both as rape since she had originally reported them as rape. To this day neither the MC or the NCIS has filed charges against CPL Laurean for rape, nor have they made any official statement whether the incidents she reported as rape were actually rape or consensual based on the evidence of the investigation.

Her family has come forth with their own press releases that have maintained that ML called her mother and said that she had been attacked on April 10, 2007. And according to the MC Presser she did not give a date...two weeks after March 26, 2007 would be April 5, 2007. Neither here nor there, but then again we do not know who is misreporting.

But one might ask why give a press release as to the "alleged rape" and even supply a "date" and yet not report that she admitted to a consensual encounter with her "alleged rapist" just days before a second encounter in which she says "I was attacked"?

By the same token it could be said that her statement to the MC/NCIS that she had a consensual encounter with the her "alleged rapist" does indeed prove that she had "some sort of friendly relationship with Laurean". But then you also have the same family saying that she exaggerated the truth when she was cornered or thought that her actions might be questioned.

Perhaps she neglected to tell her family the particulars of the encounters between heself and Laurean. Her family is demanding the whole truth, yet they either were not given the information by Maria or they have chosed not to include that in their press releases.

As for Maria and Cesar having a "friendly relationship" after the incidents of a sexual nature it remains a mystery known only to their family, friends,the LE, investigators and the DA.. But the DA has made the statement that CL was unfaithful to CSL. And CRS has stated that ML contacted CL on the day she went UA. No one has made a definitive statement yet.

JMO

[Charlotte]

Originally posted by nelkirk
The question asked was


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Was it misreported early on that both instances were claimed by her to be rape? Or did the MC say that very thing at one time, only to say something different now?"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/*]

Correct. In other words, "Did the media initially misreport what the MC said, or is the MC changing what it says now?" Your answer was "NO and NO," which is what I questioned. It would seem to be either one or the other.

Since both accounts are the same the MC is not re-writing history, nor lying, nor correcting some misinformation.

My answer was based solely on the two links provided above. This is the MC's official statement, it speaks for itself.

I also went by those two statements in my answer to CK. But the press has reported it differently, so did they screw up, or did they hear something from the MC other than the Jan. 15th PC and the letter from Kramlich to Turner? Has every statement the MC has made to the press or to the OC authorities outside those two venues now been deemed "unofficial?" Some statements between the PC and the Kramlich letter conflict -- which is the "official" statement in those cases?

In the above questions there was nothing to indicate that the question included any reference about what the press (media) had reported or misreported.

I'm sorry the question wasn't phrased clearly enough. I'll try to be more detailed from now on.

Since most of the early reports by media outlets carried some degree of misinformation who knows what the press said.

Apparently, the posters here know what the press said, as evidenced by the repetition of it. You even gave examples of the various press reports a couple of paragraphs later. The question is why the press reports varied.

Her family has come forth with their own press releases that have maintained that ML called her mother and said that she had been attacked on April 10, 2007. And according to the MC Presser she did not give a date...two weeks after March 26, 2007 would be April 5, 2007. Neither here nor there, but then again we do not know who is misreporting.

I've seen the date reported as April 11, too. You're right -- we don't know who is misreporting.

By the same token it could be said that her statement to the MC/NCIS that she had a consensual encounter with the her "alleged rapist" does indeed prove that she had "some sort of friendly relationship with Laurean". But then you also have the same family saying that she exaggerated the truth when she was cornered or thought that her actions might be questioned.

It didn't sound as though the military was going by her statement when they gave that "friendly relationship" quote to the press (before ML's body was even dug up). They were going by information that had recently come to their attention, most likely the letter that Laurean left behind when he ran. Again, the implication by the military was that the two had carried on a "friendly relationship of some sort" AFTER the rape allegations had been made. This is what Maria's family has been refuting.

Perhaps she neglected to tell her family the particulars of the encounters between heself and Laurean. Her family is demanding the whole truth, yet they either were not given the information by Maria or they have chosed not to include that in their press releases.

I'm glad that you've softened it to "perhaps." Thank you.
As for her family choosing to discuss only the rape allegation and not the details of Maria's sex life in their interviews, all I can say is good for them. They'd be called all sorts of terrible things if they had done that. Look what happened over the bipolar and lying comments.

As for Maria and Cesar having a "friendly relationship" after the incidents of a sexual nature it remains a mystery known only to their family, friends,the LE, investigators and the DA.. But the DA has made the statement that CL was unfaithful to CSL. And CRS has stated that ML contacted CL on the day she went UA. No one has made a definitive statement yet.

Yes, the DA stated that CSL was upset over CL having cheated on her.
The consensual encounter in March would qualify as cheating to her, I believe. ML contacting CL on the day she disappeared may or may not indicate a "friendly relationship." Her being dead and buried in his backyard strikes me as rather unfriendly, on the whole. As you said, whether the two had a friendly relationship after the rape allegation is known only to family, friends, etc., -- but I disagree that no one has made a definitive statement regarding it. Maria's family has been quite definitive on it. IMO

[martha]

Good morning everyone hope you or all ok today. just checking in and everything is quite on this board. no news. I will be in and out hoping someone will get some news from cl and to tell us he is on his way to the states.Yes GB this is the only case except mary winkler that I have just really wanted to know every detail about. both or so sad. o/t but did you all see where the madam hung herself???? That is strange!!!!!bye for now :rose:

[s.breda]

In reading the above posts which were very informative. I still believe the MC was and is in a CYA mode. jmo

[strick10]

Originally posted by s.breda
In reading the above posts which were very informative. I still believe the MC was and is in a CYA mode. jmo [/*]

I don't agree with that. There is no need to cover anything in this case. But everyone is entitled to their own opinion. No disrespect intended, just stating my view.

[martha]

Originally posted by s.breda
In reading the above posts which were very informative. I still believe the MC was and is in a CYA mode. jmo [/*]Thank you for saying such a sweet thing but I don;t have much to inform on I always come to this board to find out what is going on.I think the LE and MC both have told all the people in this case to keep quite. I can;t understand why we can hear something about cl. maybe today they will tell something. I hope they get him back to the states but they still will make him keep his mouth shut imho. Ever if he did love ml I just could not understand why he said that. and the part about the proof well maybe he thinks they can not prove he did anything???? I don;t know what to think about him saying both things. I know if he was my son I would be in mexico right now. I would have been there the min they caught him. so many things about this case is still not clear.It is a very SAD case!!!! :rose:

[martha]

Originally posted by strick10


I don't agree with that. There is no need to cover anything in this case. But everyone is entitled to their own opinion. No disrespect intended, just stating my view. [/*] You or so right about that no reason for them to cover up anything in this case that is why I don;t understand why we or not hearing anything in this case. wonder if any of his family has been to mexico to see him???:rose:

[strick10]

Originally posted by martha
You or so right about that no reason for them to cover up anything in this case that is why I don;t understand why we or not hearing anything in this case. wonder if any of his family has been to mexico to see him???:rose: [/*]

I can't see how someone in CALs family hasn't already paid a visit. That's just something we don't know, like many other things in this case.

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by strick10


I don't agree with that. There is no need to cover anything in this case. But everyone is entitled to their own opinion. No disrespect intended, just stating my view. [/*]

Yes, that is true strick. I happen to agree with your view.

There is not one thing to show they covered up anything in this case. If fact to think they would have some big cover up for a low ranking expendable Corporal is just not logical in my view.

Again from my point of view only I don't think there would be a DA in the state of NC that would have even taken this case to a GJ. It seems it was simply a he said/she said situation with no corroborative evidence which would be needed to prove the case BARD.

imoo

[caejde]

Originally posted by GentleBreeze


Yes, that is true strick. I happen to agree with your view.

There is not one thing to show they covered up anything in this case. If fact to think they would have some big cover up for a low ranking expendable Corporal is just not logical in my view.

Again from my point of view only I don't think there would be a DA in the state of NC that would have even taken this case to a GJ. It seems it was simply a he said/she said situation with no corroborative evidence which would be needed to prove the case BARD.

imoo [/*]

And the DA in Onslow Co. did just have that recently. Didn't take a case because he said he could prove sex but no rape.

[s.breda]

Originally posted by GentleBreeze


Yes, that is true strick. I happen to agree with your view.

There is not one thing to show they covered up anything in this case. If fact to think they would have some big cover up for a low ranking expendable Corporal is just not logical in my view.

Again from my point of view only I don't think there would be a DA in the state of NC that would have even taken this case to a GJ. It seems it was simply a he said/she said situation with no corroborative evidence which would be needed to prove the case BARD.

imoo [/*]

There was a pregnancy and the person of interest said he never had sex with Maria. Why would he lie if it wasn't a rape? The investigators wouldn't have said anything to Christina. jmo

[strick10]

Originally posted by s.breda


There was a pregnancy and the person of interest said he never had sex with Maria. Why would he lie if it wasn't a rape? The investigators wouldn't have said anything to Christina. jmo [/*]

Yes there was a pregnancy most probable not the product of the alleged rape. Maria herself indicated in Nov. that the baby was not conceived during the alleged rape dates/timeframe. IMO they both lied. He lied because even if the alleged rape could not be proved he still had an affair and how was he going to cover up having an affair if/when he was charged with adultry. Christina would've found out if that happened and it's obvious she was aware of an affair per the last press release given. IMO Maria lied because CAL really ticked her off and her reporting an alleged rape was possibly her revenge. Either that or the word was getting around that they were having an affair and to save herself from any trouble she called it rape. JMO.

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by s.breda


There was a pregnancy and the person of interest said he never had sex with Maria. Why would he lie if it wasn't a rape? The investigators wouldn't have said anything to Christina. jmo [/*]

Why would he deny it?:tongue: Why does it seem that all married men including those with children, lie about having sex outside of their marriage with another cutie?

He knew he out ranked her............he knew he could be charged with fraternization which would not meet expectation of a stellar Marine.

:shrug:

imo

[nelkirk]

Originally posted by strick10


I don't agree with that. There is no need to cover anything in this case. But everyone is entitled to their own opinion. No disrespect intended, just stating my view. [/*]

The same could be said for her family, who have inconsistencies in their statements. As have the media outlets, JD News has made several corrections on their website.

[s.breda]

Originally posted by GentleBreeze


Why would he deny it?:tongue: Why does it seem that all married men including those with children, lie about having sex outside of their marriage with another cutie?

He knew he out ranked her............he knew he could be charged with fraternization which would not meet expectation of a stellar Marine.

:shrug:

imo [/*]


It's just by denying it, he really got himself in a sling. Most men who are confronted with rape allegations say it was consensual sex.

My post was about his denying having sex period. You didn't understand my post.

Since you are admitting he out ranked her now, the rape could have been going forward because of abuse of authority, I would think.

jmo

[martha]

Originally posted by GentleBreeze


Why would he deny it?:tongue: Why does it seem that all married men including those with children, lie about having sex outside of their marriage with another cutie?

He knew he out ranked her............he knew he could be charged with fraternization which would not meet expectation of a stellar Marine.

:shrug:

imo [/*] Ha the men I have know do lie about having sex with another woman most of the time they or caught in the lie but they will still lie about it. 0some may tell their wifes the truth but not many. If a man really regrets what he has done then he will tell the truth and hope to be able to keep his marriage togeather. cl said he loved ml now does that sound like someone who had no sex with her? somone said this was ml way of getting back at cl by telling it was a rape. I can see how she would use that to get back at him. maybe he was not going to leave his wife for ml. for some reason I still think they were having a afair and ml knew about his wife and daughter all along. if you work close to someone in a office it is hard not to know a lot about their personal life. In the office where i worked we all shared parts of our personal lives with each other. It is just something people do. jmho:rose:

[martha]

I was just thinking if when ml told him to stop he did then he had a lot of control of him self. more than most men. then why did he get so out of control so bad that he killed her in such a fit of anger? just a thought no proof of anything :rose:

[CANDYKISSES]

Originally posted by GentleBreeze


Good Evening Martha!

I think she knew he was married even before the first encounter. He worked in close proximity to her. I don't think he was trying to pretend he was single with Maria as she sat at one desk and then turn around and talk about his little daughter to Lisa who worked with them both. I think like any 20 year old she like and desired him and knew he was married but when they started having sex she knew she could get in trouble having an affair with a married man so she got cold feet. She told her friend that she was in a relationship she knew she had to get out of and boy this was one way she could distance herself from that.

I think if this constitutes rape then any of us who has sons, brothers or whomever should be very worried. If this constitutes rape there will be a lot of males out there who will be targeted like sitting ducks. She said that he ceased when she told him no so if he stops on her command he is still guilty of rape? That makes no commonsense and the thoughts of it are really quite frightening.

If the boundary definition is so murky, unclear and non-defining how can they possibly know the ground rules? Will this mean if the woman becomes disgruntled for numerous of reasons they can say the encounter the night before wasn't consensual?

To me by trying to protect the rights of women they are sacrificing the males rights to clearly understand the rules in the first place.

If that is all it takes where in the world will it end? Like I said when the men have to become mind readers something is very wrong and it seems that is exactly what Maria was expecting him to do.:shrug:

imoo [/*]

That's a good question and I feel like we may never know the answer, but you have a well written post addressing the need for men to be on the lookout for situations that could easily be twisted to fit an agenda.

Unfortunately, it looks like Maria may have been either regretting choices she made, possibly angry at Cesar, fearful of pregnancy, or fearful of being found out by the MC. WE may never know for sure, but the idea of a rape judging by what we've heard so far is just not looking feasible IMO.

ALL JMO. :shrug:

[CANDYKISSES]

Originally posted by baywench


The rape charge is polarizing, and although I sometimes think "What does it matter now?" it is the initial act (whether you think it is the rape or the reporting of it or both) that will set everything else in motion. It matters because of the motive, it matters because of infinite emotions that were involved, it matters whichever side you fall on. If you believe she was raped or not that she was murdered we all agree on. I thought when he was captured the argument would stop, but to my surprise it was still important. The scenarios are very different depending on how you see the rape issue. It matters. JMO [/*]

Unfortunately I feel the same way Baywench. It seems no matter what, the rape allegations will be laced into this case.

It's going to be hard to handle during a trial with no charges ever being brought IMO. :(

There's no question we all want justice for Maria and her unborn child. :rose:

jmo

[CANDYKISSES]

Originally posted by martha
You or so right about that no reason for them to cover up anything in this case that is why I don;t understand why we or not hearing anything in this case. wonder if any of his family has been to mexico to see him???:rose: [/*]

Hi Martha, I'd like to know what the situation is at present myself in Mexico. I guess sooner or later someone will take a look but with the political mania, these cases are taking a back seat. :(

JMO

[s.breda]

Originally posted by martha
I was just thinking if when ml told him to stop he did then he had a lot of control of him self. more than most men. then why did he get so out of control so bad that he killed her in such a fit of anger? just a thought no proof of anything :rose: [/*]


Martha, he may have stopped when told to stop, but not soon enough (if you know what I mean). jmo

[martha]

Originally posted by s.breda



Martha, he may have stopped when told to stop, but not soon enough (if you know what I mean). jmo [/*]Yep sweet pie I do know what you mean. I get mad at my own self for doing so much thinking and posting it on this board ha. I just really want to know what happened between cl and ml and what caused this awful thing to happen. I just can;t understand why it had to end like it did. i know they were all so very young and at that age we don;t make wise disc. at times. I even make mistakes at my age. I do try to think and talk to someone about it before I do anything big.ha I know we all want to know what went so wrong. We will never forget ml and her baby. :rose:

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by CANDYKISSES


That's a good question and I feel like we may never know the answer, but you have a well written post addressing the need for men to be on the lookout for situations that could easily be twisted to fit an agenda.

Unfortunately, it looks like Maria may have been either regretting choices she made, possibly angry at Cesar, fearful of pregnancy, or fearful of being found out by the MC. WE may never know for sure, but the idea of a rape judging by what we've heard so far is just not looking feasible IMO.

ALL JMO. :shrug: [/*]

Hasn't it been said that it takes the human brain 8 seconds to process information and react?

I thought I had read that before.

imoo

[IvySterling]

Originally posted by GentleBreeze


Hasn't it been said that it takes the human brain 8 seconds to process information and react?

I thought I had read that before.

imoo [/*]
That process may take longer as years roll on :D

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by IvySterling

That process may take longer as years roll on :D [/*]

:D :seeya:

[CANDYKISSES]

Originally posted by GentleBreeze


Hasn't it been said that it takes the human brain 8 seconds to process information and react?

I thought I had read that before.

imoo [/*]

Not sure on that one GB, but I would think at least that to be true.

JMO.:seeya:

[nelkirk]

So where is the evidence that he lied when he denied having sexual contact with LCpl Lauterbach?

On May 18th, 2007, NCIS interviews Cpl Laurean and he denies any sexual contact with LCpl Lauterbach.
http://www.nbc17.com/midatlantic/ncn/news.apx.-content-articles-NCN-2008-01-15-0028.html

A-14 http://media.mgnetwork.com/nct/images/links/marinequestions.pdf
...no evidence could be collected from LCPL Lauterbach that would provide a DNA comparative sample to link CPL Laurean to the alleged assault...

Additionally on this day, trial counsel re-interviews LCpl Lauterbach who readjusts her statement that her pregnancy is a result of the rape.
http://www.nbc17.com/midatlantic/ncn/news.apx.-content-articles-NCN-2008-01-15-0028.html

Later on November 5, 2007, LCPL Lauterbach informed the military prosecutor she was certain the child was not Cpl. Laurean's based upon a recent Obstetrics and Gynocological (OBGYN) examination and recalculated conception date.
http://media.mgnetwork.com/nct/images/links/marinequestions.pdf

It has yet to be proven that he had sexual contact with LCpl Lauterbach. Her family spokespersons have stated that she did not have a friendly relationship with Cpl. Laurean. (sorry no link). This statement then would support that there was no consensual sexual contact between the two, which directly contradicts the statements made by LCPL Lauterbach to the military. (as per links above)

So far no evidence has been presented that CPL Laurean has lied when he denied sexual contact with LCPL Lauterbach.

No rape charges, no adultry charges, because there is no evidence that CPL Laurean had sexual contact...

A recent statement made by "FBI sources" have stated that CPL Laurean is not the father of LCPL Lauterbach's child. If this is indeed true, then this statement lends creditiblity to the statement made by CPL Laurean that he did not have sexual contact.

Without evidence to the contrary there is nothing to prove that CPL Laurean had sexual contact with LCPL Lauterbach.

Discuss the evidence not the personalities involved please...

[CANDYKISSES]

Originally posted by IvySterling

That process may take longer as years roll on :D [/*]

I was thinking that too Ivy. :o

Just observing human behavior can be alarming as to how long it takes the the brain to engage at times.

JMO.

[hinman]

Originally posted by CANDYKISSES


Snipped:

It's going to be hard to handle during a trial with no charges ever being brought IMO. :(



jmo [/*] The case was never closed so I guess charges could still be brought and I am curious if at trial that could be brought up that CL is being investigated for an alleged rape charge since that is what is going on.

[strick10]

Originally posted by hinman
The case was never closed so I guess charges could still be brought and I am curious if at trial that could be brought up that CL is being investigated for an alleged rape charge since that is what is going on. [/*]

IIRC I believe the MC has said the rape allegation case has been closed. Anyone else remember if that is the case?

[CANDYKISSES]

Originally posted by hinman
The case was never closed so I guess charges could still be brought and I am curious if at trial that could be brought up that CL is being investigated for an alleged rape charge since that is what is going on. [/*]

I would venture to guess the defense will file a motion referencing it being too prejudicial. But that's JMO Hinman. :read:

[hinman]

Originally posted by strick10


IIRC I believe the MC has said the rape allegation case has been closed. Anyone else remember if that is the case? [/*]I thought they were still trying to get DNA. I did not know they closed the case.

My main argument was that they should of closed the case a long time ago if there was no proof regardless of DNA.

I guess I will have to stop arguing that if the case is closed I just had not read that.

[strick10]

Originally posted by hinman
I thought they were still trying to get DNA. I did not know they closed the case.

My main argument was that they should of closed the case a long time ago if there was no proof regardless of DNA.

I guess I will have to stop arguing that if the case is closed I just had not read that. [/*]

Yes they obtained the babies DNA to determine if CAL was the father. Normally I would think the case would've been closed because of no proof however Maria was with child. IMO I think the MC was trying to ensure that there was absolutely no question that any sexual contact was made between the two, hence wanting the babys DNA. It is obvious that the baby was not a result of the alleged rape per Marias comment, however, IMO the MC was going to charge false allegations and/or statements once the baby was born in Feb. If the baby was CALs that meant Maria omitted to tell them they had been intimate in May and that CAL lied about the no sex.

Let me see if I can find that statement about the case being closed after Maria was found.

I'll see if I can find that comment.

[strick10]

I may be wrong in thinking that the rape allegation case was probably closed. In Gen. Kramlichs 31 Mar 08 response to Turner he states that the allegations are subject of an ongoing JAG/NCIS investigation. Still looking though just in case something changed from 31 Mar 08 to the end of Apr.

[martha]

if the baby was not cl and he said he did not have sex with ml then how was they going to charge him with rape? Maybe ml knew she was in trouble for telling it was rape when it was not. Have they proved the baby was not cl? if cl knew he had no sex with her and the baby was not his why would he feel like he had to hurt her in anyway? ml was the one going to be in a lot of trouble with the MC. I think she told her mother it was a rape because she knew her mother was going to really mad at her for having sex with a married man or I guess the other man was married. :rose:

[hinman]

Originally posted by strick10
I may be wrong in thinking that the rape allegation case was probably closed. In Gen. Kramlichs 31 Mar 08 response to Turner he states that the allegations are subject of an ongoing JAG/NCIS investigation. Still looking though just in case something changed from 31 Mar 08 to the end of Apr. [/*]Thanks for looking strick. I appreciate it. I hadn't heard it was closed so I thought I had missed something.

[hinman]

Originally posted by strick10


Yes they obtained the babies DNA to determine if CAL was the father. Normally I would think the case would've been closed because of no proof however Maria was with child. IMO I think the MC was trying to ensure that there was absolutely no question that any sexual contact was made between the two, hence wanting the babys DNA. It is obvious that the baby was not a result of the alleged rape per Marias comment, however, IMO the MC was going to charge false allegations and/or statements once the baby was born in Feb. If the baby was CALs that meant Maria omitted to tell them they had been intimate in May and that CAL lied about the no sex.

Let me see if I can find that statement about the case being closed after Maria was found.

I'll see if I can find that comment. [/*]I agree with this but I just personally feel that they should of closed the rape investigation since a person's integrity ( I can't think of the word I really want to use here) was on the line. They could of continued investigating false allegations and sexual encounters between the two them charges would not of been as serious as a rape charge would of been. CL life was on hold because of these allegations and if they were false it should not take over a year to clear his name.

[strick10]

Originally posted by hinman
I agree with this but I just personally feel that they should of closed the rape investigation since a person's integrity ( I can't think of the word I really want to use here) was on the line. They could of continued investigating false allegations and sexual encounters between the two them charges would not of been as serious as a rape charge would of been. CL life was on hold because of these allegations and if they were false it should not take over a year to clear his name. [/*]

I understand what you're saying, but, in the MC integrity is highly valued and they are required to fully investigate all allegations. No rock can be left unturned. The MC will not drop anything until they are sure that all areas have been looked at and it is 100% certain that a rape did not occur. In the MC you just can't make allegations and not expect for them be 1/2 way investigated. False allegations and false statements opens up a whole new case. They hold your feet to the fire.

If the end results were the same and the MC/NCIS had dropped the charges once it was proven that the rape did not happen based on no evidence and due to Marias inconsistant/untruthful statements can you imagine what an uproar that would be. NCIS tried to find something, anything that would confirm a rape and they did not find that which leads to the possiblity of a new case/charges of false allegations/statements had that baby been CALs. Had the baby not been CALs then he had no problem and Maria may have gotten reprimanded for false allegations but that would be the end of that. Even if Maria was to be reprimanded the false allegations/statements would have to be proved 100% without a doubt. This is difficult unless her statements clearly defined she was lying or she told NCIS that there was no rape.

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by Kathy*Rae
CANDYKISSES
Senior Member

Registered: Sep 2007
Location: Seeking JUSTICE
Posts: 4923

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by GentleBreeze


Hasn't it been said that it takes the human brain 8 seconds to process information and react?

I thought I had read that before.

imoo [/*]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Not sure on that one GB, but I would think at least that to be true.

JMO.


__________________
"I tell you everything that is really nothing, and nothing of what is everything, do not be fooled by what I am saying. Please listen carefully and try to hear what I am not saying." ~Charles C. Finn



:punch: Still processing here........ [/*]

LOL Candy has put up a link that said when a woman tells a man "no" he must stop within 1-2 seconds, iirc.

So I was saying that I have watched different shows where they said it takes the brain 8 seconds to process that information before the body will react . They have used it about car accidents and how the person will see they need to brake for up ahead traffic due to a traffic accident but it takes their foot approximately 8 seconds to react before they apply the brakes.

Now I probably have you in even more confusion now. lol

imoo

[s.breda]

I doubt it is closed until the DNA of the baby comes through. That's what the MC said they were waiting for. jmo

[Charlotte]

Originally posted by GentleBreeze


Hasn't it been said that it takes the human brain 8 seconds to process information and react?

I thought I had read that before.

imoo [/*]

I don't know if that's been said or not, but if it has I'd ask the person who said it to lay their finger on a hot stove burner and see if it takes them eight seconds to react. ;)

[CANDYKISSES]

I think there is a significant difference between a pain sensory response and the response to interpretation of the spoken word by the brain, but that is JMO. :D

[Charlotte]

Originally posted by CANDYKISSES
I think there is a significant difference between a pain sensory response and the response to interpretation of the spoken word by the brain, but that is JMO. :D [/*]

Here... CATCH!!! :D

[strick10]

Originally posted by s.breda
I doubt it is closed until the DNA of the baby comes through. That's what the MC said they were waiting for. jmo [/*]

Thanks s.breda. Do you have a link so I can save it? Don't know how much they can prove w/ the babys DNA in conjunction with the alleged rape. Be interesting know exactly why they want the DNAs.

[Charlotte]

Originally posted by strick10


Thanks s.breda. Do you have a link so I can save it? Don't know how much they can prove w/ the babys DNA in conjunction with the alleged rape. Be interesting know exactly why they want the DNAs. [/*]

I'm not s.breda, but glad to help you out. :)
This article is from April 11. Paragraphs 5 thru 7.

More details emerge of Marine's arrest (http://www.kinston.com/news/laurean_45733___article.html/lauterbach_marine.html)

[daniel green]

Originally posted by s.breda


Homicide cases have been won without the body.:shrug:

jmo [/*]

Yeah.

But nobody takes a rape case to trial without a complaining witness.

[Jan Powell]

Originally posted by s.breda
I believe he will be extradited to the U.S., tried in the U.S., and put in a U.S. prison.

Why in the world would Mexico want to spend one red cent on trying him there. Not a chance. imo

Why in the world would the U.S. be working on a treaty in reference to this case when a treaty is already in effect? That makes no sense to me. jmo [/*]

In the end I believe you will probably be right about the extradition to the US and trial here. We just aren't there yet.

The US has in the past broken the treaty with Mexico in the US criminal justice system and since he is a Mexican national, they have the right to protect their own.

By making a provisional arrest (to hold CL 60 days) for the State Dept they are signaling they will hand him over: " However, like most extradition agreements, the treaty between the United States and Mexico does not obligate either party to hand over its own nationals."

[martha]

Originally posted by CANDYKISSES
I think there is a significant difference between a pain sensory response and the response to interpretation of the spoken word by the brain, but that is JMO. :D [/*] yes I think you or right about this. jmho I don;t know anything about this tho. I just don;t believe there was a rape!!!! I have been wrong before ha I think cl will be back in the states sooner or later it may be a very long time. I keep going back in my mind to where I think they were having an affair. no way of knowing right now for sure. I know no matter how long it takes I will be watching for the out come of this case. My heart goes out to all of them because they were all so very young.maybe one day the truth will come out. I just wait for any little bit of news on this case. It has taken over a part of my life Ha,

[Jan Powell]

Originally posted by strick10


The US can try him in a foreign country? What does Article 4 entail? I don't know what it entails. Thanks. [/*]

The attached originated from the CA AG's office and was then published for TX. Since extradition is a US State Dept function the law part applies to all the states.

It's long but (to me) interesting.

http://www.oag.state.tx.us/AG_Publications/txts/article4_manual.htm#chap4

As a side note, Fox (Housley) reported after CL was taken into custody he was being interrogated by Mexican authorities. I'm not convinced Fox is correct IF he's not fighting the extradition.

[alter ego]

Originally posted by Jan Powell


In the end I believe you will probably be right about the extradition to the US and trial here. We just aren't there yet.

The US has in the past broken the treaty with Mexico in the US criminal justice system and since he is a Mexican national, they have the right to protect their own.

By making a provisional arrest (to hold CL 60 days) for the State Dept they are signaling they will hand him over: " However, like most extradition agreements, the treaty between the United States and Mexico does not obligate either party to hand over its own nationals." [/*]
When has the US ever broken it's extradiction treaty with Mexico?

Cesar is a US citizen, serving for the US military - not a Mexican national.

By making a provisional arrest, Mexico is adhering to the treaty and honoring the arrest warrant. Only the court will decide if Cesar will be extradicted, not the arresting officers.

[damienstoy]

Originally posted by alter ego

When has the US ever broken it's extradiction treaty with Mexico?

Cesar is a US citizen, serving for the US military - not a Mexican national.

By making a provisional arrest, Mexico is adhering to the treaty and honoring the arrest warrant. Only the court will decide if Cesar will be extradicted, not the arresting officers. [/*]

According to Mexican law, anyone born in Mexico retains citizenship, even if they become a citizen of another country. So yes, Mexico does consider Cesar to be a national, and they could possibly refuse to extradite him on that basis. I think it is unlikely that they will, though.

[alter ego]

Originally posted by damienstoy


According to Mexican law, anyone born in Mexico retains citizenship, even if they become a citizen of another country. So yes, Mexico does consider Cesar to be a national, and they could possibly refuse to extradite him on that basis. I think it is unlikely that they will, though. [/*]Ah, I see there were some changes in Mexico about nationality back in '96. Cesar only became a Mexican National after crossing back into Mexico. He was not a Mexican National when he committed the crime he is being charged with. Also, being a Mexican National is not the same as being a Mexican citizen. And again, the crime for which Cesar is charged was committed when he was a lawful US Citizen. Of course, Cesar's Mexican atty could argue otherwise.

I don't think Mexico will refuse to extradict him, either.

[s.breda]

I wonder why there is no news about how the extradition is going? i sure would like to have some.

[alter ego]

Originally posted by s.breda
I wonder why there is no news about how the extradition is going? i sure would like to have some. [/*]My guess is the paperwork is still being drawn up.

[martha]

Originally posted by s.breda
I wonder why there is no news about how the extradition is going? i sure would like to have some. [/*] ITA I don;t understand why they or so quite about this case. wish we could hear something. :rose:

[strick10]

Going back to the discussion regarding as to whether the rape allegations case had been closed by the MC. Here is where it was stated that the rape allegation portion of the case had been closed.

http://www.tcnewsnet.com/main.asp?SectionID=6&SubSectionID=6&ArticleID=147032

Turner had a phone conversation with General Michael Regner roughly two weeks ago. According to Mascho, Regner informed Turner that the Marine Corps "considers the sexual assault portion of the investigation to be concluded." However, Mascho said that Turner believes this contention is fraught with "serious discrepancies."

I suppose I'm not as forgetful as I thought it was.

[daniel green]

Originally posted by strick10


snipped

According to Mascho, Regner informed Turner that the Marine Corps "considers the sexual assault portion of the investigation to be concluded." [/*]

Thank you for finding this.

So that is that.

[s.breda]

They consider it closed or it is closed? Why the interest in the DNA of the child?

[martha]

so the rape case is closed but they still want to know the dna of the baby? so mary l and Turner is wanting to know if the Mc did everything they could to help ml? does that sound like mary is thinking about a case against the mc? If she is thinking about a suit against the mc I think she is wasting her time. A lot like va in the ans case. jmho:rose: :rose:

[strick10]

Originally posted by s.breda
They consider it closed or it is closed? Why the interest in the DNA of the child? [/*]

I'm not going to disect that statement. To me if it's considered closed then it is closed. Not sure why the interest in the DNA. Could be that the LE has asked for their input on the DNA. If a DNA test was already ran, which I don't think the state has done, maybe they are relying on the DoD's results which most likely would have more advanced techniques and tools in which to extract DNA from what remained of the baby.

[strick10]

Originally posted by martha
so the rape case is closed but they still want to know the dna of the baby? so mary l and Turner is wanting to know if the Mc did everything they could to help ml? does that sound like mary is thinking about a case against the mc? If she is thinking about a suit against the mc I think she is wasting her time. A lot like va in the ans case. jmho:rose: :rose: [/*]

I don't think Mary and Turner asked for the DNA. The DNA testing by the government came to before Turner started on his quest. IIRC the MC asked Mary for the authorization to conduct their own autopsy and DNA testing.

[martha]

well no one is on here today no news and i am sure everyone is waiting to hear something. maybe tomorrow we can get some news on this case. i sure hope so. i miss you all when you or not here posting but I know we don;t have anything to post about. i will chekc back later .:rose:

[IvySterling]

Originally posted by martha
well no one is on here today no news and i am sure everyone is waiting to hear something. maybe tomorrow we can get some news on this case. i sure hope so. i miss you all when you or not here posting but I know we don;t have anything to post about. i will chekc back later .:rose: [/*]
No Martha, not much to post about the past several days.

[martha]

Originally posted by IvySterling

No Martha, not much to post about the past several days. [/*] I know Ivy but I can;t help my self just coming to see if anyone has any news on this case. I know I will be coming here everyday until this case is closed. I know everyone will be posting a lot if and when we ever have a trial.ha Hope things or ok your way today. the weather has been very pretty here today. I am glad after the bad storm weather we had the other night. have a good night and take care of your self. :rose:

[IvySterling]

Originally posted by martha
I know Ivy but I can;t help my self just coming to see if anyone has any news on this case. I know I will be coming here everyday until this case is closed. I know everyone will be posting a lot if and when we ever have a trial.ha Hope things or ok your way today. the weather has been very pretty here today. I am glad after the bad storm weather we had the other night. have a good night and take care of your self. :rose: [/*]
I'm sending you a PM!

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by strick10


I don't think Mary and Turner asked for the DNA. The DNA testing by the government came to before Turner started on his quest. IIRC the MC asked Mary for the authorization to conduct their own autopsy and DNA testing. [/*]

Do they have to ask for permission since at the time of Maria's death she was an active Lance Corporal in the military? I thought they have that right since she was seen as government property, which sounds cold but the way they look at all military personnel, as you know.

I have wondered if they have technically closed all parts of the investigation except fulfilling the one order to collect DNA once the baby was born and that is all they are waiting for at this time and will do no further investigation once that order is completed which was already decided upon when ML was alive.

imoo

[martha]

Originally posted by IvySterling

I'm sending you a PM! [/*] THANK YOU IVY you or a very sweet lady. :rose:

[martha]

GOOD MORNING EVERYONE no news this morning i guess. Have a very good day be back later. :rose:

[Lyndawitha"Y]

Originally posted by GentleBreeze


Do they have to ask for permission since at the time of Maria's death she was an active Lance Corporal in the military? I thought they have that right since she was seen as government property, which sounds cold but the way they look at all military personnel, as you know.

I have wondered if they have technically closed all parts of the investigation except fulfilling the one order to collect DNA once the baby was born and that is all they are waiting for at this time and will do no further investigation once that order is completed which was already decided upon when ML was alive.

imoo [/*]

Since I look at this in a KISS mindset, I would think that the DNA of the baby could assist the DA's office in building their case against Cesar..If he is the father of this baby, then it would simply go into the evidence of motive..no more no less..and would also indicate that Maria and Cesar did indeed have some sort of sexual encounter..Rape or consentual is a moot point at this time.Course I am just looking at the murder charges at this point in time.

LMS:seeya:

[martha]

Originally posted by Lyndawitha"Y


Since I look at this in a KISS mindset, I would think that the DNA of the baby could assist the DA's office in building their case against Cesar..If he is the father of this baby, then it would simply go into the evidence of motive..no more no less..and would also indicate that Maria and Cesar did indeed have some sort of sexual encounter..Rape or consentual is a moot point at this time.Course I am just looking at the murder charges at this point in time.

LMS:seeya: [/*] I think you or right and they only want the dna of the baby for proof that ml and cl was having sexual encounter. i think they want to use it in the case against cl. jmho that is if he is the father of the baby. :rose:

[s.breda]

Originally posted by Lyndawitha"Y


Since I look at this in a KISS mindset, I would think that the DNA of the baby could assist the DA's office in building their case against Cesar..If he is the father of this baby, then it would simply go into the evidence of motive..no more no less..and would also indicate that Maria and Cesar did indeed have some sort of sexual encounter..Rape or consentual is a moot point at this time.Course I am just looking at the murder charges at this point in time.

LMS:seeya: [/*]

I believe the same. It will go to motive in the murder case. With Maria's death, the rape case no longer exists. Without a victim there is no crime. It will also show Cesar lied to the MC investigators for what that is worth. jmo

[martha]

Originally posted by s.breda


I believe the same. It will go to motive in the murder case. With Maria's death, the rape case no longer exists. Without a victim there is no crime. It will also show Cesar lied to the MC investigators for what that is worth. jmo [/*] ITA it will show he was not telling the truth and may show why he had reason to kill her. jmho:rose:

[Charlotte]

Originally posted by strick10
Going back to the discussion regarding as to whether the rape allegations case had been closed by the MC. Here is where it was stated that the rape allegation portion of the case had been closed.

http://www.tcnewsnet.com/main.asp?SectionID=6&SubSectionID=6&ArticleID=147032

Turner had a phone conversation with General Michael Regner roughly two weeks ago. According to Mascho, Regner informed Turner that the Marine Corps "considers the sexual assault portion of the investigation to be concluded." However, Mascho said that Turner believes this contention is fraught with "serious discrepancies."

I suppose I'm not as forgetful as I thought it was. [/*]

I posted about this to you the other day, but since that's day's posts have all been removed (except for one), you may not have seen it.

Turner spoke about the conversation with Regner in his March 11 press release:

http://www.house.gov/miketurner/news/press.rel/3.11.08.shtml

“Lance Corporal Lauterbach’s case highlights the need to elevate the protection accorded female military personnel who file claims that they have been sexually assaulted and raises serious questions about the procedures that the military has in place for responding to sexual assault claims,” Rep. Turner said. “I have been briefed by General Michael Regner. He has informed me that the Marine Corps has reviewed their internal procedures, determined that appropriate procedures have been followed and that the ‘matter was concluded’. I disagree.”

Turner seems to me to be saying that, according to Regner, the MC has "concluded" the "matter" of reviewing their own procedures and actions -- not that the rape investigation itself was concluded. The quote from Turner's communications director Bradley Mascho in the article you cited was either poorly worded, or rephrased with journalistic license by the reporter. Turner had the conversation with Regner, and his wording in his own press release was different than what was represented as being said by Mascho in the Vandalia Drummer News.

The entire context of Turner's conversation with Regner -- as well as the entire context of his letter to the MC and the context of his response to its reply from Lt. Gen. Kramlich -- is all about the procedures, actions, and inactions on the part of military in keeping the complainant safe while investigating the rape allegation. Turner's call for scrutiny of the MC's handling of things isn't about proving either way whether Maria was raped, it's about whether the MC provides a safe environment for those reporting sexual assault. It's the MC saying that their internal procedures are appropriate and were followed, and summarily declaring that matter "concluded," that Turner disagrees with.

The "serious discrepancies" that "this contention is fraught with" that the Vandalia Drummer News reported Mascho as saying that Turner believes would be the dicrepancies between what was done and the MC's contention that they did all they could have. He hasn't stated one way or the other as to the veracity of the rape allegation itself. The supposed ending of the rape investigation is not what Turner is disagreeing with, or what he is asking the DoD for an investigation into. It's about the MC's handling of the rape and murder investigations.

As I said in the post you missed, a number of people took Turner's words in his March 11 press release to mean that the rape investigation itself was concluded, rather than the MC's review of it's own handling of it. The rape investigation may indeed be concluded as well (due to the lack of a complaining witness), but it's not a certain fact. I wouldn't go by what the Vandalia Drummer News reported, but that may be just me. IMO

[Charlotte]

Originally posted by GentleBreeze


I have wondered if they have technically closed all parts of the investigation except fulfilling the one order to collect DNA once the baby was born and that is all they are waiting for at this time and will do no further investigation once that order is completed which was already decided upon when ML was alive.

imoo [/*]

Not according to Lt. Gen. Kramlich. In his March 31st letter to Rep. Turner, he states that:

The circumstances and allegations surrounding the death of Lance Corporal Lauterbach are the subject of an ongoing Judge Advocate General death investigation, as well as a Naval Criminal Investigative Service and civilian law enforcement criminal investigations. http://media.mgnetwork.com/nct/images/links/marinequestions.pdf

[martha]

Good morning everyone. now news!!!! just checking it to see. hope we will get some kind of news today/ you all have a good day:rose:

[martha]

SORRY forgive my typo i ment no news

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by Charlotte


Not according to Lt. Gen. Kramlich. In his March 31st letter to Rep. Turner, he states that:

http://media.mgnetwork.com/nct/images/links/marinequestions.pdf [/*]

Thank you.

That could be interpreted various ways imo. Of course the allegations and circumstances surrounding the "death" of Lauterbach is on going.

They said very clearly they would be working closely with the civilian authorities (DA/OCSD etc.) concerning the murder investigation even though the murder happened under the civilian authorities jurisdiction. Yet there will be things that they will not release. Sutherland has said the MC has not released Maria's medical records to them and it is in those records that documentation was made about the supposed rape including the gestational age of the baby.

Personally I think they have finished 99% of their investigation into the rape allegation but they are waiting for DNA on Laurean which I also find extremely strange when they could have removed his DNA from his own home months ago to achieve a DNA profile.

imoo

[s.breda]

IIRC it was reported they have DNA from Cesar from items in his house. But now that he is in custody, they want it directly from his body. jmo

[martha]

Originally posted by s.breda
IIRC it was reported they have DNA from Cesar from items in his house. But now that he is in custody, they want it directly from his body. jmo [/*] I guess they want it from his body to make sure there is no mistake in this dna. jmho I don;t blame them for wanting to be sure. This young man is looking at staying in prison for the rest of his life. If I was him I would want them to double check everything.:rose:

[CANDYKISSES]

Originally posted by martha
I guess they want it from his body to make sure there is no mistake in this dna. jmho I don;t blame them for wanting to be sure. This young man is looking at staying in prison for the rest of his life. If I was him I would want them to double check everything.:rose: [/*]

Hi Martha, you are a gem for holding the fort down and checking on us. :rose:

I would think they want to be 100% and I'm sure this all has to be done by the book given the case has been surrendered to the civillian authorities IMO.

I stand with GB on the idea of the rape allegations being a non-issue for the murder trial unless that's used for motive and we all know Dewey doesn't have to show motive. But we don't know if Cesar will plead guilty or not guilty at this point in time. So that's up for grabs as far as what will be done with it or if the civillian courts may have to call upon NCIS or the USMC.

So much uncertainty and so little known right now. We may hear something soon about interpreting the verbiage regarding the autopsy.

ALL JMO

I am hoping some of our NC peeps will check in and let us know how the voting is going.... ;)

[martha]

Thank you ck. I hope we hear something pretty soon. I hope everyone will be back once they bring him back to the states if they do. GB posts things that I am thinking and explains her self so very well. I not good at posting but I love to read your too. Sometimes I post something that upsets a few but I really don;t entend to do that just giving my o and everyone knows I don;t really know anything for sure on this case. just guessing. This case has touched my heart and i would love to know why and how it ended so bad.:rose:

[IvySterling]

~snipped
Originally posted by CANDYKISSES
I am hoping some of our NC peeps will check in and let us know how the voting is going.... ;) [/*]
NBC News is projecting that Sen. Barack Obama has won the primary election in North Carolina.

[StickyBeak]

Hello Everyone, just reading any update on CL extradition. TY for keeping thread open.
:seeya:

[baywench]

Originally posted by StickyBeak
Hello Everyone, just reading any update on CL extradition. TY for keeping thread open.
:seeya: [/*]

It's maddening, what is taking so long?

[IvySterling]

Originally posted by baywench


It's maddening, what is taking so long? [/*]
It hasn't even been a month since he was captured bay :D

[baywench]

Originally posted by IvySterling

It hasn't even been a month since he was captured bay :D [/*]

Point taken Ivy but I was naive enough to think they would just go and get him. The early reports said he would be back in two or three days and that made sense to me. JMO

[IvySterling]

Originally posted by baywench


Point taken Ivy but I was naive enough to think they would just go and get him. The early reports said he would be back in two or three days and that made sense to me. JMO [/*]
The government never said it would be in 2-3 days did they?

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by IvySterling

The government never said it would be in 2-3 days did they? [/*]

Not that I can remember. I remember they mentioned if everything went along as expected he may be back in two or three months. Then Hudson said later it could take up to two years.

imoo

[baywench]

Originally posted by IvySterling

The government never said it would be in 2-3 days did they? [/*]

The government....oh probably not. The reporters did though:D

[gaelicpeas]

I am surprised that a news outlet has not tried to go to Mexico for an interview, even if they can't talk to CL. They did that in the SP case.... interviewed the jail warden, did a prison tour, etc.....

[IvySterling]

Originally posted by gaelicpeas
I am surprised that a news outlet has not tried to go to Mexico for an interview, even if they can't talk to CL. They did that in the SP case.... interviewed the jail warden, did a prison tour, etc..... [/*]
Scott P. was in the USA, not a foreign country, big difference.

I think Cesars family would/have had no problem seeing him, but they're not the MEDIA HOUNDS ;)

[gaelicpeas]

Originally posted by IvySterling

Scott P. was in the USA, not a foreign country, big difference.

I think Cesars family would/have had no problem seeing him, but they're not the MEDIA HOUNDS ;) [/*]

true....

but still, I am surprised at no interviews... I can understand local media doesn't have the bucks... but Furhman was down there earlier. How much can it cost to go to Mexico?

[IvySterling]

Originally posted by gaelicpeas


true....

but still, I am surprised at no interviews... I can understand local media doesn't have the bucks... but Furhman was down there earlier. How much can it cost to go to Mexico? [/*]
From where I live, not much at all to go there, HOWEVER MF travels with a crew, not alone and don't think they'd like that.

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by gaelicpeas
I am surprised that a news outlet has not tried to go to Mexico for an interview, even if they can't talk to CL. They did that in the SP case.... interviewed the jail warden, did a prison tour, etc..... [/*]

I have no doubt that certain media hounds have called the Mexican authorities asking could they interview Laurean. I imagine they nixed that right in the bud and told them no one would be talking with him unless it was ones who have legal authority to do so.

imoo

[gaelicpeas]

Originally posted by GentleBreeze


I have no doubt that certain media hounds have called the Mexican authorities asking could they interview Laurean. I imagine they nixed that right in the bud and told them no one would be talking with him unless it was ones who have legal authority to do so.

imoo [/*]

Somehow that surprises me given the coverage they gave him when he was captured......

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by gaelicpeas


Somehow that surprises me given the coverage they gave him when he was captured...... [/*]

That was just because he was being transitioned in for processing. He now is being held in a cell away from all media imo. I imagine that was the local police station. He is probably at a Federal prison being held now.

imoo

[gaelicpeas]

Originally posted by GentleBreeze


That was just because he was being transitioned in for processing. He now is being held in a cell away from all media imo. I imagine that was the local police station. He is probably at a Federal prison being held now.

imoo [/*]

I know nothing about the legal system in Mexico... but it seems odd.... as is much in this case....

[martha]

Good morning eveyone. I am just checking to see if there is any news. guess not. I will be checking back in tho. take care everyone and keep posting.:rose:

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by Annelle



ITA, GB. Except for that last line. Do you think he's in a federal prison in US or a MX one?

I don;t see a benefit to CL granting media interviews even if Mexican law allows him. If CL can't talk to the media, what's the point of trying to interview him? First I guess they have to find him.


What would one expect to reveal from some big media scoop anyway? I think CL's lone soundbite has been scrutinized beyond his wildest intentions. Why would a media interview clear up any doubts or lay out the truth? [/*]

Good Morning Annelle!

I believe I did read somewhere that he would be held in a federal prison in Mexico. Maybe that is where they place fugitives that are in the process of being extradited back to another country.

I am not sure if he wants to speak out or not. You are right, just the two utterances he made were profound and made many want to know more. If he chose to talk then it possibly could clear somethings up that remain such a mystery in this case. I do think he has much information that could definitely answer some of those questions but whether he wants to speak out or not I highly doubt the Mexican authorities would give him permission to do so and his lawyers would certainly not recommend it.

imo

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by martha
Good morning everyone. I am just checking to see if there is any news. guess not. I will be checking back in tho. take care everyone and keep posting.:rose: [/*]

Good Morning Martha!

Thanks for keeping the board going.......

We sure need some news......just some small something but indeed ....something.

Makes me think that the DA/OCSD is hoping this case quietens down so all the rumblings in the county about Christina will quieten down too. Imo, that is not going to work...once in the news again she will be back to the forefront again.

You have mail!:)

imoo:seeya:

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by gaelicpeas


I know nothing about the legal system in Mexico... but it seems odd.... as is much in this case.... [/*]

Yes it did seem the local police became a little zealous when they captured the prize egg. They may have gotten their knuckles racked for that behavior.

But I imagine where he is now they don't play those games.

imoo

[martha]

Originally posted by GentleBreeze


Yes it did seem the local police became a little zealous when they captured the prize egg. They may have gotten their knuckles racked for that behavior.

But I imagine where he is now they don't play those games.

imoo [/*] I think you or on the money with this. I bet they want let people down there to see cl. anyway they or keeping everthing away from the news in this case. hope we hear something soon.:rose:

[martha]

Boy everything is so quite on this board. never seen it this quite. hope we have something to talk about tomorrow. have a good night all. :rose:

[baywench]

Originally posted by martha
Boy everything is so quite on this board. never seen it this quite. hope we have something to talk about tomorrow. have a good night all. :rose: [/*]

OK I'm sitting here with my little flashlight trying to keep the lights on and waiting for you all to come back. :read:

[IvySterling]

Originally posted by baywench


OK I'm sitting here with my little flashlight trying to keep the lights on and waiting for you all to come back. :read: [/*]
Nothing new to post about, re-hashing was even pushed to the 'Max' :D

[strick10]

Maybe it's a good thing that it's slow. This could possibly allow for some of us to go back and rethink what is known to now. Maybe something will pop into someones mind that everyone has missed.

[baywench]

Originally posted by strick10
Maybe it's a good thing that it's slow. This could possibly allow for some of us to go back and rethink what is known to now. Maybe something will pop into someones mind that everyone has missed. [/*]

Good idea Strick, I think I'll go back and look at the old links.

[gaelicpeas]

Originally posted by baywench


Good idea Strick, I think I'll go back and look at the old links. [/*]

yep, I agree that it is informative to check out the old links..... Although be careful to check out everytrhing... there is a lot of misinformation out there with regards to details.....

[strick10]

Yup, quite a bit of mis-information out there as well as some well founded items.

[gaelicpeas]

lol - oops, that should have been 'everything'.....

[baywench]

Originally posted by gaelicpeas
lol - oops, that should have been 'everything'..... [/*]

We need some news...our typing skills are getting rusty!

[gaelicpeas]

Originally posted by baywench


We need some news...our typing skills are getting rusty! [/*]

lol, yep!

[daniel green]

Originally posted by baywench


We need some news...our typing skills are getting rusty! [/*]

Hey, stranger!

What's happened to all our posters? :confused:

[baywench]

Originally posted by daniel green


Hey, stranger!

What's happened to all our posters? :confused: [/*]

I guess just no news. I only really post on two boards and both of them are dead right now. Dang at this rate I might have to do some work!

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by baywench


I guess just no news. I only really post on two boards and both of them are dead right now. Dang at this rate I might have to do some work! [/*]

Its already been almost a month since Laurean was captured. I wonder why we haven't heard a peep on how the extradition is going and if everything is on schedule or if they are running into some snags. I would have thought Hudson may have commented on that one way or the other by now but.......mum's the word it seems. Sort of strange imo.

I still think they are trying to let the case go quiet hoping the suspicions about Christina may also fade from Onslow citizens minds. Imo that is not going to happen.

imo

[Jan Powell]

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/5761663.html

It's a short story and is an example of another extradition case, it took 8 months. It's not clear in the article if the defendant fought extradition but the terms were negotiated.

[s.breda]

Originally posted by Jan Powell
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/5761663.html

It's a short story and is an example of another extradition case, it took 8 months. It's not clear in the article if the defendant fought extradition but the terms were negotiated. [/*]

That is a long time. It also doesn't say if he is a Mexican national or not. He is from Denton, Texas, but who knows if he was born in Mexico. Interesting article. Thanks.

[s.breda]

Originally posted by GentleBreeze


Its already been almost a month since Laurean was captured. I wonder why we haven't heard a peep on how the extradition is going and if everything is on schedule or if they are running into some snags. I would have thought Hudson may have commented on that one way or the other by now but.......mum's the word it seems. Sort of strange imo.

I still think they are trying to let the case go quiet hoping the suspicions about Christina may also fade from Onslow citizens minds. Imo that is not going to happen.

imo [/*]

What difference do you think it will make as to the suspicions about Christina fading from the minds of Onslow County citizens if they even have suspicions?

LE has said she was not involved.

jmo

[baywench]

Originally posted by GentleBreeze


Its already been almost a month since Laurean was captured. I wonder why we haven't heard a peep on how the extradition is going and if everything is on schedule or if they are running into some snags. I would have thought Hudson may have commented on that one way or the other by now but.......mum's the word it seems. Sort of strange imo.

I still think they are trying to let the case go quiet hoping the suspicions about Christina may also fade from Onslow citizens minds. Imo that is not going to happen.

imo [/*]

I am wishfully thinking that they are in "quiet mode" because they are dotting their "i"s and putting the case against Christina together in anticipation of lauren's return to the US. Crossing my fingers. JMO

[baywench]

Originally posted by s.breda


What difference do you think it will make as to the suspicions about Christina fading from the minds of Onslow County citizens if they even have suspicions?

LE has said she was not involved.

jmo [/*]

As much fun as it would be to have this conversation again....there are many here and in the community that feel she is involved. It is an opinion at this point. JMO

[IvySterling]

~snipped
Originally posted by s.breda
LE has said she was not involved.[/*]
We already know what the LE has said, and their opinion is NOT what most opinions are.

IF, Christina had not kept her communications with Cesar a secret, SOME may have changed their minds about her...........for me, it only cemented my opinion.

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by s.breda


What difference do you think it will make as to the suspicions about Christina fading from the minds of Onslow County citizens if they even have suspicions?

LE has said she was not involved.

jmo [/*]

Are you saying that only LE are entitled to their own opinions while others are not? I highly doubt many Onslow citizens fell for the overly dramatic quest to build Christina Laurean's persona up. I may email JDN asking them to run another poll and see if it is still at 100% that thought she was involved like they had up earlier.

I don't think one has to be a rocket scientist to know that "cooperating" doesn't equate with a woman who hid the fact that she was having communications with an international fugitive on the sly and she got busted when she got caught when they raided her sister's place. Hudson/LE can try to sell that bill of goods all day long but what it does show is she is deceitful and very capable of withholding knowledge.

What does the LE have to do with it anyway? In the trial there are two sides not just the State's and IMO Christina is going to have a difficult time as a witness and all it takes is one juror who thinks she is right in the thick of this up to her eyeballs.

imoo

[baywench]

Originally posted by IvySterling
~snipped

We already know what the LE has said, and their opinion is NOT what most opinions are.

IF, Christina had not kept her communications with Cesar a secret, SOME may have changed their minds about her...........for me, it only cemented my opinion. [/*]

ITA Ivy. It almost seems to me "they protest too much". I just cannot get my mind around how she is communicating with one of AMW's hunted fugitives and doesn't tell LE but that is not illegal. I hope they are playing word games because they want to be able to charge her with something bigger than obstruction of justice. IMO

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by IvySterling
~snipped

We already know what the LE has said, and their opinion is NOT what most opinions are.

IF, Christina had not kept her communications with Cesar a secret, SOME may have changed their minds about her...........for me, it only cemented my opinion. [/*]

Exactly. They have to build her up she is going to testify for the STATE. I think all this lovely dovey drama that played out at the PC was a proactive move.......they know she brings baggage, they know how their citizens think about her.

imoo

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by baywench


ITA Ivy. It almost seems to me "they protest too much". I just cannot get my mind around how she is communicating with one of AMW's hunted fugitives and doesn't tell LE but that is not illegal. I hope they are playing word games because they want to be able to charge her with something bigger than obstruction of justice. IMO [/*]

I agree Bay.......they are trying way too hard in trying to sell Christina to the citizens at large in their county. Imo, it shows me they are willing to forgive her for anything because they desperately need her in this case which still makes me ponder if this case is as tight as they would like us to think. All LE posture about their cases but they know until it is tried and tested in a court of law it really is just PR blustering.

imoo

[baywench]

For the diehards

[CANDYKISSES]

:rose: For what would have been her very first Mother's Day.:rose:

[Cardinal]

Originally posted by CANDYKISSES
:rose: For what would have been her very first Mother's Day.:rose: [/*]

:patriot:

That's lovely, CK.

And good to see everyone! Happy Mother's Day.

[CANDYKISSES]

Originally posted by Cardinal


:patriot:

That's lovely, CK.

And good to see everyone! Happy Mother's Day. [/*]

Same to you Cardinal. There really is a very dry spell here for news, but I can imagine this weekend would have been very special if she had decided to keep Gabriel.

I am praying for TRUE JUSTICE in this tragic case. I wish we knew what the situation was as far as the extradition is concerned at this point. :patriot:

[nuttintodo]

Originally posted by CANDYKISSES
:rose: For what would have been her very first Mother's Day.:rose: [/*]

This is so true, CK.

It is really sad and tragic that Maria never got to experience motherhood like majority of us have had the pleasure of doing.

Happy Mother's Day everyone. :rose:




Wish we had some fresh news to discuss.

[Cardinal]

Originally posted by CANDYKISSES


Same to you Cardinal. There really is a very dry spell here for news, but I can imagine this weekend would have been very special if she had decided to keep Gabriel.

I am praying for TRUE JUSTICE in this tragic case. I wish we knew what the situation was as far as the extradition is concerned at this point. :patriot: [/*]

It's a dry spell for everything except politics, it seems. I've checked in occasionally, but I'm so far behind in this case I couldn't follow the thread when I did. I've still been praying for justice, though.

I'm sure this is a sad weekend for Maria's family, and my heart goes out to them.

:rose:

[baywench]

Originally posted by CANDYKISSES
:rose: For what would have been her very first Mother's Day.:rose: [/*]

I thought of that this morning CK...she is in my thoughts.

[CANDYKISSES]

Originally posted by nuttintodo


This is so true, CK.

It is really sad and tragic that Maria never got to experience motherhood like majority of us have had the pleasure of doing.

Happy Mother's Day everyone. :rose:




Wish we had some fresh news to discuss. [/*]

I too wish we had something substantial to discuss right now as we await the slow turning wheels of justice. But in the meantime, I hope the family is being kept abreast of what is going on and has faith in the trial process here.

I imagine there are a few moms in the Lauterbach family who will be feeling a deep sense of sadness this weekend. :( Her biological mother must feel terrible as well as her adoptive mother. I can't remember from Kel's research if any of her grandmothers were still living or not. Does anyone here remember?

JMO.

:rose: Still seeking justice for Maria and Gabriel.

[s.breda]

:rose: For Maria, Gabriel, and Maria's family
on Mother's Day.

:rose: For Christina on Mother's Day.

:rose: For Mary on Mother's Day.

[IvySterling]

Everyone have a good weekend, and if it applies, a Happy Mother's Day!

[marinewife5]

Originally posted by s.breda
:rose: For Maria, Gabriel, and Maria's family
on Mother's Day.

For Christina on Mother's Day.

For Mary on Mother's Day. [/*]

This will be a significant mother's day for many...I will be thinking of all of the moms touched by this tragedy. :rose:

[Destini]

I've been pondering something this morning, which has probably already been discussed, but it just occurred to me.

Do you suppose the DA either knows or highly suspects Christina's involvement, but is hoping that by playing up the "cooperating witness" angle that it will put more pressure on Cesar to spill the beans?

If they were to go ahead & charge her, maybe they're thinking it would make Cesar want to "protect" her somehow. But if he thinks she (and the DA) are trying to pin the whole thing on him, maybe they're thinking he will come out fighting & tell the whole story?

As others have said, I think the DA is posturing with the "cooperating witness" story and they actually have a bigger plan.

It'll be interesing if this ever gets to trial to see if they start pointing fingers at each other

[s.breda]

Originally posted by Destini
I've been pondering something this morning, which has probably already been discussed, but it just occurred to me.

Do you suppose the DA either knows or highly suspects Christina's involvement, but is hoping that by playing up the "cooperating witness" angle that it will put more pressure on Cesar to spill the beans?

If they were to go ahead & charge her, maybe they're thinking it would make Cesar want to "protect" her somehow. But if he thinks she (and the DA) are trying to pin the whole thing on him, maybe they're thinking he will come out fighting & tell the whole story?

As others have said, I think the DA is posturing with the "cooperating witness" story and they actually have a bigger plan.

It'll be interesing if this ever gets to trial to see if they start pointing fingers at each other [/*]

LE has come out in a press conference saying Christina was not involved in the murder or cover up. There is a link on the links thread last page I believe.

[baywench]

Originally posted by Destini
I've been pondering something this morning, which has probably already been discussed, but it just occurred to me.

Do you suppose the DA either knows or highly suspects Christina's involvement, but is hoping that by playing up the "cooperating witness" angle that it will put more pressure on Cesar to spill the beans?

If they were to go ahead & charge her, maybe they're thinking it would make Cesar want to "protect" her somehow. But if he thinks she (and the DA) are trying to pin the whole thing on him, maybe they're thinking he will come out fighting & tell the whole story?

As others have said, I think the DA is posturing with the "cooperating witness" story and they actually have a bigger plan.

It'll be interesing if this ever gets to trial to see if they start pointing fingers at each other [/*]

Great post Destini! I am also wondering if the evidence could point to both or either of them making LE treat her with kid gloves. I do think there will be some changes in her status when CL returns to the states and starts squawking. JMO

[baywench]

Originally posted by marinewife5


This will be a significant mother's day for many...I will be thinking of all of the moms touched by this tragedy. :rose: [/*]

So senseless....many of us will be thinking of her and the baby as we celebrate tomorrow I am sure. JMO

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by CANDYKISSES


I too wish we had something substantial to discuss right now as we await the slow turning wheels of justice. But in the meantime, I hope the family is being kept abreast of what is going on and has faith in the trial process here.

I imagine there are a few moms in the Lauterbach family who will be feeling a deep sense of sadness this weekend. :( Her biological mother must feel terrible as well as her adoptive mother. I can't remember from Kel's research if any of her grandmothers were still living or not. Does anyone here remember?

JMO.

:rose: Still seeking justice for Maria and Gabriel. [/*]

I hope the Lauterbach family places a beautiful flower arrangement at Maria and Gabriel's graveside tomorrow.:rose:

imoo

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by Destini
I've been pondering something this morning, which has probably already been discussed, but it just occurred to me.

Do you suppose the DA either knows or highly suspects Christina's involvement, but is hoping that by playing up the "cooperating witness" angle that it will put more pressure on Cesar to spill the beans?

If they were to go ahead & charge her, maybe they're thinking it would make Cesar want to "protect" her somehow. But if he thinks she (and the DA) are trying to pin the whole thing on him, maybe they're thinking he will come out fighting & tell the whole story?

As others have said, I think the DA is posturing with the "cooperating witness" story and they actually have a bigger plan.

It'll be interesting if this ever gets to trial to see if they start pointing fingers at each other [/*]

Hi Destini,

Anything is possible. I do think there is a strategic move in the way the DA/LEs speaks of the uh...er..um their "credible" um..mmm.."cooperating witness." I don't think they are trying to put pressure on Laurean in fact I think Laurean may be applying his own pressure especially when he said in his two statements when arrested ("proof" and I think that was a message to the DA) and ("I loved her" was a direct message to Christina Laurean). The "hearts and flowers" mushy PC by Hudson about poor Christina was to try and quell the many suspicions Onslow citizens have about her. Imo it backfired especially when they tried to make her into credible and honorable knowing she had deceived them all behind their backs and was communicating with him on the sly.

I do wholeheartedly agree with you though about the DA/OCSD wanting very much to talk to Laurean and is hoping that he will speak of what he knows. Imo, they are missing pieces of the puzzle they need. Things that have nagged them from the start that still remain unanswered.

I also agree I think Christina will become a very big part of this case and it won't just be for the State. I think the DA already knows this and she is going to bring her own baggage that she will have to explain when a defense attorney thoroughly asked her about every facet of the crimes.

IMO the DAs weakness is the time line and they have admitted they have no time of death and only perimeters. If the attorney can pierce that time line and make it logical to the jury that someone else could have been there then it could change the dynamics of this case because I feel that jurors may think that Christina Laurean had just as much motive to do the actual crime as Cesar did. I think that will be brought to the forefront by Laurean's lawyer to be considered by his jury.

imoo

[sunstar]

Originally posted by CANDYKISSES
:rose: For what would have been her very first Mother's Day.:rose: [/*]

This is so beautiful, CK. Maria and her baby are together in Heaven though. :rose:

[sunstar]

Originally posted by Destini
I've been pondering something this morning, which has probably already been discussed, but it just occurred to me.

Do you suppose the DA either knows or highly suspects Christina's involvement, but is hoping that by playing up the "cooperating witness" angle that it will put more pressure on Cesar to spill the beans?

If they were to go ahead & charge her, maybe they're thinking it would make Cesar want to "protect" her somehow. But if he thinks she (and the DA) are trying to pin the whole thing on him, maybe they're thinking he will come out fighting & tell the whole story?

As others have said, I think the DA is posturing with the "cooperating witness" story and they actually have a bigger plan.

It'll be interesing if this ever gets to trial to see if they start pointing fingers at each other [/*]
I think you just may be on to something with this, since they have said they want to talk with CL. We'll just have to wait and see what happens when he's finally returned to the US, if he does tell all. :shrug:

[CANDYKISSES]

Still waiting for the release of documents to no avail and not much new outside of what was discussed last week regarding the project Congressman Turner and Mary Lauterbach are working on....

http://www.jdnews.com/news/committee_56611___article.html/process_house.html

Please be aware of the copyright laws and stay on topic so that when the documents are released we will be intact here. I know it's slow right now, but hang in there and news will be forthcoming.

:patriot:

jmo

[martha]

Thanks CK I keep checking ever day to see if we have any news on cl and this case. have a good evening.:rose: :rose:

[GentleBreeze]

Originally posted by CANDYKISSES
Still waiting for the release of documents to no avail and not much new outside of what was discussed last week regarding the project Congressman Turner and Mary Lauterbach are working on....

http://www.jdnews.com/news/committee_56611___article.html/process_house.html

Please be aware of the copyright laws and stay on topic so that when the documents are released we will be intact here. I know it's slow right now, but hang in there and news will be forthcoming.

:patriot:

jmo [/*]

Hi Candy,

How long has it been now since they said they were releasing the search warrant documents. I wonder what is taking so long. At this rate the Judge must be going to redact most all of it.

imoo

[baywench]

Still lurking....I hope everyone comes back when we get new news.

[CANDYKISSES]

Radio interview with McNeil in ten minutes, 830 EST.

Wednesday 5/21
7:30- Financial Fair with Financial Resource Management, Inc.
8:05- Community Moment- Debbie Fisher, Community Networking Breakfast

8:30- Richard McNeil, Cesar Laurean’s Attorney

8:45- Pamlico News

http://www.wtkf107.com/coastaldaybreak.html

:patriot:

[Tokyo Rose]

Is there any information on what he said?