Predictions, Necklace, Songs , GA Murders, Ret Account. email & Other Ideas

[PNut]

Originally posted by IrwinIndian
I think he needs a gold-plated section for people like me.



I think he needs a foul's gold section (it'd be full!!)

[Results]

Originally posted by readmylips


its all really strange to me. but that seems to be the theme of this case.

OK.....but I still think IJM post was too funny. JMHO

[kundalini]

Maybe I am reading too much into it but Brian has not posted of his dreams for last night. His last post is fof 10-17 and it is on unusual paper. Then he posts 10-19 "expect a break in this case soon".

He may have actually gone to physically look for Tara. If so, I wish him all the luck I can muster.

[simply quiet]

Originally posted by The R



Checked his site again this am and he's now posting an update (10-19-06) that says to expect a break in the case soon?


R

Is there a new SAR foundation founder, or finder of the foundation, or lead investigator maybe?

Anyone know?

[Moms4Justice]

Originally posted by kundalini
Maybe I am reading too much into it but Brian has not posted of his dreams for last night. His last post is fof 10-17 and it is on unusual paper. Then he posts 10-19 "expect a break in this case soon".

He may have actually gone to physically look for Tara. If so, I wish him all the luck I can muster.

I noticed that also. I too wish him luck.

[gagal]

:lol: I creeped over to the CB site and see that it sure is quiet! Hmmmmmmmmmmmm I guess MM threw them for a loop! Nothing like being embarrassed by one of your own.........

[Results]

That comment Brian made about the reward money keeps bothering me. He had to have a reason to make that comment. Is someone contacting him so they can get the reward money? I'm not sure about that statement because then in the next breath he says he thinks he knows where Tara is and is going to go check it out and says that HE will give the reward money to the Missing Children. Why make a comment to remove the reward money? JMHO

[Its just me]

Originally posted by Results
That comment Brian made about the reward money keeps bothering me. He had to have a reason to make that comment. Is someone contacting him so they can get the reward money? I'm not sure about that statement because then in the next breath he says he thinks he knows where Tara is and is going to go check it out and says that HE will give the reward money to the Missing Children. Why make a comment to remove the reward money? JMHO

My prayers are God will reveal to Brian where Tara is and he is out on this mission as I type. My prayers are that Tara is alive but if she is not I pray she can be found by anyone.
The reward money is confusing. One place asks the reward money be removed another sounds like he will accept the award money and give it to charity.

Notice to how I understand the reward money. There will be no reward money if Tara's body is found deceased to my understanding.

100,000 dollars if someone finds Tara alive.
100,000 dollars if someone identifies the perp.

[gagal]

I think Brian felt that MM was in this only for the money. that if the reward money wasn't offered then maybe the wackos would back off and leave the search alone. I would be very curious to see what Brians reading on MM says..........stated that he was gonna do one on him. Makes you wonder what kinda "vibes" that guy was putting out...Also, makes you wonder if MM knew tara before this??? what if this was staged to make MM famous!
JMHOO!!!!!! We dont know who was involved.....

[HonestInjun]

The Carla Baron Board has been quiet for months.

Apparently, they are communicating elsewhere.


Originally posted by gagal
:lol: I creeped over to the CB site and see that it sure is quiet! Hmmmmmmmmmmmm I guess MM threw them for a loop! Nothing like being embarrassed by one of your own.........

[gacountry]

Originally posted by gagal
:lol: I creeped over to the CB site and see that it sure is quiet! Hmmmmmmmmmmmm I guess MM threw them for a loop! Nothing like being embarrassed by one of your own.........

I liked your choice of words "creeped."

[gagal]

"When in Rome........"

[ancient relic]

Something like that.

Originally posted by HonestInjun
The Carla Baron Board has been quiet for months.

Apparently, they are communicating elsewhere.

[simply quiet]

Originally posted by gagal
I think Brian felt that MM was in this only for the money. that if the reward money wasn't offered then maybe the wackos would back off and leave the search alone. I would be very curious to see what Brians reading on MM says..........stated that he was gonna do one on him. Makes you wonder what kinda "vibes" that guy was putting out...Also, makes you wonder if MM knew tara before this??? what if this was staged to make MM famous!
JMHOO!!!!!! We dont know who was involved.....

Any news from Brian ?

[Its just me]

Originally posted by Merrick


His site, updated Oct 25, 2006:

EXPECT A BREAK IN THIS CASE TO BE ANNOUNCED VERY SOON

But, for a mere $899 USD, you, too, can become a Gold lifetime member. IMO, that's the only way Brian will discuss Tara's case since he closed it.

Didn't Brian post he was going to where he thought Tara is located. Prayers he finds something but I'm keeping my $899.00

[The R]

Originally posted by Its just me


Didn't Brian post he was going to where he thought Tara is located. Prayers he finds something but I'm keeping my $899.00




Seems psychics haven't been much help in this case yet.......


R

[The R]

Originally posted by The R



Checked his site again this am and he's now posting an update (10-19-06) that says to expect a break in the case soon?


R




Guess that's been one week now that the message has been there.....


R

[gagal]

Yep, same message. I'll hold on to my money too! Wait for a newsbreak!

[balaney]

check out Brians predictions for 10/26 and click on comment section underneath dream about TG

[Results]

Originally posted by balaney
check out Brians predictions for 10/26 and click on comment section underneath dream about TG

Can you post a link please? TIA

[lighthousedazy]

Originally posted by Results


Can you post a link please? TIA I checked the link that was posted above, but it only goes to 10/18. TIA

[fsbiii]

http://www.briansprediction.com/dd/4531.htm

FWIW - I can't figure out if the case is closed, open, or what's going on with Brian's Predictions. This one is all over the place. Godwin's zip code, Tara's neighbor's name, birthdates, the whole enchilada.

[Moms4Justice]

Maybe his DD is trying to say that Dr G knows of or has some important evidence.?
Just a thought because I don't know. I have studied it quite a bit though and IMO it has some interesting information.
FYI for those not familiar with Brians RV's and DD's. The one from last night was a "dream drawing". It was not a remote view and it was not requested by anyone. :beer:

[simply quiet]

Originally posted by Moms4Justice
Maybe his DD is trying to say that Dr G knows of or has some important evidence.?
Just a thought because I don't know. I have studied it quite a bit though and IMO it has some interesting information.
FYI for those not familiar with Brians RV's and DD's. The one from last night was a "dream drawing". It was not a remote view and it was not requested by anyone. :beer:

Oh Goody.....a dream drawing.

I am gonna post mine tom morning.

It will probably read something like.......scribble scribble scribble..........52 million bucks.....scribble scribble....ZZZZZZZZZZZ

[simply quiet]

Originally posted by Merrick


:lol: If you play those numbers he posted earlier, $52M may be yours!

Its only 9:35.....I got plenty of time to play it. ;)

[Its just me]

Just a comment: If Dr. G. (Popcorn) investigates Tara like he did ItsJustMe...He don't have poop. Just a fact.

[concernedperson]

Originally posted by Merrick


IMO, he has plenty of poop, he's full of it.

Ditto. Great minds! LOL!

[Results]

OK folks. That's a little too much pooping going on. ;)

[Its just me]

Originally posted by Results
OK folks. That's a little too much pooping going on. ;)

Sorry, I'll get back on track. Now where were we. :D

[Its just me]

Just another comment in case any one new don't know where I stand. I am still sitting right smack on top of the fence. I don't rule ANYONE or ANYTHING OUT or IN...From following you guys I think most of you are the same. Appreciate all the digging you have done.

[Moms4Justice]

Originally posted by Merrick


OK, maybe I am stoopid! But, IMO a dream drawing is based upon what Brian saw while asleep, righ? So, after all the time he's spent on Tara's case I would think that he knows enough that his subconscious would kick in during slumber like most everyone else's does, IMO. Therefore, based on prior knowledge of the events surrounding Tara's disappearance, I find his DDs somewhat suspect and influenced by actual knowledge. IMO, nothing new in the DD. But, the 0 in the square does look like maybe he was starting a game of tic-tac-toe, IM stoopid opinion.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion.
:D Tic Tac Toe was the exact same thing that came to my mind first when I saw "0 in the square". Thats funny, Im glad Im not the only one. I don't feel so silly now.

[Moms4Justice]

Originally posted by Merrick


IJM,

Agreed. I think most of us are open to any possibility short of an alien abduction:rolleyes: There is just not enough factual information available upon which to develop an informed, supportable hypothesis, IMO. We can speculate based upon the information, true or false, put on the boards and elsewhere, but until LE releases facts, it will be just speculation. I have very little confidence in Dr. G's investigation and findings because he came into this case so long after the "hot" period, the first 24-72 hours. It's all just my opinion but I'm open to exploring any avenue at this point. JMHO.

Hey don't rule out Alien Abduction, seriously! I have heard about some pretty weird things that go on around the Air Force base there and other parts of Ga.:biggrin:

[readmylips]

Originally posted by OopsItsAdel

Moms, do you interpret one part as "ML was there" or something else? Also, any thoughts on the "0" in the square up there on the right? I've never read one of these so I just wanted to get your point of view. Don't mind the other posters tonight. They make fun of most anything they don't fully understand.
:(

Anyway, any thoughts you have on it are welcome! Thanks!

it looked like mr was there to me.

[lighthousedazy]

Originally posted by Moms4Justice


Hey don't rule out Alien Abduction, seriously! I have heard about some pretty weird things that go on around the Air Force base there and other parts of Ga.:biggrin: Which one are you speaking of, Moody or Robins? I haven't heard anything. jmo

[lighthousedazy]

Nothing weird at Robins or Moody, but I can find out from my husband or the generals. jmo

[fsbiii]

Mr. Rogers?

Originally posted by readmylips


it looked like mr was there to me.

[The R]

Originally posted by Merrick


Therefore, based on prior knowledge of the events surrounding Tara's disappearance, I find his DDs somewhat suspect and influenced by actual knowledge. IMO, nothing new in the DD.

Nice observation IMO......seems to be a few cracks showing in the "I never look at message boards" armor....... I'm not saying he is untruthful, I don't know enough about what he does to make that call, but there is a lot of wiggle room there......just too much coincidental stuff???


R

[Moms4Justice]

Originally posted by lighthousedazy
Which one are you speaking of, Moody or Robins? I haven't heard anything. jmo

I was being facetious:tongue:

But for entertainment purposes only if you have never read this forum I find it quite amusing at times.This post is about "mysterious" military trucks in Marrietta Ga.

http://www.godlikeproductions.com/bbs/message.php?messageid=251314

Sorry, this is off the subject of Tara :rose:

[fsbiii]

Maybe Brian can take lessons from Carla Baron and her television show about lies and manipulation of events for public appeal. His latest "DD" smells just like Carla and John's "visions" all predicated on Anita's emails and phone calls before their arrival in Ocilla to film their junkyard of a show. I bet he enjoys the hits to his site at present, just like Carla liked all the buzz to her board (which is a ghost town now, pardon the pun). JMOO.

Originally posted by The R


Nice observation IMO......seems to be a few cracks showing in the "I never look at message boards" armor....... I'm not saying he is untruthful, I don't know enough about what he does to make that call, but there is a lot of wiggle room there......just too much coincidental stuff???


R

[lighthousedazy]

Originally posted by Moms4Justice


I was being facetious:tongue:

But for entertainment purposes only if you have never read this forum I find it quite amusing at times.This post is about "mysterious" military trucks in Marrietta Ga.

http://www.godlikeproductions.com/bbs/message.php?messageid=251314

Sorry, this is off the subject of Tara :rose: Oh ok, so you're talking about Dobbins. I have read this forum since 11/05. I do remember that post. Weird. jmo

[Moms4Justice]

Originally posted by fsbiii
Maybe Brian can take lessons from Carla Baron and her television show about lies and manipulation of events for public appeal. His latest "DD" smells just like Carla and John's "visions" all predicated on Anita's emails and phone calls before their arrival in Ocilla to film their junkyard of a show. I bet he enjoys the hits to his site at present, just like Carla liked all the buzz to her board (which is a ghost town now, pardon the pun). JMOO.


I don't know what Haunting Evidence episode about Tara you watched but the one I watched was quite a bit different from Brians RV. IMO
Unless of course you meant from a general perspective.

[fsbiii]

I meant from the perspective of giving the appearance of not knowing specifics about something and claiming "visions" or "dreams". Surely Brian doesn't expect us to believe he just "came up with" the name S. Oakley, or Tara's birthdate, etc.? That's ridiculous IMO.

Originally posted by Moms4Justice

I don't know what Haunting Evidence episode about Tara you watched but the one I watched was quite a bit different from Brians RV. IMO
Unless of course you meant from a general perspective.

[Moms4Justice]

Originally posted by lighthousedazy
Oh ok, so you're talking about Dobbins. I have read this forum since 11/05. I do remember that post. Weird. jmo


That forum is addictive in an uncanny way. I don't ever post there but I do read there often.
That weird post about the military trucks was around the same time that the "fruit" eric Julien had posters on the east coast either on the verge of a heart attack or laughing their butts off about the asteriod that was to cause a tsunami because "Aliens told him"
Anyway, now you know where that facetious comment come from. Sorry
:hat:

[Moms4Justice]

Originally posted by fsbiii
I meant from the perspective of giving the appearance of not knowing specifics about something and claiming "visions" or "dreams". Surely Brian doesn't expect us to believe he just "came up with" the name S. Oakley, or Tara's birthdate, etc.? That's ridiculous IMO.



Thats your opinion, and you are certainly entitled to it.
My opinion on the hand is different.
I have seen numerous things that are dated by email ( his nightly news letter) that he has gotten exactly correct and had absolutely no way of knowing prior to them even happening unless of course his "visions" and/or "dreams" give him specifics.
So, this is simple. You can choose to believe or not believe and there is nothing that I nor anyone else can do about it. That is whats great about the good ol' US of A we have that freedom.:patriot:

[fsbiii]

Thanks for the civics lesson, and I agree. But in Tara's case, what you referenced did not occur--his dream a few nights ago came after months of being exposed to details about Tara's case. He's inconsistent in his procedures at the least, and everyone can judge for themselves whether or not he's helping.

Originally posted by Moms4Justice


Thats your opinion, and you are certainly entitled to it.
My opinion on the hand is different.
I have seen numerous things that are dated by email ( his nightly news letter) that he has gotten exactly correct and had absolutely no way of knowing prior to them even happening unless of course his "visions" and/or "dreams" give him specifics.
So, this is simple. You can choose to believe or not believe and there is nothing that I nor anyone else can do about it. That is whats great about the good ol' US of A we have that freedom.:patriot:

[Its just me]

Originally posted by Moms4Justice

I don't know what Haunting Evidence episode about Tara you watched but the one I watched was quite a bit different from Brians RV. IMO
Unless of course you meant from a general perspective.

Using this post to give my opinion only on the different boards and things I am familiar with.

Haunted Evidence was used to promote AG's theory that MH is involved in Tara's disappearance.

Brian's RV and DD is used to promote Brian.

CB message board was used to back AG

CTV board has been a mixture. Many things discussed some not involving Tara.

TT has been a mixture. Many things discussed some not involving Tara.

Until Tara is found or the right perp convicted all of the above are just people offering a thought, dream, theory for the public to see or read and not a single one is more important than the other. And none are without some faults but hopefully all will contain some good in the search for the Truth. MHOO

[Moms4Justice]

I found this to be positive and interesting and thought I would share. It will have to be in two seperate post because of length.
The information came from http://www.123numerology.com/

Birth name:

Tara Faye Grinstead

Date of birth: November 14, 1974

How Is Your Life Path Calculated ?

This is calculated in four steps:

1) Add up the digits in your month of birth (if more than one digit)
2) Add up the digits in your day of birth (if more than one digit)
3) Add up the digits in your year of birth.
4) Add up the answers from (1), (2), and (3) above.

With all the above calculations, we keep adding until we end up with a single digit, or an 11 or 22 (which are special cases in numerology, known as "Master Numbers").

Your life path says a lot about you, so please read the following very carefully ...

Tara, your Life Path of 1 ...


Your life path number is number 1, and so you are probably also blessed with a great drive and burning desire to be "number one" at whatever you do. Unfortunately, your competitive spirit sometimes gets you into trouble with friends and family, as work and ambition take precedence over emotional relationships.

You have a great faith in yourself that often achieves result despite great odds ... yet at the same time, has you often accused of having an enormous ego. However, in your defense, it is that enormous ego that gives you the daring and courage to change everybody's life for the better.

You have probably been born into one of two life paths. Either you have been born into wealth and privilege and coddled by lucky circumstances into becoming "great" in some way or you are thriving despite great challenges such as poverty and war. The number 1 is the number of the hero and this is why you find many disabled as well as super achievers (such as military leaders and business magnates) born under this life path number.

You are also usually blessed with good health, vitality and endless inspiration. Your number is very connected with the divine and you often feel especially connected to God or your subconscious mind. However, as you are such an individualist, this insistence on listening to your hunches often make you appear irrational or even insane to others, that is, until the direction of your gut instincts pays off and all benefit.

Although you are capable of rising to great heights when it comes to career or athletics, you are also capable of great falls. However, as you are also an innovative and resourceful individual you have the uncanny ability to "make lemons out of lemonade" and start again from scratch.

Despite your main personally blessing, you might also feel as if you face more challenges or obstacles in life than others do. Karmically, many number 1's spend their early years learning not to be dependent on others as fate throws difficult relationships and situations their way. If you feel cursed or that you have a bad luck, that is very characteristic of number ones whose life lessons are usually about "letting go", "releasing control" and "overcoming great odds."

As a number 1 you may also need to watch a tendency towards arrogance or over confidence. Many number ones stumble early in life because they have a habit of biting off more than they can chew. Often you are perceived as odd, controlling or self-centered by others. However often these are traits are forgiven as others also recognize that your talents outshine those of the ordinary mortal.

Of all the numbers, you are the one that values individuality, privacy and ethics more than anything. This is why so many of you become business, political and spiritual leaders. You tend to have faith in yourself, more than you do others, and make a better leader than a team player. You are best suited to occupations that allow you to work on your own or be the big boss.

Being a number 1, you are also likely to achieve some measure of fame in your life. This is because you are destined to be "the one that is loved by all" as opposed to "the one that is loved by one other." It sometimes takes number ones a lifetime to realize that being adored by many is not such a bad thing.

Your Expression - which describes your potential natural talents and abilities - works out to be a 3.

Tara, your Expression of 3 ...
Your Potential Natural Talents and Abilities


You are at the height of your self-expression when you feel that others are experiencing "being high on life" like you are. One of your personal goals may be to uplift humanity or spread joy or enthusiasm wherever you go. You know how to unite others through the magic of performance, song dance, singing, acting or literature. For this reason, you are fated to entertain others in some way, whether you are in showbiz or not!

You are imaginative in every way possible. As you are a great innovator your career choice may be unorthodox in some way. You consider the accumulation of experiences to be your greatest wealth so you may choose a career in which you travel a lot so you can meet as many people and encounter as many different kinds of situations as possible.

You love to dare to be grand and this is reflected in your mannerisms and speech. You often speak in full paragraphs and are a captivating storyteller. You often throw your entire body into your self-expression so that it is one with what you are saying. For this reason many of you make incredible actors, opera singers, teachers or performers.

You also have a natural dexterity that makes it easy for you to learn and play music. Threes are often blessed with a natural sense of comic timing as well as rhythm. This makes you an excellent dancer and lover.

You love philosophy and the old cliches that are true in life so when you feel lost emotionally you rely on wise words to get you through. You rarely take anything that happens to you in life personally, a trait that frustrates your enemies to no end. This ability to let stuff "roll off your back" serves you well in the many complex emotional situations that threes often get into.

You relate better to large groups of people then you do one on one. As threes are often no shows in their family lives and rarely have time to pay attention to their lovers they are likely to show their affection by giving lavish gifts. However this is often perceived by others as an attempt to buy others affection or as a lousy substitute for real emotional support.

As you adore being in the spotlight you probably dress to impress. Either you dress in the latest trendy fashions or in an eccentric fashion that makes it impossible for others not to notice you. As you are an oddly sentimental creature, you are fond of heirlooms and one of a kind jewelry and clothing that sets you apart from the crowd.

One of the greatest gifts you have to offer others is your boundless optimism and enthusiasm for life. Others who meet you rarely forget you as you always make a permanent first impression.

Although on the surface you might appear to be a bit shallow to others usually you are motivated by the desire to have others transcend petty emotions and pains in life. Nothing annoys you more than a person that insists on looking down at his shoes when he could be looking up at a big wide sky full of stars. The ultimate achievement of your life expression is to change the consciousness of others so that they aspire to their highest ideals. One way that you do this by continually reminding them through your actions that these ideals can be manifested through kind and wise action on earth.

[Moms4Justice]

Now, Let's Examine Your Soul Urge
(also known as your "Heart's Desire")

We have already done all the mathematics necessary to work out this number. It is simply the total of the top row (the vowels) of your full birth name.

In your case Tara, this totals 5.


Tara, your Soul Urge of 5 ...

What You Desire To Be, To Have, and To Do In Your Life


You love change. You live to experience as much as possible in the shortest amount of time possible. You appreciate the fact that life is short and are bound and determined to make the most of every minute you have on this earth. You have an inquisitive mind and a thirst for adventure that is only slaked by the collecting of unusual experiences and plenty of travel.

Your adaptable nature puts you at home anywhere. You are also a bit of chameleon that is able to transform its appearance and nature to suit the environment. You are a big believer in the phrase "When in Rome.. Do as the Romans do." Your closet is usually full of many costumes, as part of your soul's satisfaction is to do a bit of \"play acting\" in real life.

You also possess the rare gift of detachment. Emotionally this grants you the ability to have a serial number of relationships throughout your life yet not suffer any kind of trauma or nasty consequences when one ends. However your casual attitude towards relationships often devastates others who interpret your adventurous spirit as an unwillingness to settle down and put down roots. This gives you the reputation of being "shallow" or a "heartbreaker" when nothing could be further from the truth. You simply don't connect to others in the same way they do to you and you are frustrated by those who can't seem to get on with their life the same way you are able to.

In fact you can't think of a bigger disservice to one's soul than to give up one's right to pursue their heart's desire. You feel smothered by individuals who define love as giving up your heart and soul for another. Your definition of love is more spiritually sophisticated. You believe that an expression of true love for another soul is the courage to let them go to pursue their own path.

Another one of your blessings is that it simply does not occur to you to be overemotional about things or create dramas. You are a very difficult person to pick a fight with as you have a pacifist nature. You simply see ugly emotional scenes as beneath you and you are often long gone before a battle of wills is likely to take place.

You are also very accepting of different cultures and in particular, religious and political points of view. Unfortunately others see this omniscience as procrastination or as two faced as you have a way of "agreeing with everyone." Your refusal to take a stand sometimes costs you dearly professionally. This is often a mystery to you as from your point of view all you were doing is being fair.

You intrinsically understand that without change there is no evolution. This is why somehow, many of you end up as being the catalyst for change in many situations. Sometimes the change that your very presence provokes is constructive and good and sometimes you are the culprit that causes complete chaos. However often your motivation for revealing secrets or destroying relationships is to clear out the old and create way for the new.

You are also graced with an astounding amount of courage. Like water you have the ability to wear down obstacles like water in a stream wears down a rock over a long period of time. Although you may appear unpredictable or unreliable to others you are actually a very complex individual who often harbors a clear vision of who they want to be and how they want to live in the future.

[Moms4Justice]

No offense taken.
It clearly has a link provided.
If you took the time to read the whole post then you would see that is a numerology reading on Tara. Based on her name and birthdate.
Compared to her astrological reading maybe? Thats the best I can do with helping you understand it.
No offense intended.

[One2Snoop]

Merrick,

I believe the numerology reading is in the appropriate place - under Brians Prediction thread, if that helps explain anything? :read:

[Moms4Justice]

Originally posted by Merrick
Moms/One,

I really appreciate your patience with me but I'm just not getting it. I just don't see the relevancy. It's probably the fault of who I am. No offense taken and no offense intended.

Merrick

Merrick,
Its a reading of someone just like a Palm Reading, Astrological reading, Pyschic reading, horoscope etc.
PALM = A reading into ones life and future by observing the lines in the palms of your house.
ASTROLOGICAL = " " the planets at the persons time of birth
PYSCHIC = well you know........lol
NUMEROLOGY = is a detail of a person based on their b-day and their name ( what # the letters represent)


The post was Tara's numerology reading. It would fall under the same catagory with the other things mentioned above.
I just found it interesting and some of it sounded a lot like Tara.
It even says she would make a great teacher.
I hope this helps.

[One2Snoop]

Originally posted by Merrick


I am truly not being disrepectful but I still don't get it. I've never been into that stuff, palm reading, stars, numerology, etc. How does it help, what does it mean? I guess I'm just not a believer. I believe in what is here and now and tangible. I read all you postd but I just dont' get how it has anything to do with Tara. Like I said earlier, I'm just Stoopid!!:biggrin:

Merrick

Either you believe in that stuff (palm readings, psychics etc...) or you don't but it doesn't mean you're stupid. :patriot:

[One2Snoop]

Originally posted by Merrick


I was voicing my frustration at not being able to grasp how numerology, psychic readings, etc, work.

ok. :seeya:

[Moms4Justice]

Originally posted by OopsItsAdel

Moms, do you interpret one part as "ML was there" or something else? Also, any thoughts on the "0" in the square up there on the right? I've never read one of these so I just wanted to get your point of view. Don't mind the other posters tonight. They make fun of most anything they don't fully understand.
:(

Anyway, any thoughts you have on it are welcome! Thanks!

Yes, I do believe that the DD says "ML was there"
I think the "0" in the tic tac toe thing is possibly reffering to a property map that someone has.... But thats my opinion.
BTW it is also in my theory that ML WAS there.

[One2Snoop]

Originally posted by Moms4Justice


Yes, I do believe that the DD says "ML was there"
I think the "0" in the tic tac toe thing is possibly reffering to a property map that someone has.... But thats my opinion.
BTW it is also in my theory that ML WAS there.

Are you saying ML was there with HD then? (going with what you posted in the "Conflicting Theories thread") Can you expand on your theory a little more? I'd sure like to hear it or if you've posted it before can you direct me to it. Thanks.

[readmylips]

Originally posted by Moms4Justice


Yes, I do believe that the DD says "ML was there"
I think the "0" in the tic tac toe thing is possibly reffering to a property map that someone has.... But thats my opinion.
BTW it is also in my theory that ML WAS there.

it reads MR to me. i guess its all in the interpretation.

[Its just me]

Originally posted by Moms4Justice


Yes, I do believe that the DD says "ML was there"
I think the "0" in the tic tac toe thing is possibly reffering to a property map that someone has.... But thats my opinion.
BTW it is also in my theory that ML WAS there.

All landowners/farmers have aerial property maps of their farm/land that show each field, pond, timber, pasture etc. My be a good idea to check with the Irwin County FSA office who provides this kind of map or with the clerk or courts who can provide a surveyed map which only shows the land lines if someone requested a property map from one of these offices.. Just a thought.

[Moms4Justice]

Originally posted by Its just me


All landowners/farmers have aerial property maps of their farm/land that show each field, pond, timber, pasture etc. My be a good idea to check with the Irwin County FSA office who provides this kind of map or with the clerk or courts who can provide a surveyed map which only shows the land lines if someone requested a property map from one of these offices.. Just a thought.

A very good thought!

IJM I know that you "ride the fence" in a theory on what happened to Tara and this post was positive and helpful to me regarding my theory and questions about what happened and I THANK YOU for that.

[Its just me]

Originally posted by Moms4Justice


A very good thought!

IJM I know that you "ride the fence" in a theory on what happened to Tara and this post was positive and helpful to me regarding my theory and questions about what happened and I THANK YOU for that.

I do ride the fense. Glad I could help. Nothing should be over looked.

[PNut]

well, in what I am SURE is an oversite, a very productive thread which had taken a turn towards the topic of GBI searching Tara's home, and the found necklace, has gone *poof*.

Hence, I shall start it anew.

the necklace Tara wore the last day/evening she was seen alive, was found, on the floor of her bedroom almost 2 weeks after she was reported missing.

Had it been merely overlooked by LE/GBI?

Was it brought back INTO the home by someone?

Was it there all along and dislodge/shifted and fell to the floor by accident?


How secure WAS Tara's home in the first days after her disappearance?


Please, let's continue this discussion, as it seemed to be rather interesting....

[luvmy2labpups]

Ok, so if the necklace was thrown on the floor as ANITA said, how did the GBI miss it? I am sorry, but the GBI doesn't just ignore a necklace thrown on the floor. If it was visible to ANITA then the GBI saw it as well.


http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRI...1/12/ng.01.html




GATTIS: She had a very expensive pair of shoes she wore that night. She always bought stuff. Those were thrown in the middle of the floor. Also, a necklace that she had just made the night before. She used beads that she had and beads that were my grandmother`s necklace. She restrung, made her own necklace. That was thrown on the floor. Tara did not take care of her belongings like that.

[cbcrime]

I just have a hard time with GBI missing the necklace. Okay what if it was between clothes and fell out later. The problem with this is that now you're saying the GBI never picked up the clothes and looked through them. Wouldn't you look through all the clothes for any possible evidence?

Also who found the necklace. The crime library article on 11/6 says invesitgators recovered the necklace. Who actually recovered the necklace? Was it in another LE search or did someone else find it and call LE?

Also this necklace seemed to be a pretty good size - not like a thin gold chain that could easily get lost in a rug or carpet. So how could it be missing.

Yet Luv - your quote from AG makes it seem like it was mixed in with other jewerly. Did the searchers just not know the importance of these items?

[MATTHEWsevenone]

Well well well - yet anouther POOFED THREAD - what is it about Tara's timeline on Saturday that bugs someone(s)?

I too think the necklace is POSSIBLY an important piece of the puzzle where Tara's disappearance goes...

1. I think it COULD HAVE BEEN OVERLOOKED. IMO- depends on how the house was processed. If the GBI did not have a photo of the necklace and there were various necklaces strewn around during the Pageant prep time - the GBI could have just overlooked this necklace because it was just ONE MORE NECKLACE...

2. If all the necklaces were documented and the bedroom completely processed (wouldn't this have included the room being vacuumed and hair and fibers being taken as possible evidence?) Then the necklace was much more likely to have been PLACED where it was found AFTER the GBI had processed the room/site IMO. The reasons for this include IMO-

a. to discredit the GBI and the investigation
b. to confuse and taunt the GBI/investigators
c. to send a message to someone

** a point of information: didn't Anita say during some interview that the house was covered with fingerprinting dust and she and others cleaned it after the house had been processed? If they did this then they more than likely dusted and vacuumed right? SO the WHEN this necklace showed up becomes more curious, IMO- if it did show up 2 weeks after Tara vanished. (wish I could recall the date the necklace was discovered in relationship to where the searches were being conducted and/or being curtailed - it was only two weeks before authorities called off the grid searches remember?)


** I have wondered WHY anyone would return it to Tara's Bedroom?

Wouldn't that person had to feel superior to LE or in the loop?
Wouldn't that person have to had access to Tara's house/bedroom and not feel out of place or able to do so without fear of detection?
Could that person have used a cohort or accomplice?


OR

Did that person want to simply shed a piece of evidence they discovered that could connect them to Tara that night! --remember that PHOTO was up for all the world to see on one website, not sure if that particular photo aired elsewhere or not?

Was that necklace broken or not? I think the answer to thay may be very important- whether it was always in that room or returned.

ALL MOO of course.

V

:seeya:

[cbcrime]

From Crime Library article dated 11/6/2005
"Investigators have also reportedly recovered a necklace Grinstead had been seen wearing the night she disappeared. It was found over the weekend on the floor of her home, and had apparently been overlooked in earlier searches, a source said."

From Crime Library article dated 3/20/2006
"A study of the young woman's home a week earlier, he told Crime Library, had convinced him that the young woman had been abducted sometime between 11:05 p.m. on Oct. 22 and 5 o'clock the next morning, and in all probability she knew her abductor, and may even have been close to him. There was, Godwin had determined, a struggle. The proof of that, he concluded, was the fact that some of Tara's beads had been strewn across the floor, along with the often-reported fact that her bedside clock had fallen to the floor and the bedpost at the foot of her bed had been damaged. "Somebody kicked the heck out of it," Godwin said."

Godwin is the only one who has indicted the necklace was broken. Or at least beads strewn across the floor. And that wasn't until March 2006.

[Lindsey]

Originally posted by MATTHEWsevenone
Well well well - yet anouther POOFED THREAD - what is it about Tara's timeline on Saturday that bugs someone(s)?


2. If all the necklaces were documented and the bedroom completely processed (wouldn't this have included the room being vacuumed and hair and fibers being taken as possible evidence?) Then the necklace was much more likely to have been PLACED where it was found AFTER the GBI had processed the room/site IMO. The reasons for this include IMO-

a. to discredit the GBI and the investigation
b. to confuse and taunt the GBI/investigators
c. to send a message to someone

** a point of information: didn't Anita say during some interview that the house was covered with fingerprinting dust and she and others cleaned it after the house had been processed? If they did this then they more than likely dusted and vacuumed right? SO the WHEN this necklace showed up becomes more curious, IMO- if it did show up 2 weeks after Tara vanished. (wish I could recall the date the necklace was discovered in relationship to where the searches were being conducted and/or being curtailed - it was only two weeks before authorities called off the grid searches remember?)



NANCY GRACE
Massive Search Turns Up no Sign of Beauty Queen Turned Teacher

Aired January 12, 2006 - 20:00:00 ET


GRACE: I wish you could be here with us tonight. We are in Ocilla, Georgia, live at the headquarters for the search for Tara Grinstead, obviously a beauty queen turned history teacher. Today, I went through her home with her mother. Everything is about history -- historic quotes, historic books, historic photos. I said earlier she even named her dog after Dolly Madison.

But another disturbing thing I saw in that home is this -- fingerprint dusting, luminol dusting, the works, trying to find Tara Grinstead.

--------------

The house had not been cleaned on January 12, 2006 according to the Nancy Grace transcripts.

[Results]

I thought the car was cleaned so it would not be dirty when Tara came back because she would just die if she seen her car like that. So, why didn't they clean the house too? That doesn't make sense and if I have it wrong please by all means correct me. JMO

[TuscanDreams]

Don't shoot the messenger. I work in LE (not forensics or CSI by any stretch of the imagination) and I can tell you that things are often overlooked.

The police department is falliable. They aren't superhumans nor are they malicious.

IF a necklace was overlooked, it was on oversight. If male police officers were searching the home, they easily could have overlooked a necklace.

ETA: I remember a case in my area in which the police missed a bullet hole. The crime scene clean up team that was hired by the homeowners found the bullet hole and LE was notified. Forensics found the bullet that was lodged in the wall and guess what? It convicted the offender because it came from a gun that he'd owned.

Not everything is sinister- mistakes happen.

[Lindsey]

Originally posted by Results
I thought the car was cleaned so it would not be dirty when Tara came back because she would just die if she seen her car like that. So, why didn't they clean the house too? That doesn't make sense and if I have it wrong please by all means correct me. JMO

You're right. Mr. P said he had the car washed so it wouldn't have the black fingerprint dust on it when Tara came home. But the inside of the house was still covered in black fingerprint dust when Nancy Grace went there in January. Makes no sense at all.

IMO

[MATTHEWsevenone]

Lindsey,

Thanks for the link Lindsey - appreciate it I do. But I was speaking of the interview ANITA did- not Faye. And it was much earlier than Jan. I thought. Obviously both reflect there was dust or residue on some surfaces but I was really trying to recall what was said.

I think she and Greta Van Sesertain (sic) walked through the house in November (?) Why do I have in my head that Anita remarked she and others cleaned Tara's house after the LE processed it. I did find some of the photos... one clearly shows some sort of dust/debris on the coffee table and another with Anita sitting close to the same table and there is dust.

http://www.foxnews.com/photoessay/0,4644,699,00.html#12_0


Anyone have the Greta interview link?

It has been a year! But I thought I recalled SOMEONE REMARKING ON CAMERA Tara's house had been cleaned after LE were done and I thought that someone was Anita. Now I am wondering if it was Mr. P and he was talking exclusively about Tara's car (that would have been on Nancy Grace I think).

Sure wish we had all of our threads on this board to just go back and find the references and allow us to keep the chronology fresh in our minds. With so many other missing person cases, we actually had threads dedicated to news links. Wonder if we could do that now with Tara's case?

With the way these threads go POOF I almost wonder if someone wants to make sure CTV does not have the record it usually does and in particular with this missing person case.

It is ODD which THREADS go POOF IMO.

ALL MOO of course.


:seeya:

[MATTHEWsevenone]

Originally posted by Results
I thought the car was cleaned so it would not be dirty when Tara came back because she would just die if she seen her car like that. So, why didn't they clean the house too? That doesn't make sense and if I have it wrong please by all means correct me. JMO


Results -

I didn't see your post til I posted mine. I too am wondering about some of this. Hopefully we can pull the links in and sync up what was what...

As I recall Mr. P said Anita ASKED HIM to clean the car because of the fingerprinting stuff... yet she and her mom leave the house with all the luminol testing AND fingerprinting stuff all over the house?

Hey- could I be thinking about the posts made by that girl who competed that night. Did she post ANYTHING about cleaning the house?

Somewhere before Dec. I have in my notes - house cleaned - date left blank. Where did I get that?

Any help greatly appreciated.

V
:seeya:

[Results]

Originally posted by MATTHEWsevenone



Results -

I didn't see your post til I posted mine. I too am wondering about some of this. Hopefully we can pull the links in and sync up what was what...

As I recall Mr. P said Anita ASKED HIM to clean the car because of the fingerprinting stuff... yet she and her mom leave the house with all the luminol testing AND fingerprinting stuff all over the house?

Hey- could I be thinking about the posts made by that girl who competed that night. Did she post ANYTHING about cleaning the house?

Somewhere before Dec. I have in my notes - house cleaned - date left blank. Where did I get that?

Any help greatly appreciated.

V
:seeya:

M71,

Don't forget that the yard was cleaned or raked too for when she returned home yet they didn't clean the house for her return. That just seems odd to me. JMHO

[Results]

Also, AG was complaining that the GBI did not do enough testing on the car and she was going to have to pay for the testing so why send anyone to clean the car when AG herself thinks the car needed more testing. Why didn't she tell the GBI that Monday to take the car instead of having it washed and then say I'm not happy with the testing of the car? That don't make sense either. JMHO

[concernedperson]

As I said before on the poofed thread it could be when the photos were released of what Tara wore at the BBQ the necklace became importent. Just a guess. The necklace could have been entangled with the clothes she wore. And later placed for someone to find.

It seems more than not, that Tara was readying herself for bed or a more casual encounter. If I understand correctly, no shoes are missing. If that is the case no female that I know is going anywhere without shoes unless it is the mailbox.

[Results]

I was told that Missy Davis and A**** went through all of Tara's jewelry looking for the missing necklace and earrings after all Missy would have known full well what it looked like considering she saw her with it on Saturday night but they didn't find it. Several people went to the house on 11/3 and that necklace was not on the floor. I was also told that several ladies used a broom to sweep under the bed to see if anything was under there - necklace, earrings, etc. There was no necklace in that bedroom on 11/3 so how did the necklace just magically appear on the 6th or 7th whicever it was? This coud be a key piece of evidence. I believe my source is right because the one thing I believe for sure is that there was a great discussion going on about the necklace on the TO GBI THREAD and that thread went POOF which I will say it again makes me think my source maybe on to something. I don't trust many people but I do believe my source 100%. My source has been accurate time after time. You can chose to not believe it or you can chose to believe it but what would it hurt if we take this information and discuss it from all angels. All I am asking you posters to do is to give what I was told a benefit of a doubt and see where it leads us. What do we have to lose to trust someone that was there? Let us give some time and thought on this necklace in question. I truly believe this could be very important and I would also like to say thank you to my source for permission in posting the information they shared with me. I will never reveal anything that I am told in confidence without permission so once again thank you! JMHO

[OhBrother]

Originally posted by Results
I was told that Missy Davis and A**** went through all of Tara's jewelry looking for the missing necklace and earrings after all Missy would have known full well what it looked like considering she saw her with it on Saturday night but they didn't find it. Several people went to the house on 11/3 and that necklace was not on the floor. I was also told that several ladies used a broom to sweep under the bed to see if anything was under there - necklace, earrings, etc. There was no necklace in that bedroom on 11/3 so how did the necklace just magically appear on the 6th or 7th whicever it was? This coud be a key piece of evidence. I believe my source is right because the one thing I believe for sure is that there was a great discussion going on about the necklace on the TO GBI THREAD and that thread went POOF which I will say it again makes me think my source maybe on to something. I don't trust many people but I do believe my source 100%. My source has been accurate time after time. You can chose to not believe it or you can chose to believe it but what would it hurt if we take this information and discuss it from all angels. All I am asking you posters to do is to give what I was told a benefit of a doubt and see where it leads us. What do we have to lose to trust someone that was there? Let us give some time and thought on this necklace in question. I truly believe this could be very important and I would also like to say thank you to my source for permission in posting the information they shared with me. I will never reveal anything that I am told in confidence without permission so once again thank you! JMHO
If your source was "there", maybe your source has a reason for not telling you the truth about the necklace. Ever consider that?

:confused:

[readmylips]

Originally posted by OhBrother

If your source was "there", maybe your source has a reason for not telling you the truth about the necklace. Ever consider that?

:confused:

was the source there? :confused: are you assuming that the source was there? and if the source "was" there, how would it have any bearing on the idea that the necklace was looked for and was not found at that time? it seems you're implying that the source planted the necklace. is that what you're saying? and if it is, when would they have done that and why?

[OhBrother]

Originally posted by readmylips


was the source there? :confused: are you assuming that the source was there? and if the source "was" there, how would it have any bearing on the idea that the necklace was looked for and was not found at that time? it seems you're implying that the source planted the necklace. is that what you're saying? and if it is, when would they have done that and why?

I assumed the source was there because you stated as much:

What do we have to lose to trust someone that was there? Let us give some time and thought on this necklace in question. I truly believe this could be very important and I would also like to say thank you to my source for permission in posting the information they shared with me.

Did I misunderstand your post?

[OhBrother]

Originally posted by readmylips


was the source there? :confused: are you assuming that the source was there? and if the source "was" there, how would it have any bearing on the idea that the necklace was looked for and was not found at that time? it seems you're implying that the source planted the necklace. is that what you're saying? and if it is, when would they have done that and why?

WHY OR WHEN would ANYBODY have done that???
:shrug:

[readmylips]

Originally posted by OhBrother


I assumed the source was there because you stated as much:

What do we have to lose to trust someone that was there? Let us give some time and thought on this necklace in question. I truly believe this could be very important and I would also like to say thank you to my source for permission in posting the information they shared with me.

Did I misunderstand your post?

well the first perception issue to address is who'd post that is. it isn't mine. but i still don't see anywhere in it where results says the source was there.

you didn't answer the rest of my inquiry though. i'm more interested in your thoughts than in your selective perception.

[readmylips]

Originally posted by OhBrother


WHY OR WHEN would ANYBODY have done that???
:shrug:

you tell me. that's why i asked you.

[readmylips]

Originally posted by OhBrother


I assumed the source was there because you stated as much:

What do we have to lose to trust someone that was there? Let us give some time and thought on this necklace in question. I truly believe this could be very important and I would also like to say thank you to my source for permission in posting the information they shared with me.

Did I misunderstand your post?

i owe you an apology. my own selective perception kicked in on this one. i read that 3 times and not until the fourth did i see the end of that very first sentence and absorbed it. a fine example of how our perceptions rule the way we absorb information.

[Results]

Originally posted by OhBrother

If your source was "there", maybe your source has a reason for not telling you the truth about the necklace. Ever consider that?

:confused:

I consider my source the most reliable source so far that I know involved in this case. But, you :no: I think you know a whole lot considering you just registered. So, what is your game today .. oh wait "somebody actually told the truth" and YOU can't stand it. BTW, the one thing that I have considered is the nicswitchers are afraid of what is coming out on the boards. I don't want to know who you are because I don't care who you are. I care about the people that want to help find Tara not come to the boards and put every single poster down with smartass remarks and play games. Your problem IMO is jealousy what is the matter you don't have any friends left so the only thing that you can do is come on here and try to discredit anything that is discussed. Your post acutally makes me laugh because your post reminds me of people that have spotted ELVIS WHO IS ALIVE AND WELL. Be productive. I did not ask you to believe me nor do I care if you believe me. What I care about is there is something wrong with why a whole thread speaking of a necklace just disappears. Proves my point more than likely there is something here about this necklace. If you don't want to participate in finding Tara then that is your business. But please leave me alone when trying to drag down posters that really CARE AND WANT CLOSURE FOR ALL INVOLVED. JMHO

[OhBrother]

Originally posted by readmylips


well the first perception issue to address is who'd post that is. it isn't mine. but i still don't see anywhere in it where results says the source was there.

you didn't answer the rest of my inquiry though. i'm more interested in your thoughts than in your selective perception.
I have no thoughts on your selective perception theory.

I did assume you AGREED with the post of Results since you quoted it, however, I stand corrected that they were not "your" words. But you did quote and agree, so that resulted in my question back to you about the source being there.

Your "questions in response to questions" tells me nothing, so there must be a reason for you being evasive. Please feel free not to respond if you can't contribute anything. TIA.

[readmylips]

Originally posted by OhBrother

I have no thoughts on your selective perception theory.

I did assume you AGREED with the post of Results since you quoted it, however, I stand corrected that they were not "your" words. But you did quote and agree, so that resulted in my question back to you about the source being there.

Your "questions in response to questions" tells me nothing, so there must be a reason for you being evasive. Please feel free not to respond if you can't contribute anything. TIA.

evasive? what was i evasive about? i offered you my opinion several times. :confused:

i am not surprised you have no thoughts on selective perception. most people with a severe case of it do not.

[OhBrother]

Originally posted by Results


I consider my source the most reliable source so far that I know involved in this case. But, you :no: I think you know a whole lot considering you just registered. So, what is your game today .. oh wait "somebody actually told the truth" and YOU can't stand it. BTW, the one thing that I have considered is the nicswitchers are afraid of what is coming out on the boards. I don't want to know who you are because I don't care who you are. I care about the people that want to help find Tara not come to the boards and put every single poster down with smartass remarks and play games. Your problem IMO is jealousy what is the matter you don't have any friends left so the only thing that you can do is come on here and try to discredit anything that is discussed. Your post acutally makes me laugh because your post reminds me of people that have spotted ELVIS WHO IS ALIVE AND WELL. Be productive. I did not ask you to believe me nor do I care if you believe me. What I care about is there is something wrong with why a whole thread speaking of a necklace just disappears. Proves my point more than likely there is something here about this necklace. If you don't want to participate in finding Tara then that is your business. But please leave me alone when trying to drag down posters that really CARE AND WANT CLOSURE FOR ALL INVOLVED. JMHO
Results, it was a VERY simple comment I made to you. Aren't you willing to have an open mind??

WHOEVER was there had an opportunity to "plant" the necklace. EVEN YOUR SOURCE IF THEY WERE THERE. Right? What gives them immunity? Am I missing something?

My point being: I don't think ANYONE planted anything. I think it was a simple error, if that. But if it WAS NOT an oversight, then your source (if they were there) is in the SAME CATEGORY AS ANYONE ELSE WALKING IN THE HOUSE.

You can't dispute that, so please don't try.

Feel free not to respond if you can't contribute.

BTW, when you registered here, I believe you most likely ALSO started off with "zero" posts until you posted. Did anyone attackyou for being new?
:shrug:

What's a nicswitcher by the way???

[readmylips]

Originally posted by OhBrother

Results, it was a VERY simple comment I made to you. Aren't you willing to have an open mind??

WHOEVER was there had an opportunity to "plant" the necklace. EVEN YOUR SOURCE IF THEY WERE THERE. Right? What gives them immunity? Am I missing something?

My point being: I don't think ANYONE planted anything. I think it was a simple error, if that. But if it WAS NOT an oversight, then your source (if they were there) is in the SAME CATEGORY AS ANYONE ELSE WALKING IN THE HOUSE.

You can't dispute that, so please don't try.

Feel free not to respond if you can't contribute.

BTW, when you registered here, I believe you most likely ALSO started off with "zero" posts until you posted. Did anyone attackyou for being new?
:shrug:

What's a nicswitcher by the way???

ok, i'll play for a minute.

let's say that results source planted the necklace. what benefit would it be for them to tell results that the necklace was searched for and not found but then mysteriously appeared? if they planted it, wouldn't they just want the discussion about it to go away? why would they call attention to the fact that it had been searched for and not found?

[odette]

Originally posted by OhBrother

Results, it was a VERY simple comment I made to you. Aren't you willing to have an open mind??

WHOEVER was there had an opportunity to "plant" the necklace. EVEN YOUR SOURCE IF THEY WERE THERE. Right? What gives them immunity? Am I missing something?

My point being: I don't think ANYONE planted anything. I think it was a simple error, if that. But if it WAS NOT an oversight, then your source (if they were there) is in the SAME CATEGORY AS ANYONE ELSE WALKING IN THE HOUSE.

You can't dispute that, so please don't try.

Feel free not to respond if you can't contribute.

BTW, when you registered here, I believe you most likely ALSO started off with "zero" posts until you posted. Did anyone attackyou for being new?
:shrug:

What's a nicswitcher by the way???

What's a nicswitcher by the way???
:lol:

Anyone see oops lately??


IMO

[Results]

Originally posted by OhBrother

Results, it was a VERY simple comment I made to you. Aren't you willing to have an open mind??

WHOEVER was there had an opportunity to "plant" the necklace. EVEN YOUR SOURCE IF THEY WERE THERE. Right? What gives them immunity? Am I missing something?

My point being: I don't think ANYONE planted anything. I think it was a simple error, if that. But if it WAS NOT an oversight, then your source (if they were there) is in the SAME CATEGORY AS ANYONE ELSE WALKING IN THE HOUSE.

You can't dispute that, so please don't try.

Feel free not to respond if you can't contribute.

BTW, when you registered here, I believe you most likely ALSO started off with "zero" posts until you posted. Did anyone attackyou for being new?
:shrug:

What's a nicswitcher by the way???

New members don't bother me one bit. A member that just signs up and knows it all and starts derailling threads then I say you are not a new member of this board but a recent new nic for whatever reason and frankly I don't care. Anyone in that house that day could have planted the necklace or the cat could have done it. But, I will bet that if all people were to be given a LDT for that day in question without a doubt my source will pass and maybe everyone in that house will pass. We don't know if someone there that day planted it or planted it that night knowing some individuals were going to the house. I don't know that is why I am trying to discuss it but I am finding it once again a subject that we are trying to discuss but the thread just has to be derailed. Why must there be fighting because if we are all here for Tara then what the hell are we fighting about? Our goal is to discuss, examine, research, and communicate. Without the help of all members we can't do this. We have to make a choice here to ignore those that want to change the topic from what we are discussing or try to get everyone involved in the discussion. It doesn't matter if you believe it or not all I asked is lets put this in a truth pile and examine it and see what it comes up with. We can use it as a faulse information and see what it comes up with. When we do this both ways one of these ways, truth or false, is going to fit in a puzzle. That is why I think it is very important to discuss it both ways but without hatred, I know it all, you know nothing, etc etc. UNITED WE STAND DIVIDED WE FALL. Why can't we show respect to all posters and deal with each post to see if the event fits the piece of puzzle. It is a proven fact that team work has more results then any other system. Both sides want Tara found and closure for everyone. I have to wonder why so many don't want to be team players those are the ones that I'm concerned about . JMHO

[Results]

Originally posted by odette



:lol:

Anyone see oops lately??


IMO

:lol:

[Its just me]

Originally posted by Results


New members don't bother me one bit. A member that just signs up and knows it all and starts derailling threads then I say you are not a new member of this board but a recent new nic for whatever reason and frankly I don't care. Anyone in that house that day could have planted the necklace or the cat could have done it. But, I will bet that if all people were to be given a LDT for that day in question without a doubt my source will pass and maybe everyone in that house will pass. We don't know if someone there that day planted it or planted it that night knowing some individuals were going to the house. I don't know that is why I am trying to discuss it but I am finding it once again a subject that we are trying to discuss but the thread just has to be derailed. Why must there be fighting because if we are all here for Tara then what the hell are we fighting about? Our goal is to discuss, examine, research, and communicate. Without the help of all members we can't do this. We have to make a choice here to ignore those that want to change the topic from what we are discussing or try to get everyone involved in the discussion. It doesn't matter if you believe it or not all I asked is lets put this in a truth pile and examine it and see what it comes up with. We can use it as a faulse information and see what it comes up with. When we do this both ways one of these ways, truth or false, is going to fit in a puzzle. That is why I think it is very important to discuss it both ways but without hatred, I know it all, you know nothing, etc etc. UNITED WE STAND DIVIDED WE FALL. Why can't we show respect to all posters and deal with each post to see if the event fits the piece of puzzle. It is a proven fact that team work has more results then any other system. Both sides want Tara found and closure for everyone. I have to wonder why so many don't want to be team players those are the ones that I'm concerned about . JMHO

UNITED WE STAND DIVIDED WE FALL. I'm standing with you.
:rose: For a great post.

[OhBrother]

Originally posted by readmylips


ok, i'll play for a minute.

let's say that results source planted the necklace. what benefit would it be for them to tell results that the necklace was searched for and not found but then mysteriously appeared? if they planted it, wouldn't they just want the discussion about it to go away? why would they call attention to the fact that it had been searched for and not found? There you go responding for Results again but I'll play for a minute too. If you will read my post, it is self explanatory. But to answer your question, HYPOTHETICALLY SPEAKING, calling attention to something like that might make a person think EXACTLY what you are thinking right now..."If they did that, why would they mention it...so they probably didn't do that..." A smart person MIGHT make a move like that. Right?

Use your brain before you ask someone to read your lips. MOO.

[NancynNC]

BUMP

[OhBrother]

Originally posted by Results


New members don't bother me one bit. A member that just signs up and knows it all and starts derailling threads then I say you are not a new member of this board but a recent new nic for whatever reason and frankly I don't care. Anyone in that house that day could have planted the necklace or the cat could have done it. But, I will bet that if all people were to be given a LDT for that day in question without a doubt my source will pass and maybe everyone in that house will pass. We don't know if someone there that day planted it or planted it that night knowing some individuals were going to the house. I don't know that is why I am trying to discuss it but I am finding it once again a subject that we are trying to discuss but the thread just has to be derailed. Why must there be fighting because if we are all here for Tara then what the hell are we fighting about? Our goal is to discuss, examine, research, and communicate. Without the help of all members we can't do this. We have to make a choice here to ignore those that want to change the topic from what we are discussing or try to get everyone involved in the discussion. It doesn't matter if you believe it or not all I asked is lets put this in a truth pile and examine it and see what it comes up with. We can use it as a faulse information and see what it comes up with. When we do this both ways one of these ways, truth or false, is going to fit in a puzzle. That is why I think it is very important to discuss it both ways but without hatred, I know it all, you know nothing, etc etc. UNITED WE STAND DIVIDED WE FALL. Why can't we show respect to all posters and deal with each post to see if the event fits the piece of puzzle. It is a proven fact that team work has more results then any other system. Both sides want Tara found and closure for everyone. I have to wonder why so many don't want to be team players those are the ones that I'm concerned about . JMHO
Results I agree with your post. But if you will read back you will see that I did NOT derail this thread by fighting. Other posters began an attack on me because I saw a picture on the internet marked CRIME SCENE PHOTO and asked a question about it. One poster even answered MY questions WITH questions to delay the answer. You should go to THAT poster and complain about delays and derailments. I AM a team player believe it or not but there is no reason whatsoever for another poster to immediately try to intimidate me for ASKING A QUESTION. If you think there IS a reason, then you need to re-examine whether YOU are a team player.

You want us to have an open mind about the necklace, and I DO have an open mind. But when I tell you a "what if" theory and you flush it down the toilet and call in the troops to defend you, then YOU are not a team player. I have been reading this board for over 8 months so please don't tell me I don't know anything about this case and punish me for being a new sign on. If you want others to respect YOU then you should start by showing it to others.

It's not MY FAULT if someone ELSE posted a "crime scene" photo, it's not my fault if I LOOKED AT IT and it's not YOUR place to decide whether it exists or not. It does exist, and that's the end of the story. I WOULD like to discuss the necklace, but will the other posters allow that?? LOL

Good post though. And I agree.

BTW, "new members" shouldn't bother you. You were once a new member too.

[Its just me]

Originally posted by OhBrother

Results I agree with your post. But if you will read back you will see that I did NOT derail this thread by fighting. Other posters began an attack on me because I saw a picture on the internet marked CRIME SCENE PHOTO and asked a question about it. One poster even answered MY questions WITH questions to delay the answer. You should go to THAT poster and complain about delays and derailments. I AM a team player believe it or not but there is no reason whatsoever for another poster to immediately try to intimidate me for ASKING A QUESTION. If you think there IS a reason, then you need to re-examine whether YOU are a team player.

You want us to have an open mind about the necklace, and I DO have an open mind. But when I tell you a "what if" theory and you flush it down the toilet and call in the troops to defend you, then YOU are not a team player. I have been reading this board for over 8 months so please don't tell me I don't know anything about this case and punish me for being a new sign on. If you want others to respect YOU then you should start by showing it to others.

It's not MY FAULT if someone ELSE posted a "crime scene" photo, it's not my fault if I LOOKED AT IT and it's not YOUR place to decide whether it exists or not. It does exist, and that's the end of the story. I WOULD like to discuss the necklace, but will the other posters allow that?? LOL

Good post though. And I agree.

BTW, "new members" shouldn't bother you. You were once a new member too.

OB we all were new members at one time and it is difficult to get involved with poster and subjects. Unless I misread you first came on board asking in if a poster had a link that they were human so if you want respect you first need to respect. Simply as that OB. I welcome you as I just posted on another thread if you want to discuss things with out attacking posters and you did in your first few post. If you want to discuss the necklace or anything just shape up and you will be treated as anyone else. You may think I am talking down on you but that is not what I think I am doing...If you want to be a poster which I think you do I'm just trying to settle the dust so we all can move forward with productive posts. MHOO and no offense intended.

[odette]

Originally posted by OhBrother

Results I agree with your post. But if you will read back you will see that I did NOT derail this thread by fighting. Other posters began an attack on me because I saw a picture on the internet marked CRIME SCENE PHOTO and asked a question about it. One poster even answered MY questions WITH questions to delay the answer. You should go to THAT poster and complain about delays and derailments. I AM a team player believe it or not but there is no reason whatsoever for another poster to immediately try to intimidate me for ASKING A QUESTION. If you think there IS a reason, then you need to re-examine whether YOU are a team player.

You want us to have an open mind about the necklace, and I DO have an open mind. But when I tell you a "what if" theory and you flush it down the toilet and call in the troops to defend you, then YOU are not a team player. I have been reading this board for over 8 months so please don't tell me I don't know anything about this case and punish me for being a new sign on. If you want others to respect YOU then you should start by showing it to others.

It's not MY FAULT if someone ELSE posted a "crime scene" photo, it's not my fault if I LOOKED AT IT and it's not YOUR place to decide whether it exists or not. It does exist, and that's the end of the story. I WOULD like to discuss the necklace, but will the other posters allow that?? LOL

Good post though. And I agree.

BTW, "new members" shouldn't bother you. You were once a new member too.

It's not MY FAULT if someone ELSE posted a "crime scene" photo, it's not my fault if I LOOKED AT IT and it's not YOUR place to decide whether it exists or not. It does exist, and that's the end of the story.

Photo of Tara's shoes on the Internet, with LE "crime scene photo" written on it does not exist. End of story.

You need to STOP making things up OHBrother!.

IMO

[sogalady]

Originally posted by odette




Photo of Tara's shoes on the Internet, with LE "crime scene photo" written on it does not exist. End of story.

You need to STOP making things up OHBrother!.

IMO

I agree Odette,, seems something this important would surely still be around for such a seasoned sleuther to locate,,,,,,,hhhuuummm!

[TuscanDreams]

Let's pursue this and just assume that the necklace was placed there after the police searched her house.

Who had access to the home, who could have put the necklace there?

I tend to believe that the necklace was overlooked, I can't tell you how many times I've thought I had a piece of jewelry on my nightstand and then found that my cat or puppy had either a.eaten it or b. drug it somewhere else.

[TuscanDreams]

Originally posted by Moms4Justice
I'm lost........where did the email subject come up?
Where is this info? From LE or family & friends?

Welcome to my world. :D I'm normally confused about this case, I've never seen anything like it.

[Results]

Originally posted by TuscanDreams
Let's pursue this and just assume that the necklace was placed there after the police searched her house.

Who had access to the home, who could have put the necklace there?

I tend to believe that the necklace was overlooked, I can't tell you how many times I've thought I had a piece of jewelry on my nightstand and then found that my cat or puppy had either a.eaten it or b. drug it somewhere else.

That is what I want to know too. You could be right and the cat took it off to play with. Which I am going to ask about that. Was the cat left in the house after Tara went missing or did they put the cat outside? TIA JMHO

[Gooch]

Originally posted by OhBrother

Results I agree with your post. But if you will read back you will see that I did NOT derail this thread by fighting. Other posters began an attack on me because I saw a picture on the internet marked CRIME SCENE PHOTO and asked a question about it. One poster even answered MY questions WITH questions to delay the answer. You should go to THAT poster and complain about delays and derailments. I AM a team player believe it or not but there is no reason whatsoever for another poster to immediately try to intimidate me for ASKING A QUESTION. If you think there IS a reason, then you need to re-examine whether YOU are a team player.

You want us to have an open mind about the necklace, and I DO have an open mind. But when I tell you a "what if" theory and you flush it down the toilet and call in the troops to defend you, then YOU are not a team player. I have been reading this board for over 8 months so please don't tell me I don't know anything about this case and punish me for being a new sign on. If you want others to respect YOU then you should start by showing it to others.

It's not MY FAULT if someone ELSE posted a "crime scene" photo, it's not my fault if I LOOKED AT IT and it's not YOUR place to decide whether it exists or not. It does exist, and that's the end of the story. I WOULD like to discuss the necklace, but will the other posters allow that?? LOL

Good post though. And I agree.

BTW, "new members" shouldn't bother you. You were once a new member too.

First off .. Results info is very correct from what I was told by my source. Second.. I went in the house with AG in between the time the scene was released to the family and the time the necklace was found. I was looking for little things that maybe someoone had missed ... There ws nothing under the bed at all.. There were no big piles of cloths for a necklace to be lost in. I looked very carefully.. It is a mystery to me where the neckalce came from.. no question about it.. It surely was not in the main part of her bedroom floor.. I am not saying that it was placed by anyone.. but it was surely hidden well. That is the one thing that really makes no sense to me. The GBI luminols fingerprints the entire house. They process the sheets and bed cloths.. .. they look at her shoes and they miss a necklace in the floor?.. I also want to say this.. You can quote the Nancy Grace and Gretta transcripts all you want ... But many of the things that were said on TV are untrue. For instance.. they aired a NG segment and NG said that the house was just as Tara left it .. That was false statemnet .. Many Many things had been changes .. heck .. the bed was made up.. the house had been straightened and cleaned .. So I would not believe eveything I saw on TV. I also would not put much weight into what godwin said either.. he more than likely has other motives.. but all of this is just my opinion.

[cbcrime]

My question is this - how could the necklace be missed for two weeks? From all reports family and friends were in and out of the house during those 2 weeks. And everyone missed a necklace lying on the floor? Obviously it was not on the floor for 2 weeks or someone would have discovered it. So where was it?

[readmylips]

Originally posted by OhBrother
There you go responding for Results again but I'll play for a minute too. If you will read my post, it is self explanatory. But to answer your question, HYPOTHETICALLY SPEAKING, calling attention to something like that might make a person think EXACTLY what you are thinking right now..."If they did that, why would they mention it...so they probably didn't do that..." A smart person MIGHT make a move like that. Right?

Use your brain before you ask someone to read your lips. MOO.

i get it now. kind of like hd leaving numerous messages, going to her house multiple times over the weekend and showing back up on monday? same kind of concept? "if i was involved why would i tip my hand like that?" that makes better sense when you put it like that. thanks. maybe you have a point. i hadn't considered that. is it possible then that hd did that too?

[Results]

Originally posted by readmylips


i get it now. kind of like hd leaving numerous messages, going to her house multiple times over the weekend and showing back up on monday? same kind of concept? "if i was involved why would i tip my hand like that?" that makes better sense when you put it like that. thanks. maybe you have a point. i hadn't considered that. is it possible then that hd did that too?

I just love it when a post comes together! JMHO

[Its just me]

Originally posted by cbcrime
My question is this - how could the necklace be missed for two weeks? From all reports family and friends were in and out of the house during those 2 weeks. And everyone missed a necklace lying on the floor? Obviously it was not on the floor for 2 weeks or someone would have discovered it. So where was it?

There is more than one possibility for the necklace to show up 2 weeks later but someone placing the necklace in the house is on the top of my list. I know I will never know this answer but I would like to know how the necklace was handled when found and what did the GBI do with the necklace. The beads on the necklace are not small and fingerprints could have been lifted.

Another thing that blows my mind is when someone offers reasonable gained knowledge to some facts on this case the people who post this knowledge or the source of the knowledge are accused of being involved in Tara's disappearance. I'm not interested any smart reply the history of the post (if available..may not be online but they are copied) will prove this to be facts on many occasions. For all of this to be true then there would have to be a conspiracy of ctv posters involved in Tara's disappearance. If anyone truly wants to believe this I suggest you allow us enough time and we will all hang our self but so far that has not happened...we are the ones still standing after being knocked many times. MHOO and a few facts.

[PNut]

ok. let's just PRETEND we KNOW for a fact, the necklace was NOT in the house on 10/22, and WAS PLACED there days later.

WHY?

What would an innocent person have to gain by doing that? All they'd have to do is say, oh hey, LE, Tara had taken this off while at the BBQ, and left it on my counter, etc....(of course this is just an example of an innocent theory)

What if it was someone guilty of harming Tara, what would they have to gain by doing this? If a person had killed Tara, dumped her body, or buried her, and has her necklace for some reason, it broke in a struggle, etc... why the hell would they go BACK and PUT it at the scene of the crime?? That'd be stupid! Even if LE was watching you, a beaded necklace should be pretty simple to get rid of. Take a hammer to it, pulvarize it. Roll your window down in the vehicle, drop one bead at a time over weeks time span.

I don't buy that the necklace was overlooked. I believe it was brought back. But for the life of me, I can't figure out WHY. From an innocent or guilty standpoint, WHY?:shrug:

[Results]

I have thought of nothing else except WHY?

I know that HD was there without anyone noticing him so once you do this the first time probably easier to do the second time as the saying goes. However, did the perp notice the necklace after the investigation went underway and thought hey I will put the necklace back which would make investigators think who is close enough to put it there. I almost see this as a frame for a local POI. What other reason could there be UNLESS TARA WENT BACK AND PUT IT THERE HERSELF?????? I don't know? JMHO

[odette]

The way that I read this comment by AG, regarding the fact that the necklace was "thrown on the floor", is that the necklace was in full view, when first seen. AG didn't say that it was under anything, behind anything (on the floor). I may be wrong, but that's what it looks like to me.

IMO

NANCY GRACE ~ CNN ~ Aired January 12, 2006 - 20:00:00 ET

Gattis: She had a very expensive pair of shoes she wore that night. She always bought stuff. Those were thrown in the middle of the floor. Also, a necklace that she had just made the night before. She used beads that she had and beads that were my grandmother`s necklace. She restrung, made her own necklace. That was thrown on the floor. Tara did not take care of her belongings like that.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0601/12/ng.01.html

[Its just me]

As I said I believe the necklace was placed in the house. By who I simply have no idea. One theory I have is the necklace could have been there all along and placed on the floor by someone to try to make the house appear to be a possible crime scene. BTW I believe it is possible if Tara was not alive when she left her house she was not murdered but took an over dose of drugs. Just don't over look the "possible" in my post.

[cbcrime]

The other question I have and maybe someone has an answer Who Found the Necklace?

Pnut really I agree if you harmed Tara why bring back the necklace and not the earrings? It would make more sense to destroy the necklace.

I wonder if it was processed by GBI?

[fsbiii]

Is there any photo of Tara's shoes "thrown in the middle of the floor"? (I don't care if it's marked "Crime Scene Photo" or not). Seems like there are 2 pics showing them positioned side by side beside her bed, IIRC. Perhaps a mystery person picked them up and placed them that way, but when AG got there...were they "thrown in the middle of the floor," or is that subject to interpretation?

Originally posted by odette
The way that I read this comment by AG, regarding the fact that the necklace was "thrown on the floor", is that the necklace was in full view, when first seen. AG didn't say that it was under anything, behind anything (on the floor). I may be wrong, but that's what it looks like to me.

IMO

NANCY GRACE ~ CNN ~ Aired January 12, 2006 - 20:00:00 ET

Gattis: She had a very expensive pair of shoes she wore that night. She always bought stuff. Those were thrown in the middle of the floor. Also, a necklace that she had just made the night before. She used beads that she had and beads that were my grandmother`s necklace. She restrung, made her own necklace. That was thrown on the floor. Tara did not take care of her belongings like that.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0601/12/ng.01.html

[cbcrime]

The why is a big question. Why do this? Was the necklace always there and hidden really well. Someone found it and put it out to make it look like someone planted it? If they wanted to implicate a favorite POI - how would that implicate that person?

I am sure that the GBI has had all kinds of questions about this necklace. I just can't wrap my mind around the why's of this. Does anyone know the circumstances of how this was found i.e. search by LE or just found by family or friends? If it was found by LE on another search of the house - who knew about the search in order to put the necklace there? JMHO

[odette]

Originally posted by fsbiii
Is there any photo of Tara's shoes "thrown in the middle of the floor"? (I don't care if it's marked "Crime Scene Photo" or not). Seems like there are 2 pics showing them positioned side by side beside her bed, IIRC. Perhaps a mystery person picked them up and placed them that way, but when AG got there...were they "thrown in the middle of the floor," or is that subject to interpretation?



AMW photo of Tara's shoes ...scroll down

http://www.amw.com/missing_persons/video_photos.cfm?id=35468

Foxnews photo of Tara's shoes

http://www.foxnews.com/photoessay/0,4644,701,00.html#4_0

[Atok]

Mhu was a first responder to that house, correct? Certainly hours before AG. Both noticed the fancy shoes were out and not put away as would be habit, but when Mhu entered the house to find out if things were disturbed, my memory has it that she didn't feel things were much disturbed at first glance.

If those shoes were carelessly tossed in the middle of the floor, instead of near the bed as we are seeing them in the pictures wouldn't she have noticed that? Wouldn't she have seen the tossed necklace laying there as well?

Furthermore wouldn't many other people see that obvious disarray? AG wasn't the first person into the house and people who were there before her did NOT see a tossed scene.

The shoes and necklace being thrown on the floor is an obvious dramatization by AG. I am being polite and not calling it an outright lie.

Why would AG wish to imply there was stuggle or disarray? BECAUSE IT FITS HER OPINION OF WHAT SHE WANTS THE STORY TO BE.

Ask yourself why about THAT. And ask yourself WHEN did the scene get "tossed" as it were? Was this two weeks later as well?

[cbcrime]

How can you trust any evidence in this case!? Quite honestly Atok your scenario is the only one that makes any sense to me. Though if this was done for staging purposes - I don't think very much of the attempt. JMO

I have always had a concern about chain of custody and authenticity on any "evidence" in these private searches. I believe any evidence found and used in a criminal case could be torn apart by a good defense attorney.

This case is so frustrating. It seems to be about manipulation from beginning to end. JMO

[Its just me]

Originally posted by cbcrime
How can you trust any evidence in this case!? Quite honestly Atok your scenario is the only one that makes any sense to me. Though if this was done for staging purposes - I don't think very much of the attempt. JMO

I have always had a concern about chain of custody and authenticity on any "evidence" in these private searches. I believe any evidence found and used in a criminal case could be torn apart by a good defense attorney.

This case is so frustrating. It seems to be about manipulation from beginning to end. JMO

MHOO is that any evidence found after the initial search of the house will have difficulty standing in a court of law. I also think any evidence found with out LE being present or called to collect the evidence will also have a hard time standing as evidence.

[OhBrother]

I read awhile back that Tara read some of MH's emails and read some bad stuff. That's all I know about that and I don't know why the subject has come up again unless there is another issue with emails, but I have no idea. Nancy, have you heard anything else about it?

[Its just me]

Originally posted by Atok
Mhu was a first responder to that house, correct? Certainly hours before AG. Both noticed the fancy shoes were out and not put away as would be habit, but when Mhu entered the house to find out if things were disturbed, my memory has it that she didn't feel things were much disturbed at first glance.

If those shoes were carelessly tossed in the middle of the floor, instead of near the bed as we are seeing them in the pictures wouldn't she have noticed that? Wouldn't she have seen the tossed necklace laying there as well?

Furthermore wouldn't many other people see that obvious disarray? AG wasn't the first person into the house and people who were there before her did NOT see a tossed scene.

The shoes and necklace being thrown on the floor is an obvious dramatization by AG. I am being polite and not calling it an outright lie.

Why would AG wish to imply there was stuggle or disarray? BECAUSE IT FITS HER OPINION OF WHAT SHE WANTS THE STORY TO BE.

Ask yourself why about THAT. And ask yourself WHEN did the scene get "tossed" as it were? Was this two weeks later as well?

Good thoughts and good post. Thanks. I also think Dr. Godwin dramatized some of the evidence he states he found in the house. My information is the damadge to the bed did not happen the week-end Tara disappeared but earlier. Did not he state there was other evidence found. I also think he found the underwear that was the same name brand Tara wore which I believe was also planted because a witness saw a familiar face in the area where the underwear was found a day or so before the this discovery by Dr. Godwin. Just adding my 2 cents of thoughts.

[PNut]

This is probably a stupid question, but here it goes.

In the pic of the shoes - notice the black hair clip laying on the floor? I don't see Tara as the type to throw her clip on the floor - was it possible set on the bed side table and knocked off in a struggle? Her hair was pulled back that day, IIRC. Was it pulled back with THAT clip?

Sorry if this has been discussed and discounted before - I missed it if it has. But when I looked at those pics, it kinda leaped out at me as another item that seems out of place for Tara's neat freak personality.

[Results]

Originally posted by PNut
This is probably a stupid question, but here it goes.

In the pic of the shoes - notice the black hair clip laying on the floor? I don't see Tara as the type to throw her clip on the floor - was it possible set on the bed side table and knocked off in a struggle? Her hair was pulled back that day, IIRC. Was it pulled back with THAT clip?

Sorry if this has been discussed and discounted before - I missed it if it has. But when I looked at those pics, it kinda leaped out at me as another item that seems out of place for Tara's neat freak personality.

I'm wondering if Tara was really a neat freak at all. I don't know her so I sure don't know but in the beginning when the pictures of the shoes were on the net I saw several items on the floor with the shoes and not just the hair clip. The neighbors tidying up the house so that makes me assume that things were not neat and I also realize she had several people in her house that day and may not have had time to straighten up. I don't have a cat so I don't know alot about a litter box but how often do you change a litterbox like once a day, twice a day, which leads me to ask was is full that it needed to be cleaned and if that is not the reason then why clean it? JMHO

[PNut]

ooohhh Lindseeeeyyyyy....can you link us to the comment made about Tara being a neat person? Was it AG or MHu that stated that?? I kinda think it was MHu...but can't remember for sure. If it was MHu, I'd probably believe it...if it was AG, then I'd not give it any credence.

[One2Snoop]

Originally posted by OhBrother
I read awhile back that Tara read some of MH's emails and read some bad stuff. That's all I know about that and I don't know why the subject has come up again unless there is another issue with emails, but I have no idea. Nancy, have you heard anything else about it?

Do you know what sort of bad stuff she read? How do you know it was bad? How do you know if what you read about the emails is true or not? :confused:

[readmylips]

Originally posted by One2Snoop


Do you know what sort of bad stuff she read? How do you know it was bad? How do you know if what you read about the emails is true or not? :confused:

well it fits his theory so it must be true. that's how this works, right?

:rolleyes:

[One2Snoop]

Tara's car....

http://boards.courttv.com/showthread.php?postid=7860331&highlight=who+washed+taras+car#post7860331

[readmylips]

Originally posted by guitarstring

You are RIGHT Lindsey, but didn't someone say here that AG ASKED MR. P to wash it? If true, why didn't AG just ask LG to go wash it?

Did ANITA ask MR. P to wash that car or NOT? If not, who did?
If nobody, then why did Mr. P think he had the right to do so on his own?

There are many ODD things about the actions of the neighbors that bothers me and others. I sure wish Mrs. P would speak out and support what Mr. has said. But, considering we don't know who is guilty of anything, if anything, in this case, it does make perfect sense for one spouse to keep quiet. What does the law say about not having to testify against your husband/wife?

a lot of people don't like to speak in front of others and even more dont like to be interviewed by media. i would probably defer to my spouse in that situation myself. i dont see it as suspicious at all that mrs p hasn't interviewed.

[PNut]

Thanks GS! I really thought it was MHu, but I have no memory, so hated to say that as a fact!! Appreciate the back up!

And about the neighbors...you know, I've had my suspicions there also.

But let's face it folks - it's been over a year. IF someone brought harm to Tara, and LE has not been able to make an arrest so far, odds ARE....this person has gotten away with murder. Sure, there may be an arrest at some point, but even LE has alluded to the fact that they have very little to go on, and aren't even 100% sure a crime has even taken place! So, odds are, unless the perp does something really stupid, they have gotten away with murder, and they know it.

Like Natalee Holloway - odds are, there will never be an arrest (well, definitive arrest!) made in her case. Whoever the perp is, just has to keep their mouth closed, and they are homefree. It happens many times unfortunately.

We had a missing 18 yr old girl, taken from a bowling alley parking lot. Several months later her body was found by a hunter in the woods. She was seen struggling with a guy at her car in the parking lot. LE has interviewed this guy many times. They KNOW he did it. but they just can't prove it. The evidence is just NOT there for a conviction or arrest. So, this guy, has literally, gotten away with murder. He knows it, her family knows it, LE knows it - and there's nothing anyone can do.

I feel, if someone hurt Tara, s/he is feeling pretty confident, over a year later, that they have gotten away with it.

JMHO

[fsbiii]

I'm laughing on the inside, g-string. I promise. (Just disregard that look of confused disgust and dim-lit bewilderment on my face, it's becoming permanent at this point).

Originally posted by guitarstring
Just a quick question (or two) to ask, off topic for one second:

Did Tara use her personal laptop at school?
Did she take the laptop with her when she traveled in the car?

I don't want to go into a long explanation of why I'm asking, fsbiii will have a fit if I'm lengthy, so just an answer will do fine.

[PNut]

Originally posted by guitarstring
Just a quick question (or two) to ask, off topic for one second:

Did Tara use her personal laptop at school?
Did she take the laptop with her when she traveled in the car?

I don't want to go into a long explanation of why I'm asking, fsbiii will have a fit if I'm lengthy, so just an answer will do fine.

GS- why ya gotta lash out at fsb like that?? Heck, he's been underground and quiet these last coupla days. You hecklin' him to try to get a rise outta 'em? You missin' him Guitar??;)

[PNut]

Originally posted by OhBrother
I read awhile back that Tara read some of MH's emails and read some bad stuff. That's all I know about that and I don't know why the subject has come up again unless there is another issue with emails, but I have no idea. Nancy, have you heard anything else about it?

Did you read that HERE?

[PNut]

Originally posted by guitarstring
Oh, and PNUT, I haven't been here in a few days myself so I've been missing everybody!! :D

Well G Strung, I wasn't feelin' the love and hated to see you at fsb get off on the wrong foot after both of you have been on hiatus for awhile.

(psst - be careful, since you both were gone the same time, and both came BACK at the same time, paranoid types around here might just say you and fsb are one in the SAME!) :D

[mooloo]

I KNEW IT!!

(Slamming fist on the table.)


Originally posted by PNut


Well G Strung, I wasn't feelin' the love and hated to see you at fsb get off on the wrong foot after both of you have been on hiatus for awhile.

(psst - be careful, since you both were gone the same time, and both came BACK at the same time, paranoid types around here might just say you and fsb are one in the SAME!) :D

[mooloo]

Don't know if she used her personal laptop at the high school....it's just too easy to email things back and forth and not have to lug a laptop back and forth--plus there was a computer on her desk at school and anywhere she might have gone in the building.

I would be surprised if she didn't use it for her college classes, though...

But, I really have no clue...just speaking from a practical viewpoint and personal experience.


Originally posted by guitarstring
Just a quick question (or two) to ask, off topic for one second:

Did Tara use her personal laptop at school?
Did she take the laptop with her when she traveled in the car?

I don't want to go into a long explanation of why I'm asking, fsbiii will have a fit if I'm lengthy, so just an answer will do fine.

[readmylips]

Originally posted by guitarstring


I see your point, but HD is not speaking in front of others or being interviewed by the media either, neither is RR but there's been plenty of large talk about them on this board. Why is there no talk about what the next door neighbor lady may know or have seen?

I'm just saying that Mr. P appeared to be very close to Tara, her routines, habits, EVEN HAVING A KEY TO HER HOME and some have said, her CAR. Taking all that closeness into consideration, I think it should only be natural that Mrs. P is focused on a bit more about what she may know.
Is it because she's an older lady that nobody seems to think she could hold some very important info regarding this case?

I'll admit, it would be a nice ending to hear that Tara won the Saturday night lottery drawing and ran off with her millions, but that's not the way it's looking.

(quote) Why is there no talk about what the next door neighbor lady may know or have seen? (end quote)
because mr p has spoken for his family. often and adequately. he probably gave as much or more solid information about the course of that weekend as anyone. and when he did it, he did it as a rep of his family. him and his wife. logical. my spouse would have done the same for us. no one has spoken for the others you mentioned not have they spoken for themself. very big difference imo.

(quote) I'll admit, it would be a nice ending to hear that Tara won the Saturday night lottery drawing and ran off with her millions, but that's not the way it's looking. (end quote)

where in the world did this last little piece come from? who said anything about tara won the lottery and blah blah blah? did i miss that? what your theory is or is not about what happened to tara has no bearing on the discussion about who is speaking for the p family.

[Results]

Originally posted by luvmy2labpups
Ok, so if the necklace was thrown on the floor as ANITA said, how did the GBI miss it? I am sorry, but the GBI doesn't just ignore a necklace thrown on the floor. If it was visible to ANITA then the GBI saw it as well.


http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRI...1/12/ng.01.html




GATTIS: She had a very expensive pair of shoes she wore that night. She always bought stuff. Those were thrown in the middle of the floor. Also, a necklace that she had just made the night before. She used beads that she had and beads that were my grandmother`s necklace. She restrung, made her own necklace. That was thrown on the floor. Tara did not take care of her belongings like that.

I'm confused about the above statement made by AG on the NG show. Is there 2 necklaces? The necklace here is thrown on the floor with the shoes indicating it was found that Monday AM when they were first in the house. If there is only one necklace this statement is misleading because it is talking about the shoes she wore and the necklace on the floor. So, is there 2 necklaces or one? One other thing a poster kept saying the necklace was broke AG in her statement above says it was "thrown" on the floor says nothing about it being broke. TIA JMHO

[cbcrime]

It was Dr G who indicated that the necklace was broken - beads strewn across the floor and that wasn't until April 2006. No one else has indicated it was broken. So I don't know why Dr G made this statement. I don't understand AG's either. That makes it seem like it was found with other jewerly.

[readmylips]

As often as he has interviewed he would have said he found the necklace in the car. and if by some wild stretch of the imagination, he did find a necklace in the car, he would not have gone in to tara's house and just tossed it on the floor. :rolleyes:

no possibility in my mind at all.

who told you that mhu found the necklace?





Originally posted by guitarstring
Ok, let's get back to the necklace.

Let's look at this scenario, just to see it would be possible:

TG reported missing on Monday. (Fact)
Neighbor takes her car to carwash on that Friday. (Fact, IMO.)

Could neighbor have found the necklace in the car as he was cleaning it and not thought of it as a big deal and just placed it back in her house?

If he was so absent- minded as to wander through a missing woman's home, touch things, move things, let people inside with his key, rake her yard, rake up piles of pinestraw in the yard, get inside her car, take it to a car wash, etc... isn't it entirely possible that he was also just as clueless about touching the necklace, if he were to have found it in her car?

Now, if MHu found the necklace on the floor BEFORE Mr. P washed TG's car on Friday, then that eliminates that as a possibility.

Was necklace found BEFORE car was washed?

[luvmy2labpups]

Someone mentioned Mrs. P, I found this article with quotes from her so I thought I would share. It also has some very interesting quotes from ANITA.

http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cache:KDiFzzJvP4sJ:www.angelsmissing.com/forum/index.php%3Fshowtopic%3D3802%26mode%3Dthreaded%26p id%3D12427+Joe+Portier+%2B+Grinstead&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=10



Asked if she thinks her sister is still alive, Gattis nodded. "I've always been very adamant about that," she said. "Tara's a survivor and a fighter. She's one of God's good angels, and he wants her to still be on this earth."

Gattis feels her sister left with someone she knew on the night she disappeared. Her house was locked but her car, a pearl white Mitsubishi 3000 GT, was unlocked and in the carport, with $100 in the console and clay on the tires.

"Tara never left her car unlocked, and never drove on dirt roads," Gattis said.

"There was no struggle in the house. Tara was a singer; that was her talent in pageants," Gattis said of her sister, thrice crowned Miss Tifton and a contestant in several Miss Georgia pageants. "If someone was removing her, she'd project her voice. And she took self-defense. She'd go out kicking and screaming and fighting."

Myrtle and Joe Portier, the elderly couple who live next door to Grinstead, never heard any noise that October night.

Grinstead had spent the day at home, helping several of her students primp and prepare for the Miss Georgia Sweet Potato pageant that evening in nearby Fitzgerald.

"We thought she was home the whole time, with her car in the carport," said Myrtle Portier, who is very close to Grinstead. "We didn't realize until Monday morning, when she had no lights on."

Grinstead was taking graduate courses three nights a week at Valdosta State University and would turn on a lamp in the front corner room of her house, a signal to the Portiers that she was safely home.

[One2Snoop]

Maria did say there was jewelry on the floor - she didn't say specifically what kind though.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0601/13/ng.01.html
------------------------
GRACE: What did you see in the bedroom?

HULETT: The bedroom, she had -- there were clothes on the floor, jewelry on the floor. Her shoes were on the floor. And they were really nice shoes, and she`s very peculiar about her clothes, her clothing and shoes. They were on the floor. There were things packed -- stacked up on her -- next to her bed. Her bed had been slept in, it looked like to me. You know, her pillows were arranged like she sleeps. I immediately thought that she had been in the bed at some point. You know, she had been there at night. I knew that the last time that anybody had talked to her was Saturday night.

[luvmy2labpups]

As far as Tara being a clean freak, it all depends on what you consider a clean freak, in this interview anita says it was apparently normal for her to keep clothes out on a chest

http://72.14.209.104/search?q=cache:RR_PFXXuhOMJ:transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0510/31/ng.01.html+%22Anita+Gattis%22&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=15

GATTIS: The shoes were found lying on the floor, which a friend of mine told me was very unusual, because they were fairly expensive pair of shoes. She usually boxed them up and put them in the closet. The rest of her clothes were lying piled on a chest.

GRACE: Piled on a chest. Would that be normal for her?

GATTIS: It appears so. There were more clothes on that chest, also.



There are many things in this interview that I did not recall reading before such as the statement below. How does Anita know that the car never left?

GATTIS: Well, she was last seen on a Saturday night. We`re assuming maybe she disappeared sometime Saturday night. Her car never left her house after she arrived home from the superintendent`s house.

[One2Snoop]

There are many things in this interview that I did not recall reading before such as the statement below. How does Anita know that the car never left?

GATTIS: Well, she was last seen on a Saturday night. We`re assuming maybe she disappeared sometime Saturday night. Her car never left her house after she arrived home from the superintendent`s house.

Good catch Luv - and good question.

[luvmy2labpups]

Originally posted by One2Snoop
Maria did say there was jewelry on the floor - she didn't say specifically what kind though.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0601/13/ng.01.html
------------------------
GRACE: What did you see in the bedroom?

HULETT: The bedroom, she had -- there were clothes on the floor, jewelry on the floor. Her shoes were on the floor. And they were really nice shoes, and she`s very peculiar about her clothes, her clothing and shoes. They were on the floor. There were things packed -- stacked up on her -- next to her bed. Her bed had been slept in, it looked like to me. You know, her pillows were arranged like she sleeps. I immediately thought that she had been in the bed at some point. You know, she had been there at night. I knew that the last time that anybody had talked to her was Saturday night.


Yes she did, however, in this interview ANITA says that the only things out of place were the clock and lamp and they found the necklace on the 7th of November. (Date of interview on 8th said they found it the day before)


http://64.233.187.104/search?q=cache:VQc9-5eSOIIJ:transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0511/08/ng.01.html+missy+davis+%2B+anita+Gattis&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1



GRACE: And it makes perfect sense with all of this traveling. Anita, another question about this necklace. This is also a new detail, a necklace found on the floor of her home. What was the necklace, and where was it found?

GATTIS: This was the necklace that she wore on Saturday night, the last time she was seen. It was laying on the floor. She had helped many girls get ready for a beauty pageant that afternoon, so she had various pieces of jewelry laying around. Interesting thing that we`ve just found yesterday, we cannot find the earrings she had on that night.

GRACE: What were they?

GATTIS: They were described to me by Missy Davis -- and that`s one of the last people that saw Tara -- as a chandelier-type earring. And Missy and I went through her jewelry yesterday for about an hour, and we cannot find the earrings.

GRACE: You know, Anita, that is a tiny, a subtle but important detail in this case. Now, the necklace that was found on the floor -- let me just ask you a couple of questions. What room was it found?

GATTIS: It was in her bedroom.

GRACE: OK. And that`s the same place the radio clock was found on the floor, that sat by her bed, and the lamp was cracked. Was that the same room where she charged up her cell phone?

GATTIS: Exactly. The cell phone was in the charger right by the broken lamp.

GRACE: OK. So then was that necklace one she wore that evening, or does anybody know?

GATTIS: That is exactly the one she wore. We`ve identified it. Yes, it was the necklace she had on Saturday evening.

GRACE: You know, it`s amazing to me. It sounds like she was right there in the bedroom, changing clothes from coming home, taking off her jewelry, and something went wrong, something that made her take her pocketbook with her keys in her purse. You said the doors were locked, everything was in order except that lamp and that radio clock, right?

GATTIS: That`s correct, yes.

[One2Snoop]

Ahhh yes - thanks - I also noticed Anita never said it was broken.

[luvmy2labpups]

I am looking for a couple of things, will post them when I find them.

[Results]

Originally posted by luvmy2labpups
As far as Tara being a clean freak, it all depends on what you consider a clean freak, in this interview anita says it was apparently normal for her to keep clothes out on a chest

http://72.14.209.104/search?q=cache:RR_PFXXuhOMJ:transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0510/31/ng.01.html+%22Anita+Gattis%22&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=15

GATTIS: The shoes were found lying on the floor, which a friend of mine told me was very unusual, because they were fairly expensive pair of shoes. She usually boxed them up and put them in the closet. The rest of her clothes were lying piled on a chest.



THE SHOES WERE FOUND LYING ON THE FLOOR, WHICH A FRIEND OF MINE TOLD ME WAS VERY UNUSUAL

Wouldn't Tara's friends know and not AG's friend? Is MHu AG's friend too? This statement shows that AG didn't know Tara's habits and that a friend informed her of what was usual and what was not. I think it is important to know what friend of AG's knew Tara that told her this information. Anyone know? TIA JMHO

[Results]

Originally posted by luvmy2labpups
Someone mentioned Mrs. P, I found this article with quotes from her so I thought I would share. It also has some very interesting quotes from ANITA.

http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cache:KDiFzzJvP4sJ:www.angelsmissing.com/forum/index.php%3Fshowtopic%3D3802%26mode%3Dthreaded%26p id%3D12427+Joe+Portier+%2B+Grinstead&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=10



Asked if she thinks her sister is still alive, Gattis nodded. "I've always been very adamant about that," she said. "Tara's a survivor and a fighter. She's one of God's good angels, and he wants her to still be on this earth."

Gattis feels her sister left with someone she knew on the night she disappeared. Her house was locked but her car, a pearl white Mitsubishi 3000 GT, was unlocked and in the carport, with $100 in the console and clay on the tires.

"Tara never left her car unlocked, and never drove on dirt roads," Gattis said.

"There was no struggle in the house. Tara was a singer; that was her talent in pageants," Gattis said of her sister, thrice crowned Miss Tifton and a contestant in several Miss Georgia pageants. "If someone was removing her, she'd project her voice. And she took self-defense. She'd go out kicking and screaming and fighting."

Myrtle and Joe Portier, the elderly couple who live next door to Grinstead, never heard any noise that October night.

Grinstead had spent the day at home, helping several of her students primp and prepare for the Miss Georgia Sweet Potato pageant that evening in nearby Fitzgerald.

"We thought she was home the whole time, with her car in the carport," said Myrtle Portier, who is very close to Grinstead. "We didn't realize until Monday morning, when she had no lights on."

Grinstead was taking graduate courses three nights a week at Valdosta State University and would turn on a lamp in the front corner room of her house, a signal to the Portiers that she was safely home.

[RCM-715]

Originally posted by Babes
How did Tara get a hold of MH's emails?
How did she get a hold of the email's password when MH doesnt even want to be with her?
When did she check his emails?
Where did she check his emails?
Was the emails only forwarded to her email? Then who forwarded it?

Thanks for the answers if you have any..


Actually MH did change his password, but there are ways to gather that information and she did.
There were no "bad e-mails" in his account, just ones that expressed concern, care and news from home that many recieve while away fighting a war.
TG was a jealous person and remained jealous after the break up. Any e-mail to MH by a female would have upset her. So it's a fact she did read his mail and she shouldn't, but it was only messges of concern and such from family and friends.
MH had moved on at this time and the relationship with TG was over.

[One2Snoop]

GS - I think you missed this post....


Originally posted by luvmy2labpups
Someone mentioned Mrs. P, I found this article with quotes from her so I thought I would share. It also has some very interesting quotes from ANITA.

http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cache:KDiFzzJvP4sJ:www.angelsmissing.com/forum/index.php%3Fshowtopic%3D3802%26mode%3Dthreaded%26p id%3D12427+Joe+Portier+%2B+Grinstead&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=10



Asked if she thinks her sister is still alive, Gattis nodded. "I've always been very adamant about that," she said. "Tara's a survivor and a fighter. She's one of God's good angels, and he wants her to still be on this earth."

Gattis feels her sister left with someone she knew on the night she disappeared. Her house was locked but her car, a pearl white Mitsubishi 3000 GT, was unlocked and in the carport, with $100 in the console and clay on the tires.

"Tara never left her car unlocked, and never drove on dirt roads," Gattis said.

"There was no struggle in the house. Tara was a singer; that was her talent in pageants," Gattis said of her sister, thrice crowned Miss Tifton and a contestant in several Miss Georgia pageants. "If someone was removing her, she'd project her voice. And she took self-defense. She'd go out kicking and screaming and fighting."

Myrtle and Joe Portier, the elderly couple who live next door to Grinstead, never heard any noise that October night.

Grinstead had spent the day at home, helping several of her students primp and prepare for the Miss Georgia Sweet Potato pageant that evening in nearby Fitzgerald.

"We thought she was home the whole time, with her car in the carport," said Myrtle Portier, who is very close to Grinstead. "We didn't realize until Monday morning, when she had no lights on."

Grinstead was taking graduate courses three nights a week at Valdosta State University and would turn on a lamp in the front corner room of her house, a signal to the Portiers that she was safely home.

[One2Snoop]

ooops sorry Results I see we posted at the same time. :beer:

[fsbiii]

Do you know if she may have sent something from MH's account to someone else, posing as MH?

Originally posted by RCM-715

Actually MH did change his password, but there are ways to gather that information and she did.
There were no "bad e-mails" in his account, just ones that expressed concern, care and news from home that many recieve while away fighting a war.
TG was a jealous person and remained jealous after the break up. Any e-mail to MH by a female would have upset her. So it's a fact she did read his mail and she shouldn't, but it was only messges of concern and such from family and friends.
MH had moved on at this time and the relationship with TG was over.

[Results]

Well I lost my post. LOL

"Tara never left her car unlocked, and never drove on dirt roads," Gattis said.

I wonder if a friend told her this too?

"There was no struggle in the house. Tara was a singer; that was her talent in pageants," Gattis said of her sister, thrice crowned Miss Tifton and a contestant in several Miss Georgia pageants. "If someone was removing her, she'd project her voice. And she took self-defense. She'd go out kicking and screaming and fighting."

How long ago did Tara take self-defense classes. Was she worried and just took them or had she taken them years ago? Could show frame of mind and also talk to an instructor of a problem IF she was having one.

"We thought she was home the whole time, with her car in the carport," said Myrtle Portier, who is very close to Grinstead. "We didn't realize until Monday morning, when she had no lights on."


Ms. P states that there were no lights on at Tara's Monday morning. It has always been said that a porch light and jack-o-lantern lights were on Monday morning when they entered the house. HD said there was a dim light on Monday at 12:15 AM. Who is turning the lights on and off? This light thing has always bothered me.

This is JMHO. Thank you Luvs for posting these interviews here so I could use them because I still don't know how to post a link even though I have tried. Once again thanks. JMHO

[Results]

Originally posted by One2Snoop
ooops sorry Results I see we posted at the same time. :beer:

Actually I had a reply on my post but some how I lost it. You did good I messed up! You owe me no apologies you are a great poster and I appreciate all the help you contribute to this case.



:beer:

[Results]

Originally posted by guitarstring
Back to the necklace: Odd that the necklace suddenly appeared in Tara's home on the same day that the house and vehicle burned on Snapdragon?

Exactly. That is why I don't think the fire has anything to do with Tara's disapperance. They could have destroyed that necklace in the fire and not have to worry about it. IF the necklace was not there the whole time at Tara's the only logic to return it was to frame or point to someone local. Also, I heard that the GBI came back to Tara's house 5 times within the first 2 weeks and I just can't see them missing that necklace that many times if it was there the whole time. I'm thinking this necklace was a setup! JMHO

[luvmy2labpups]

I can't find what I was looking for but I will and when I do I will post it. Results, of course I don't mind if you disect, post, hash over, or turn upside down any of those links, that is why I put them here. I wanted to give information and get some feedback. ONE2, I also noticed she did not say broken.

[MATTHEWsevenone]

Originally posted by Results
Also, AG was complaining that the GBI did not do enough testing on the car and she was going to have to pay for the testing so why send anyone to clean the car when AG herself thinks the car needed more testing. Why didn't she tell the GBI that Monday to take the car instead of having it washed and then say I'm not happy with the testing of the car? That don't make sense either. JMHO

results -

that is one of those things I have never understood or had a clear timeline ...

the luminol of the car, that is.

Anita said she PAID for it because the GBI refused to,

BUT the GBI DID supposedly luminol the house...

Why on earth would the GBI not do the car too?

Talk about disconnects.

And I can't find in my notes the WHEN the luminol was supposedly done in relationship to Mr. P's cleaning of the car.

Think about it...

necklace not found until 2 weeks later (and a necklace made of beads - not a tiny flat chain sort of thing)

AND

the luminol testing of the car

GEE... sure seems it could have been important for the GBI to step forward early on and keep everyone up to date about the particulars since there was IMO an opportunity for someone(s) with info to lose faith in the GBI early on -

SINCE the very beginning of this case I have wanted to do a timeline. I do them for all the cases I follow. This is the ONLY one where it is IMPOSSIBLE because of the way the case has been handled by the LE, the family, and the media. FRUSTRATING AS CAN BE!

MOO.
:seeya:

[Results]

I agree M71. It is so very frustrating. IMO

[One2Snoop]

Originally posted by guitarstring
http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cach...s&ct=clnk&cd=10
Grinstead had spent the day at home, helping several of her students primp and prepare for the Miss Georgia Sweet Potato pageant that evening in nearby Fitzgerald.

"We thought she was home the whole time, with her car in the carport," said Myrtle Portier, who is very close to Grinstead. "We didn't realize until Monday morning, when she had no lights on."



*******************
Mrs. P said: "We didn't realize until Monday morning, when she had no lights on."

What????

I thought Tara's mother called and SPOKE to Mrs. P around 1 AM on Monday morning???????

What does she mean she didn't REALIZE????

You mean, after FG called there, she still wasn't AWARE of SOMETHING? Maybe FG spoke to MR. P and not Mrs. P?

And what exactly did Mrs. P REALIZE?

Didn't they go over to Tara's early Monday morning and use Mr. P's key and let themselves inside to see if she was there???????

Mrs. P didn't realize Tara was missing.

[TuscanDreams]

Originally posted by cbcrime
My question is this - how could the necklace be missed for two weeks? From all reports family and friends were in and out of the house during those 2 weeks. And everyone missed a necklace lying on the floor? Obviously it was not on the floor for 2 weeks or someone would have discovered it. So where was it?

JMO, based on my own "cat- astrophes". My cat will take something light, like a necklace and drag it through the house.

I just don't see the necklace being a big part of this case. Of course, I could be very wrong.

[Results]

IF the necklace was brought back to the house by someone the big question is why? Could it be because they wanted to have the necklace but could only have it if it was officially found? Or that the person who brought it back wanted someone else to have it? So, if we research it this way then WHO has the necklace now I wonder? Does anyone know WHO now has the necklace? JMHO

[Results]

Originally posted by TuscanDreams


JMO, based on my own "cat- astrophes". My cat will take something light, like a necklace and drag it through the house.

I just don't see the necklace being a big part of this case. Of course, I could be very wrong.

This necklace does not look like it is small by any means unless I am looking at the wrong necklace. Does anyone know if the necklace was light? JMHO

[cbcrime]

Even if the cat dragged the necklace around the house. If there were so many searches of the house and people there - how could they miss it. The necklace being found two weeks after the initial search of the house is just not right IMO.

[RCM-715]

Originally posted by fsbiii
Do you know if she may have sent something from MH's account to someone else, posing as MH?



Who knows? I wouldn't say she didn't, but I don't have any facts re: that. I think if she had, it would have surfaced in some way by now.

[MATTHEWsevenone]

Originally posted by PNut
This is probably a stupid question, but here it goes.

In the pic of the shoes - notice the black hair clip laying on the floor? I don't see Tara as the type to throw her clip on the floor - was it possible set on the bed side table and knocked off in a struggle? Her hair was pulled back that day, IIRC. Was it pulled back with THAT clip?

Sorry if this has been discussed and discounted before - I missed it if it has. But when I looked at those pics, it kinda leaped out at me as another item that seems out of place for Tara's neat freak personality.

PNut,

You and I are on the same page about that hair clip...

I do recall discussing it earlier and theorizing perhaps she did meet someone at her house for a romantic rendevous after the BBQ, and the hair clip came off and landed on the floor and the shoes ended up as they were because Tara and someone were more concerned about ... (well you get my drift) - I keep recalling the way the comforter looked (though it could have just been tossed like that after LE took the sheets- always wondered why LE did not take the comforter, guess the luminol test did not show anything on the comforter(?). Remember the interview where Anita said Tara's bed looked as if Tara had slept in it? I wonder if it looked that way NOT because someone SLEPT in it but because she and someone has a turn in it?

I don't mean anything disrespectful. Tara was a full grown single woman and IMO it makes sense for her to rendevous at her own house- considering her job, her small town residency, etc.

Drawing it all back to this thread --What I never could UNDERSTAND was WITH THE CLIP being ON THE FLOOR and the shoes being uncharacteristically (supposedly)ON THE FLOOR and the CLOCK RADIO being ON THE FLOOR -

how on earth did the LE (and all of those people) MISS the NECKLACE ON THE FLOOR - for 2 weeks?

One other thing - I know some here can help me - Monday NIGHT after Tara was reported missing...

Anyone recall Anita or anyone else saying they stayed at Tara's house that night or the next few nights?


ALL MOO.
:seeya:

[Results]

Originally posted by guitarstring
http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cach...s&ct=clnk&cd=10
Grinstead had spent the day at home, helping several of her students primp and prepare for the Miss Georgia Sweet Potato pageant that evening in nearby Fitzgerald.

"We thought she was home the whole time, with her car in the carport," said Myrtle Portier, who is very close to Grinstead. "We didn't realize until Monday morning, when she had no lights on."



*******************
Mrs. P said: "We didn't realize until Monday morning, when she had no lights on."

What????

I thought Tara's mother called and SPOKE to Mrs. P around 1 AM on Monday morning???????

What does she mean she didn't REALIZE????

You mean, after FG called there, she still wasn't AWARE of SOMETHING? Maybe FG spoke to MR. P and not Mrs. P?

And what exactly did Mrs. P REALIZE?

Didn't they go over to Tara's early Monday morning and use Mr. P's key and let themselves inside to see if she was there???????

That is something to think about. That was an excellent point on the wee hour phone call and not being alerted then. Good catch! JMHO

[Results]

[i]

One other thing - I know some here can help me - Monday NIGHT after Tara was reported missing...

Anyone recall Anita or anyone else saying they stayed at Tara's house that night or the next few nights?


ALL MOO.
:seeya: [/B]

I have always heard that AG stayed with someone local. That would be very interesting to know who stayed there if in fact someone did stay there. JMHO

[fsbiii]

Thanks for the response.

Early on, a couple of people closer to MH mentioned a young girl emailing him, and that gave some rise to the "dating an 18 year old" postings here and there. Tara most likely saw that/those email(s), IMO. I pondered the idea of her replying to such an email (or any others) and that possibly making MH mad enough to threaten her with charges of some sort. Just an opinion, just a theory.

Originally posted by RCM-715


Who knows? I wouldn't say she didn't, but I don't have any facts re: that. I think if she had, it would have surfaced in some way by now.

[MATTHEWsevenone]

Originally posted by TuscanDreams


JMO, based on my own "cat- astrophes". My cat will take something light, like a necklace and drag it through the house.

I just don't see the necklace being a big part of this case. Of course, I could be very wrong.

TuscanDreams,

My cats are notorious PEN and PENCIL THIEVES among other items...

I can see a cat dragging or even playing with Tara's necklace - it had beads (a favorite of one of my cats).

Tara sitting on her bed or bench taking her shoes off and the necklace dangles. Herman sees his moment to spring and WHALA, necklace ends up broken. OR

Tara notices HERMAN likes the necklace and she takes it off and allows Herman to paw it or even attack it, put it in his mouth, and carry it off in a victory lap (happens all the time in my house!) Herman is also an OUTDOOR KITTY so he more than likely has his claws and accidents do happen with kitty with claws. Not a clue if his claws were trimmed often and kept short.

BUT regardless of whether the necklace ended up on the floor by design or accident the night Tara returned home (that is IF SHE DID RETURN HOME) I still can't see HOW with so much stuff on the floor that seemed to NOT BELONG THERE or OUT OF PLACE why LE (and all of the others) did not see the necklace for TWO WEEKS.

Always has bugged me.

Anyone else concerned that the delayed finding may help to discredit the GBI if there is a court case - if Tara was harmed?

Along those same lines, anyone have an opinion if and how the GBI could have been able to diffuse the necklace's late finding AT THE TIME?

ALL MOO of course.

V
:seeya:

[MATTHEWsevenone]

Originally posted by cbcrime
Even if the cat dragged the necklace around the house. If there were so many searches of the house and people there - how could they miss it. The necklace being found two weeks after the initial search of the house is just not right IMO.

cbcrime-

we are on the same page with much of this case. AND THIS POST gotta say

DITTO!

:beer:

[Results]

Originally posted by RCM-715



Actually MH did change his password, but there are ways to gather that information and she did.
There were no "bad e-mails" in his account, just ones that expressed concern, care and news from home that many recieve while away fighting a war.
TG was a jealous person and remained jealous after the break up. Any e-mail to MH by a female would have upset her. So it's a fact she did read his mail and she shouldn't, but it was only messges of concern and such from family and friends.
MH had moved on at this time and the relationship with TG was over.

I would like to ask you something that I have been wondering about. I was wondering if a family or friend told MH about the AV and HD incident on any of his E-mails. I'm thinking that if he did get an E-mail from family or friend about this incident he was done with her when he came home and that is why he did not contact her. The other thing is if his family or friend told him something else in his E-mails that she had done that made him say I'm done with her and didn't contact her when he returned home. It has been said many times that MH did not let Tara know when he got back from overseas which makes me believe that he found something out before he got to Ocilla and decided that there was no hope for them romantically. I could be way off about why he didn't contact her when he got back. If you can answer those questions TIA and if you can't I understand that too! Thank you for sharing your information that you have already given us because it sure is appreciated. JMHO

[Lindsey]

IIRC, GBI was processing the house MONDAY NIGHT until Tuesday morning so no one spent the night there.

Also, it has been stated AG didn't arrive in Ocilla until after the GBI had arrived Monday afternoon so AG didn't get to go into Tara's house until Tuesday after the GBI had finished with it. According to all I've heard and read, AG stayed with a local lady when she was in Ocilla. I never heard of her spending a night in Tara's house.

IMO

[cbcrime]

I could be wrong - but I don't think that GBI ever said anything about the finding of the necklace. It was reported found but that was about it. And quite honestly now I am totally confused. Was it on the floor with other jewerly - could it have been added to the pile of jewerly? Or was it by itself?

IIRC weren't some of the beads Tara's grandmothers? So possibly they were important or setimental. (Though I don't remember if AG said they were Tara's grandmother's beads or their grandmother's beads).

[Lindsey]

I don't believe the necklace was broken. I know Dr G talked about loose beads on the floor but that doesn't carry any weight with me. But even if there were loose beads on the floor, how do we know they weren't extras left over from Tara making a necklace with "some beads she already had" and some from AG's grandmother's necklace? Maybe she didn't use all the beads she had if she made a new necklace from 2 old necklaces?

JMO

[MATTHEWsevenone]

Originally posted by guitarstring
But surely she had some idea that something wasn't right.

Why did it take co-workers from school to visit TG's home and REPORT HER MISSING if the lady neighbor and her husband had already been alerted to concerns by Tara's mother early in the AM on Monday? Didn't they think to go over when they woke up and check on her???????????????

Why didn't Tara's own MOTHER get in her car and DRIVE to her daughter's home if she was concerned about her?

Why didn't HD do something if he was so concerned that morning?

It still just puzzles me that nobody seemed to take this seriously and it took co-workers from Tara's school to report her missing.

So, were the co-workers AT Tara's home when they called and made the report, or were they back at school?

This has always bugged me too.

We have her MOM and her best friend trying on Monday morning to locate Tara (in Hawkinsville, right?) - the best friend ultimately drives to Ocilla NEXT, right? Doesn't that sound backwards to ANYONE? ANd if Faye was so concerned she called the neighbors in the middle of the night, why didn't she follow up the next morning with them?

AND EVEN BEFORE THIS

We have MOM calling her neighbor- an older couple (I think the Nancy Grace interview actually have MR P saying HE spoke with Faye)around 1 AM - wee hours (in RURAL TIME that is - there are not many after hours or 24 hour places- in small town USA the town closes down EVEN on weekends around 10/11 PM)- and such a call at that hour, does not send up any warning flares... the MAN does not even cross the lawn, knock on the door , and make sure Tara is OK - the reasonable explanation was her lights were off and he was being considerate.. BUT WHAT ABOUT THE NEXT MORNING, WHY DIDN'T HE THINK TO GO KNOCK ON THE DOOR AND CHECK ON HER? GOOD GRIEF, HIS OWN WIFE IS QUOTED AS SAYING TARA'S LIGHTS NOT BEING ON THAT MONDAY MORNING BOTHERED HER!

AND LET'S NOT FORGET MR. P HAD THE OCILLA CHIEF OF POLICE ON SPEED DIAL, right? ANd he was/is a city councilman. And what about the fact he HAD A KEY TO TARA's HOUSE AND CAR! - boy that key to her car has always bugged me for reason. Anyone else? Why would someone give a next door neighbor a copy of their car key? That has always made me wonder if Tara was free and easy with keys and just who had copies of keys when she lived with her dad a couple of streets over?

Even if he didn't want to be involved, he could have called local LE and had them check out that house first thing the next morning.

ALL MOO. OF COURSE.

:seeya:

[odette]

PORTIER: I would not think so, Nancy. After I had called the local police when we couldn`t find Tara in the house that Monday morning, I walked back to the front porch talking to the chief of police on my cell phone.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0601/13/ng.01.html

[MATTHEWsevenone]

Originally posted by cbcrime
I could be wrong - but I don't think that GBI ever said anything about the finding of the necklace. It was reported found but that was about it. And quite honestly now I am totally confused. Was it on the floor with other jewerly - could it have been added to the pile of jewerly? Or was it by itself?

IIRC weren't some of the beads Tara's grandmothers? So possibly they were important or setimental. (Though I don't remember if AG said they were Tara's grandmother's beads or their grandmother's beads).

Not the only one confused...

I too wonder if the necklace was on the floor WITH OTHER JEWELRY...

Speaking of the remarks about the beads being from her grandma...

Here is a theory -- only a theory --

What if someone took her jewelry that night after harming Tara. Learned through the grapevine the necklace was UNIQUELY linkable to Tara (the beads, the fact she made it, and the photo that showed it ON HER from the PAGEANT)-- and the perp realizes it was TOO HOT to hold onto.

what to do, what to do,

Could just toss it or bury it - but GBI/others could be anywhere and watching...

What better place than to put it back in Tara's house since the GBI had processed it AND Tara's clothes from that night were found in her house!

I keep thinking about girls/parents who may have been returning clothes to Tara's --- I keep wondering if someone could have slipped by who was NOT one of the girls Tara helped and was someone the perp used to get the necklace back in that house.

OR

If the perp was a female and somehow tied to those pageants and she walked freely into that house and no one suspected she had not only the stuff she was legitimately returning BUT she also had that necklace she NEEDED to get rid off.

ALL MOO. OF COURSE.




:seeya:

[Lindsey]

Originally posted by cbcrime
I could be wrong - but I don't think that GBI ever said anything about the finding of the necklace. It was reported found but that was about it. And quite honestly now I am totally confused. Was it on the floor with other jewerly - could it have been added to the pile of jewerly? Or was it by itself?

IIRC weren't some of the beads Tara's grandmothers? So possibly they were important or setimental. (Though I don't remember if AG said they were Tara's grandmother's beads or their grandmother's beads).

IIRC, AG said they belonged to HER grandmother. She didn't say "Tara's grandmother" or "our grandmother", she said "my grandmother". Since they had different paternal grandmothers, I don't know if that's what AG meant or if that's just her way of speaking.

IMO

[Lindsey]

Originally posted by guitarstring


Lindsey, I read somewhere on here that the GBI spent 3 days in the house gathering evidence. Is that true?

If so, why would they let anyone go in on day 2 instead of waiting until after they were through with house on day 3?

And when they were through, whose idea was it to put up the crime scene tape?

I haven't heard the GBI spent 3 days in the house gathering evidence. I heard they started processing the house on Monday afternoon and finished sometime Tuesday morning. But I also heard of them going back to Tara's house more than once so it might have been a total of 3 days. I just don't know.

IMO

[MATTHEWsevenone]

Originally posted by odette
PORTIER: I would not think so, Nancy. After I had called the local police when we couldn`t find Tara in the house that Monday morning, I walked back to the front porch talking to the chief of police on my cell phone.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0601/13/ng.01.html

from the same interview:

"GATTIS: It was unlocked when Maria got there, but Mr. Portier had a key and he let the police in.

GRACE: Ah. So that`s why it was unlocked.

GATTIS: Right.

PORTIER: Right."


SO WHICH IS IT --- as ANITA was told and related Mr P unlocked the door for the POLICE OR

GEE WHIZ, doesn't MR P swing both ways during this interview -

he states he unlocked the door for the POLICE

AND

he states he unlocked the door and he and whoever comprises "WE" checked for Tara inside her house ...

Thanks Odette. So it seems Mr. P did go over to Tara's Monday morning - but the way that single interview went we do NOT KNOW the WHEN or with WHOM?

And in this instance, Anita was just NOT THERE to know one way or the other was she? She had to relay on what someone(s) was/were telling her, right?

ALL MOO.

:seeya:

[readmylips]

one last try. you tried to make your point about mrs p by saying she should get the same attention that the pois who have not spoken have gotten. my point is that mr p has spoken for them. so they have been spoken for.

best i can do for you in simplifying the point i was trying to make.

are you now saying that mrs p is a poi and her husband is speaking for her? :tongue:

nevermind. dont answer that.

Originally posted by guitarstring


Guitarstring:
Ok, let's look at what you just pointed out. If HD's wife spoke out right now and answered every question that we had, wouldn't you wonder why HD wasn't speaking for himself, right? Of course you would. Seems quite logical to me.

I'm sure when LE talked with Mrs. P, they didn't allow Mr. P to speak for her did they? If she's got a mouth, she can speak for herself, unless there's a reason he prefers to do the talking.

Think about it. The lady lives next door.......with a man who (from all accounts) appears to have been very close to a missing woman, having lunch at school with her regularly (as has been discussed here), working in the yard, going to ballgames, knowing her routines/schedules, etc.. Seems like the wife of the neighbor would have a lot of important information to offer if she was as close to Tara as her husband was.

BUT, some men are just controlling like that though, and maybe it's the lady's nature to be submissive and let him speak. Maybe that's all it is. But we never hear how close TARA and the lady were, only Tara and the lady's husband. Doesn't that seem odd?

[Lindsey]

I'm not sure Mr. P had keys to Tara's car. I know he had a key to her house and it might have been that she had an extra set of car keys inside her house somewhere in plain view. I don't know.

JMO


Originally posted by MATTHEWsevenone


This has always bugged me too.

We have her MOM and her best friend trying on Monday morning to locate Tara (in Hawkinsville, right?) - the best friend ultimately drives to Ocilla NEXT, right? Doesn't that sound backwards to ANYONE? ANd if Faye was so concerned she called the neighbors in the middle of the night, why didn't she follow up the next morning with them?

AND EVEN BEFORE THIS

We have MOM calling her neighbor- an older couple (I think the Nancy Grace interview actually have MR P saying HE spoke with Faye)around 1 AM - wee hours (in RURAL TIME that is - there are not many after hours or 24 hour places- in small town USA the town closes down EVEN on weekends around 10/11 PM)- and such a call at that hour, does not send up any warning flares... the MAN does not even cross the lawn, knock on the door , and make sure Tara is OK - the reasonable explanation was her lights were off and he was being considerate.. BUT WHAT ABOUT THE NEXT MORNING, WHY DIDN'T HE THINK TO GO KNOCK ON THE DOOR AND CHECK ON HER? GOOD GRIEF, HIS OWN WIFE IS QUOTED AS SAYING TARA'S LIGHTS NOT BEING ON THAT MONDAY MORNING BOTHERED HER!

AND LET'S NOT FORGET MR. P HAD THE OCILLA CHIEF OF POLICE ON SPEED DIAL, right? ANd he was/is a city councilman. And what about the fact he HAD A KEY TO TARA's HOUSE AND CAR! - boy that key to her car has always bugged me for reason. Anyone else? Why would someone give a next door neighbor a copy of their car key? That has always made me wonder if Tara was free and easy with keys and just who had copies of keys when she lived with her dad a couple of streets over?

Even if he didn't want to be involved, he could have called local LE and had them check out that house first thing the next morning.

ALL MOO. OF COURSE.

:seeya:

[MATTHEWsevenone]

Originally posted by luvmy2labpups



Yes she did, however, in this interview ANITA says that the only things out of place were the clock and lamp and they found the necklace on the 7th of November. (Date of interview on 8th said they found it the day before)


http://64.233.187.104/search?q=cache:VQc9-5eSOIIJ:transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0511/08/ng.01.html+missy+davis+%2B+anita+Gattis&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1



GRACE: And it makes perfect sense with all of this traveling. Anita, another question about this necklace. This is also a new detail, a necklace found on the floor of her home. What was the necklace, and where was it found?

GATTIS: This was the necklace that she wore on Saturday night, the last time she was seen. It was laying on the floor. She had helped many girls get ready for a beauty pageant that afternoon, so she had various pieces of jewelry laying around. Interesting thing that we`ve just found yesterday, we cannot find the earrings she had on that night.

GRACE: What were they?

GATTIS: They were described to me by Missy Davis -- and that`s one of the last people that saw Tara -- as a chandelier-type earring. And Missy and I went through her jewelry yesterday for about an hour, and we cannot find the earrings.

GRACE: You know, Anita, that is a tiny, a subtle but important detail in this case. Now, the necklace that was found on the floor -- let me just ask you a couple of questions. What room was it found?

GATTIS: It was in her bedroom.

GRACE: OK. And that`s the same place the radio clock was found on the floor, that sat by her bed, and the lamp was cracked. Was that the same room where she charged up her cell phone?

GATTIS: Exactly. The cell phone was in the charger right by the broken lamp.

GRACE: OK. So then was that necklace one she wore that evening, or does anybody know?

GATTIS: That is exactly the one she wore. We`ve identified it. Yes, it was the necklace she had on Saturday evening.

GRACE: You know, it`s amazing to me. It sounds like she was right there in the bedroom, changing clothes from coming home, taking off her jewelry, and something went wrong, something that made her take her pocketbook with her keys in her purse. You said the doors were locked, everything was in order except that lamp and that radio clock, right?

GATTIS: That`s correct, yes.

Thanks LUVS. Where does it say the necklace was found the day before? I read where they - Anita and Maria - went through her jewelry the day before and they could not locate the earrings... but I still can't find the interview that speaks exactly to when that NECKLACE was found or by whom.

IF - the necklace was found on 11/7:
It was also a MONDAY - the same day of the week Tara was reported missing.
It was two days later LE stopped all grid searches.


Just adding to

V

:seeya:

[MATTHEWsevenone]

Originally posted by Lindsey
I'm not sure Mr. P had keys to Tara's car. I know he had a key to her house and it might have been that she had an extra set of car keys inside her house somewhere in plain view. I don't know.

JMO




So Lindsey,

We don't have an interview/news article where Mr P says he had a set of keys to her car. Thought there was one at one time?

Sure wish we had our full board!

V
:seeya:

[readmylips]

Originally posted by odette
PORTIER: I would not think so, Nancy. After I had called the local police when we couldn`t find Tara in the house that Monday morning, I walked back to the front porch talking to the chief of police on my cell phone.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0601/13/ng.01.html

this was my understanding as well. mr p did go to check on her in the am and he was the one who started the ball rolling as far as sounding an alarm goes. i also believe he has been quoted as being very regretful for not going over when fay called.

[luvmy2labpups]

Originally posted by MATTHEWsevenone


Thanks LUVS. Where does it say the necklace was found the day before? I read where they - Anita and Maria - went through her jewelry the day before and they could not locate the earrings... but I still can't find the interview that speaks exactly to when that NECKLACE was found or by whom.

IF - the necklace was found on 11/7:
It was also a MONDAY - the same day of the week Tara was reported missing.
It was two days later LE stopped all grid searches.


Just adding to

V

:seeya: Did you mean Missy and not Maria? Look at the last sentence below. If you want to read it in context, go back and look at my post you quoted, it is the second paragraph.



GATTIS: This was the necklace that she wore on Saturday night, the last time she was seen. It was laying on the floor. She had helped many girls get ready for a beauty pageant that afternoon, so she had various pieces of jewelry laying around. Interesting thing that we`ve just found yesterday, we cannot find the earrings she had on that night.

[odette]

Originally posted by MATTHEWsevenone


from the same interview:

"GATTIS: It was unlocked when Maria got there, but Mr. Portier had a key and he let the police in.

GRACE: Ah. So that`s why it was unlocked.

GATTIS: Right.

PORTIER: Right."


SO WHICH IS IT --- as ANITA was told and related Mr P unlocked the door for the POLICE OR

GEE WHIZ, doesn't MR P swing both ways during this interview -

he states he unlocked the door for the POLICE

AND

he states he unlocked the door and he and whoever comprises "WE" checked for Tara inside her house ...

Thanks Odette. So it seems Mr. P did go over to Tara's Monday morning - but the way that single interview went we do NOT KNOW the WHEN or with WHOM?

And in this instance, Anita was just NOT THERE to know one way or the other was she? She had to relay on what someone(s) was/were telling her, right?

ALL MOO.

:seeya:

So it seems Mr. P did go over to Tara's Monday morning - but the way that single interview went we do NOT KNOW the WHEN or with WHOM?

"We thought she was home the whole time, with her car in the carport," said Myrtle Portier, who is very close to Grinstead. "We didn't realize until Monday morning, when she had no lights on."
http://tinyurl.com/y3vtqm

I do not know at what time Mr P./Mrs P., (or perhaps both) went to check on Tara on the Monday morning, but Tara was reported missing on Monday, October 24, 2006 at 8:50AM and sunrise in Ocilla on Monday October 24 2005 occured at 07:43 am.

From that, I gather that it must have been prior to 07:43am when the P's noticed that Tara's lights had not come on.



IMO

[OhBrother]

Originally posted by readmylips
one last try. you tried to make your point about mrs p by saying she should get the same attention that the pois who have not spoken have gotten. my point is that mr p has spoken for them. so they have been spoken for.

best i can do for you in simplifying the point i was trying to make.

are you now saying that mrs p is a poi and her husband is speaking for her? :tongue:

nevermind. dont answer that.


Which one of you spoke for you RML?

BTW, are you related to FP? Just wondering, because there's a huge pink giraffe that keeps walking through this room. It's wearing a tee shirt that says "PRETEND YOU DIDN'T SEE ME".

[readmylips]

Originally posted by OhBrother

Which one of you spoke for you RML?

BTW, are you related to FP? Just wondering, because there's a huge pink giraffe that keeps walking through this room. It's wearing a tee shirt that says "PRETEND YOU DIDN'T SEE ME".

delusional rambling is amusing.

[readmylips]

you are simply unable to comprehend my words. i will try one more time to help you with that i guess.

did i say her words aren't important? i believe i said that her husband was speaking for the two of them when he interviewed. that's pretty clear as he quotes her a time or two. it isn't an unreasonable explanation for why she didn't do the interviewing.

i said i don't find it odd that she didn't grab the mic and take over. he had it handled so why would she?

have you been married for a long time? if so, does your husband ever step up and handle things for you? it's very common for a spouse to do that especially in a stressful situation. and i would even venture to sy that the longer you're married the more likely it is to happen. they have been married a long time.

why do you insist upon reading so much more into my words than are there?

you and ohbother should have a little conference with that pink giraffe and ask him why he keeps ohbothering you.

mrs p is not on my poi list. she can be on yours if you like but that wont change my viewpoint. whether you like it or not, yes, i do have more knowledge on the subject than you do. does that make me right? no, but it does give me the ability to think more clearly on certain subjects. maybe one day we will all know who was right and who was wrong.

think we'll get a prize for being right? i wonder what the punishment will be for being wrong. how many people will be persecuted in the meantime from nothing more than irrational theories?





Originally posted by guitarstring
Readmylips, you asked me if Mrs. P was NOW a POI. I guess you would like to know if she is a POI to me, because I cannot speak for others so, I have to say

LE has their list.
You have your list.
I have mine.
and so on~ I don't know who is on other lists, but yes, she's on mine. I like to think of her more as a VIP instead of a POI.

We each have our own reasons as to why someone is important.
I respect everyone's individual reasons, even if they are unknown to me. It's just the way it is. We don't all view things the same and that's ok.

FYI: FYI: FYI: FYI:
Person of Interest does NOT mean guilty of anything.
POI does not mean criminal.
POI does not mean law breaker.
POI does not mean that person is going to get arrested.

Person of interest is self explanatory.

I'd like to ask how you may have come to your conclusion that this neighbor lady, Mrs. P, knows NOTHING of INTEREST to this case?

I'd be most interested in your ideas on this.

Oh brother rml, If I was a betting person, I'd bet you won't share, as that would be collaborating with an outsider, but if you care to explain why she should NOT be considered as important, I'd like to hear your views. It could be helpful to us all.

Has anyone in LE given you an official list that we don't know about?Is that how you are able to exclude someone? Just wondering.

Oh, here comes the pink giraffe.
:lol:

[Results]

Originally posted by guitarstring


Judging from your reply, I have to ask if you know where Tara is or what happened to her or why she is unable to be located?

If not, how can you call a line of thinking IRRATIONAL?

Weren't you banned from here before for the same tactics you use now? Does the moderator know who you are and why you are here?

I could be wrong, but I was told you have your own message board about Tara, and I don't mean to be ugly, but I really feel it's unfair to keep intimidating the users here when you can just hang out on your own board. I mean, if we lowly CTV users here are so clueless, then why give us your time?

We here at CTV really do appreciate posts with thought provoking inquiries, but your posts all appear to be slams at someone about their views.

Honestly, we all have different views and try to discuss things here with a mature manner, but it's very difficult to keep something going when it's sideswiped by undertones and psychological games and fraudulent claims to be seekers of truth who care about Tara.

I don't try to intimidate others and I try to respond with respect to the individual views of others and keep in mind that I am not right all the time, nor am I all knowing. You say you have more knowledge on the subject than I do? I'm assuming you mean the details of this case? If so, how about trying to straighten some kinks out for us?

Please, seek the truth, by all means, but do so in one accord with others. Must you be so oppositional to all views but your own?

Please help us over here in our efforts to determine what happened to Tara. I'm sure you would love to see her come home too!

:rose: Sending a prayer to help you embrace others who care for Tara.

STOP THIS BS RIGHT NOW! THERE IS NO PLACE FOR IT HERE. THERE WAS A GOOD DISCUSSION ON A GBI THREAD THAT WENT POOF. DO NOT TRY TO GET THIS THREAD TO GO POOF. GOTTA PROBLEM TAKE IT SOMEWHERE ELSE. JMHO

[Results]

Originally posted by OhBrother

Which one of you spoke for you RML?

BTW, are you related to FP? Just wondering, because there's a huge pink giraffe that keeps walking through this room. It's wearing a tee shirt that says "PRETEND YOU DIDN'T SEE ME".

STOP YOUR BS RIGHT NOW! I DON'T GIVE A DA** ABOUT NO STUPID PINK GIRAFFE AND YOU CAN TAKE THAT SOMEWHERE ELSE. WE WERE DOING JUST FINE IN A CONVERSATION WITHOUT YOUR IGNORANCE AND INTERUPTIONS THAT YOU NEVER HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY OR NOTHING TO CONTRIBUTE BECAUSE YOU ARE IN A STUPID GAME. NOT HERE. NOT HERE ANYMORE. I'M TIRED OF POSTERS COMING ON HERE WHEN THERE ARE GOOD POSTERS DISCUSSING A POSSIBLE LEAD TO FIND TARA. TO YOU IT MIGHT NOT BE A POSSIBLE LEAD AND THAT IS OK THEN JUST SHUT THE HELL UP AND LET US CONTINUE WITH TRYING TO FIND TARA. I'M SICK OF THIS CRAP. DO YOU HEAR ME? I'M SICK OF IT. JMHO '

Now, about this necklace.....

[readmylips]

judging from your reply, i find your perceptions irrational.

you don't have to agree with my views and i don't have to agree with yours. i am entitled to my opinions and you to yours. because they differ you find me intimidating? that's a personal isue that i can't help you with. its just words. take them or leave them.

how many nics have you used here? or are using here now? how many times have you been banned and how many times have you requested that your posts be removed? how many nics have you abandoned when the heat got too bad? dont answer that coz i already know and dont care. and lets not get in to a who you are discussion. it's tiresome.

are you lashing out at me because i asked if you were involved in tara's disappearance or because you have been fed so many lies that you are confused?

if you feel intimidated by my posts then put me on ignore and carry on. its a handy feature and i think it is intended just for that purpose.


Originally posted by guitarstring


Judging from your reply, I have to ask if you know where Tara is or what happened to her or why she is unable to be located?

If not, how can you call a line of thinking IRRATIONAL?

Weren't you banned from here before for the same tactics you use now? Does the moderator know who you are and why you are here?

I could be wrong, but I was told you have your own message board about Tara, and I don't mean to be ugly, but I really feel it's unfair to keep intimidating the users here when you can just hang out on your own board. I mean, if we lowly CTV users here are so clueless, then why give us your time?

We here at CTV really do appreciate posts with thought provoking inquiries, but your posts all appear to be slams at someone about their views.

Honestly, we all have different views and try to discuss things here with a mature manner, but it's very difficult to keep something going when it's sideswiped by undertones and psychological games and fraudulent claims to be seekers of truth who care about Tara.

I don't try to intimidate others and I try to respond with respect to the individual views of others and keep in mind that I am not right all the time, nor am I all knowing. You say you have more knowledge on the subject than I do? I'm assuming you mean the details of this case? If so, how about trying to straighten some kinks out for us?

Please, seek the truth, by all means, but do so in one accord with others. Must you be so oppositional to all views but your own?

Please help us over here in our efforts to determine what happened to Tara. I'm sure you would love to see her come home too!

:rose: Sending a prayer to help you embrace others who care for Tara.

[luvmy2labpups]

Originally posted by guitarstring


Judging from your reply, I have to ask if you know where Tara is or what happened to her or why she is unable to be located?

If not, how can you call a line of thinking IRRATIONAL?

Weren't you banned from here before for the same tactics you use now? Does the moderator know who you are and why you are here?

I could be wrong, but I was told you have your own message board about Tara, and I don't mean to be ugly, but I really feel it's unfair to keep intimidating the users here when you can just hang out on your own board. I mean, if we lowly CTV users here are so clueless, then why give us your time?

We here at CTV really do appreciate posts with thought provoking inquiries, but your posts all appear to be slams at someone about their views.

Honestly, we all have different views and try to discuss things here with a mature manner, but it's very difficult to keep something going when it's sideswiped by undertones and psychological games and fraudulent claims to be seekers of truth who care about Tara.

I don't try to intimidate others and I try to respond with respect to the individual views of others and keep in mind that I am not right all the time, nor am I all knowing. You say you have more knowledge on the subject than I do? I'm assuming you mean the details of this case? If so, how about trying to straighten some kinks out for us?

Please, seek the truth, by all means, but do so in one accord with others. Must you be so oppositional to all views but your own?

Please help us over here in our efforts to determine what happened to Tara. I'm sure you would love to see her come home too!

:rose: Sending a prayer to help you embrace others who care for Tara. YOU try to respond with respect? UMMM what is respectful about this post? Just because you think you filled it with some sugary words, it doesn't mean the underlying meaning can't be read loud and clear. This post was clearly meant to be a slam and nothing more. RML, I wouldn't worry about Guitarstring, everyone knows better.

[readmylips]

you are right results. i apologize for being drawn in to it.

let's get back to the discussion and i will just ignore the bothers.

thanks for bringing my thoughts back to where they should be.

Originally posted by Results


STOP YOUR BS RIGHT NOW! I DON'T GIVE A DA** ABOUT NO STUPID PINK GIRAFFE AND YOU CAN TAKE THAT SOMEWHERE ELSE. WE WERE DOING JUST FINE IN A CONVERSATION WITHOUT YOUR IGNORANCE AND INTERUPTIONS THAT YOU NEVER HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY OR NOTHING TO CONTRIBUTE BECAUSE YOU ARE IN A STUPID GAME. NOT HERE. NOT HERE ANYMORE. I'M TIRED OF POSTERS COMING ON HERE WHEN THERE ARE GOOD POSTERS DISCUSSING A POSSIBLE LEAD TO FIND TARA. TO YOU IT MIGHT NOT BE A POSSIBLE LEAD AND THAT IS OK THEN JUST SHUT THE HELL UP AND LET US CONTINUE WITH TRYING TO FIND TARA. I'M SICK OF THIS CRAP. DO YOU HEAR ME? I'M SICK OF IT. JMHO '

Now, about this necklace.....

[fsbiii]

Exactly. It's hard to do, but it must be done. Some of these people are like those relatives at the family reunion that you dread to see. They have a right to be there, but you hope to keep them at a distance and still enjoy the baked ham and green bean casserole while doing so.

Pass the turnips, please.

Originally posted by luvmy2labpups
YOU try to respond with respect? UMMM what is respectful about this post? Just because you think you filled it with some sugary words, it doesn't mean the underlying meaning can't be read loud and clear. This post was clearly meant to be a slam and nothing more. RML, I wouldn't worry about Guitarstring, everyone knows better.

[Results]

Originally posted by readmylips
you are right results. i apologize for being drawn in to it.

let's get back to the discussion and i will just ignore the bothers.

thanks for bringing my thoughts back to where they should be.



You are a valuable poster from where I am sitting. There just seems to be some posters that are so concerned about some local posters and I'm just tired of it. I have tried everything I could to get locals back on here to help us out and reading what you locals have to go through well lets just say I can see why they think it is not worth it. Us posters that are from afar need to take a stand right here and right now to say THIS WILL NOT BE TOLERATED. I'm really concerned about this necklace because if it can make one whole thread go POOF then this one could too. We have excellent posters, researchers, and link pullers. So, let us put our heads together and find out about this necklace.

Who has the necklace now? FG? AG?

It's a woman's necklace so why would a man have it if he does have it?

Please anyone who has the necklace?

[Its just me]

Originally posted by Results


STOP YOUR BS RIGHT NOW! I DON'T GIVE A DA** ABOUT NO STUPID PINK GIRAFFE AND YOU CAN TAKE THAT SOMEWHERE ELSE. WE WERE DOING JUST FINE IN A CONVERSATION WITHOUT YOUR IGNORANCE AND INTERUPTIONS THAT YOU NEVER HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY OR NOTHING TO CONTRIBUTE BECAUSE YOU ARE IN A STUPID GAME. NOT HERE. NOT HERE ANYMORE. I'M TIRED OF POSTERS COMING ON HERE WHEN THERE ARE GOOD POSTERS DISCUSSING A POSSIBLE LEAD TO FIND TARA. TO YOU IT MIGHT NOT BE A POSSIBLE LEAD AND THAT IS OK THEN JUST SHUT THE HELL UP AND LET US CONTINUE WITH TRYING TO FIND TARA. I'M SICK OF THIS CRAP. DO YOU HEAR ME? I'M SICK OF IT. JMHO '

Now, about this necklace.....

Few post that I agree with every word but this one I do. Thank you.

Now, about this necklace.....

[Its just me]

This is a little off topic about the necklace but I wonder why the earrings are said to be missing but not the ring that LG gave Tara.
The ring is missing. I wonder if it is possible that the necklace was there all along and AG dramatized it to make like it appeared two weeks later. She's done more.

[luvmy2labpups]

Originally posted by fsbiii
Exactly. It's hard to do, but it must be done. Some of these people are like those relatives at the family reunion that you dread to see. They have a right to be there, but you hope to keep them at a distance and still enjoy the baked ham and green bean casserole while doing so.

Pass the turnips, please.



LMAO, that is a fine example. Turnips headed your way. :lol:

[Results]

Originally posted by Its just me
This is a little off topic about the necklace but I wonder why the earrings are said to be missing but not the ring that LG gave Tara.
The ring is missing. I wonder if it is possible that the necklace was there all along and AG dramatized it to make like it appeared two weeks later. She's done more.

You have a point but if she did that why in the world would she do that? I have to ask is the ring from LG or from both LG/AG? JMHO

[Results]

Originally posted by Its just me
This is a little off topic about the necklace but I wonder why the earrings are said to be missing but not the ring that LG gave Tara.
The ring is missing. I wonder if it is possible that the necklace was there all along and AG dramatized it to make like it appeared two weeks later. She's done more.

You know the ring makes perfect sense to me I think. IF LG gave Tara the ring it probably wouldn't have looked good to say the ring LG gave Tara is missing when there was rumors flying that Tara and LG had an affair. Damage control. It was stated that Tara didn't take it off which means it meant alot to Tara and unlike the necklace and earings that she wore they were not worn everyday so they assumed that the ring was with her since she didn't take it off. So, why mention the ring when they know it will open questions of why and when did LG give this ring to Tara. Why didn't she take it off and why was it so important to her? IJM, you might just have something here. Gotta go check something out. LOL JMHO

[PNut]

ooh, somehow I missed the details of this ring! So LG gave Tara a ring?? What kind of ring? What were the stones? Was it from LG and AG, or just him?? Was it for an occassion of some sort?

The pics of Tara from that day - does she have the ring, can we tell?

[Results]

VITO COLUCCI, PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR: Yes. You know, there`s some troubling things on this, Nancy. There`s a lot of troubling things. You know, this is a town of only 3,000 people. I don`t know their background. We talked about, Is the search going on? I don`t even know if the investigation is going on or what they`re involved in. There can`t be a lot of crime going on in this town, OK? They missed a necklace that was on the floor of her house. They did several searches, and they found it on the third or fourth search. I know that GBI, the Georgia Bureau, was involved in this for a little while, but I`m a little concerned about what they`re actually doing on this case, Nancy

This private investigator says GBI found it on the floor on the 3rd or 4th visit. They don't say this necklace was found on the bedroom floor. Something isn't right here. JMHO

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0511/23/ng.01.html

[readmylips]

Originally posted by Results
VITO COLUCCI, PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR: Yes. You know, there`s some troubling things on this, Nancy. There`s a lot of troubling things. You know, this is a town of only 3,000 people. I don`t know their background. We talked about, Is the search going on? I don`t even know if the investigation is going on or what they`re involved in. There can`t be a lot of crime going on in this town, OK? They missed a necklace that was on the floor of her house. They did several searches, and they found it on the third or fourth search. I know that GBI, the Georgia Bureau, was involved in this for a little while, but I`m a little concerned about what they`re actually doing on this case, Nancy

This private investigator says GBI found it on the floor on the 3rd or 4th visit. They don't say this necklace was found on the bedroom floor. Something isn't right here. JMHO

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0511/23/ng.01.html

i wouldn't put a whole lot of weight into what the "investigators" on nancy grace say. the show's intention is to create high ratings. they are not concerned about facts or accuracy. they aim to entertain. i would guess that there is little cross referencing or checking done to verify the information they share before they share it. i see it as a verbal version of a message board.

on the subject of the ring, lg gave it to tara as a christmas gift. i was told it was a solo gift from him to her. i would guess she was probably wearing it when she disappeared. someone told me that she wore it alot.

[Results]

Originally posted by readmylips


i wouldn't put a whole lot of weight into what the "investigators" on nancy grace say. the show's intention is to create high ratings. they are not concerned about facts or accuracy. they aim to entertain. i would guess that there is little cross referencing or checking done to verify the information they share before they share it. i see it as a verbal version of a message board.

on the subject of the ring, lg gave it to tara as a christmas gift. i was told it was a solo gift from him to her. i would guess she was probably wearing it when she disappeared. someone told me that she wore it alot.

Thank you for the information it is very helpful. Now can you please tell me if you know who has the necklace now?

I was thinking that maybe the GBI withheld where the lecklace was found for some reason and if AG was told it was found in the bedroom and she told where the necklace was and that is why maybe they stopped telling her anything and if they didn't tell her and she knew it was found in the bedroom floor then that would mean she put it there or she knew it was going to be put there or she guessed it. I'm not sure exactly what you are saying about the investigator speaking in this interview or if you aren't talking about him but the NG show itself? If you don't want to say on board please PM me. TIA JMHO

[readmylips]

Originally posted by Merrick


rml,

I agree with you completely on the NG show. It's mostly entertainment and ratings, not investigative journalism, IMO.

I still believe that the necklace was most likely in the house and overlooked because no one was taking this "missng persons" case as seriously as they should have been. IMO, the initial responders most likely thought that Tara just took off to regroup and be by herself. I doubt that a thorough search was done at the on set of this case. Of course, I wasn't there so this is just my impression from reading all available information. I just don't understand why the earrings are missing. If the necklace was in fact "planted" by the perp after the fact, why not all the missing items? Any ideas?
JMHO.

the missing person report was actually taken very seriously. that monday afternoon a group was assembled and searches began immediately. the whole town was abuzz and shocked and scared and worrried. it was like something you see in a bad movie.

it wasn't until some time passed and rumors started floating that the "maybe she ran away" theories trickled by. there might have been some who considered that from the beginning but it wasn't something that was general consensus and still isn't tmk.

i also think that some of the local "maybe she ran away" theories have more to do with hope for a positive outcome than anything else. personally i hope she ran away too but i have no idea what happened or where she is and i won't give up on her until i do. just my opinion on that.

[Its just me]

Originally posted by Results


You have a point but if she did that why in the world would she do that? I have to ask is the ring from LG or from both LG/AG? JMHO

Results as you know we don't know about the necklace and why it showed up 2 weeks later. My thoughts are that AG and Dr. G have tried very hard to make the house a crime scene, which is not what the GBI has confirmed. AG has done many things that implicate that she thinks MH did something to Tara. If AG truly believes this it is so sad that she has lost any creditability with many people and has created a situation where many are looking at her actions and asking questions and I am sorry to say my questions go to the point of her or LG’s personal involvement or knowing something about Tara's disappearance whether it be Tara is alive or deceased. BTW These are just my thoughts and questions I have.

[RCM-715]

Originally posted by Results


I would like to ask you something that I have been wondering about. I was wondering if a family or friend told MH about the AV and HD incident on any of his E-mails. I'm thinking that if he did get an E-mail from family or friend about this incident he was done with her when he came home and that is why he did not contact her. The other thing is if his family or friend told him something else in his E-mails that she had done that made him say I'm done with her and didn't contact her when he returned home. It has been said many times that MH did not let Tara know when he got back from overseas which makes me believe that he found something out before he got to Ocilla and decided that there was no hope for them romantically. I could be way off about why he didn't contact her when he got back. If you can answer those questions TIA and if you can't I understand that too! Thank you for sharing your information that you have already given us because it sure is appreciated. JMHO

The relationship was over 6 months prior to that incident. MH was trying to maintain a friendship with TG, but this incident greatly discouraged a friendship.

MH did know about HD and it didn't concern him at the least. It wasn't his business at this point who TG was seeing. I know this as fact that it didn't bother him!

Several people informed MH of this relationship TG was having with HD and his response was always the same, "I could care less"...............

[odette]

Originally posted by readmylips


this was my understanding as well. mr p did go to check on her in the am and he was the one who started the ball rolling as far as sounding an alarm goes. i also believe he has been quoted as being very regretful for not going over when fay called.

This should help to clarify a few things as well.

Adelga.com Irwin unites to search for teacher

Wednesday, November 02 2005 @ 11:31 AM EST


The Portiers never saw her bedroom night light come on Sunday night and found that fact to be mysterious. About midnight Sunday, Grinstead’s mother called them to ask if they had heard from her daughter.

“Normally we saw her on an everyday basis,” Joe Portier said. “I told her we had not seen her and her mother sounded concerned.”

Although the Portiers had a key to her home, he said they did not want to invade their neighbor’s privacy. But when they woke up Monday morning and saw that there was still no sign that Grinstead had been home, they investigated. They found a scene that has been puzzling friends, families and police members for over a week now.

Her door was locked, but her car was still parked in the carport and the doors to it were unlocked. The Portiers found the shoes in the floor and a lamp that had been knocked over and broken in her bedroom. Her alarm clock was lying on the floor near her bed, and the time was off by several hours. Her cell phone, with which she was seen Saturday, was placed on a charger.

None of those things are necessarily signs of foul play, but they provoke curiosity.

“Had we known it was a crime scene, we would have probably backed off and not touched a thing,” said Joe Portier.

He said that he called ICHS and asked if Grinstead had called in to work, and found that she had not. As a city councilman, he had Police Chief Billy Hancock’s phone number in his cell phone and he called the chief directly. The investigation into Grinstead’s disappearance began.

http://adelga.com/article.php?story=20051102113146939

[TuscanDreams]

I'm so confused!

Can anyone answer these questions?

Was the necklace that was found a lighter chain necklace?

WHO found the necklace?

How did it reach the media that a necklace was found that was previously missing?

[readmylips]

Originally posted by TuscanDreams
I'm so confused!

Can anyone answer these questions?

Was the necklace that was found a lighter chain necklace?

WHO found the necklace?

How did it reach the media that a necklace was found that was previously missing?

the necklace was a long beaded necklace. not a light chain.

tmk ag found the necklace. no confirmed report on that by le.

ag told nancy grace about it in interview

[One2Snoop]

Originally posted by TuscanDreams
I'm so confused!

Can anyone answer these questions?

Was the necklace that was found a lighter chain necklace?

WHO found the necklace?

How did it reach the media that a necklace was found that was previously missing?

Tuscan -

This is a picture of Tara and what she was wearing the last night she was seen. If you look closely enough you can see the necklace she had on. Like RML said, it was a beaded necklace - not a chain.

http://i13.tinypic.com/3yhumgl.jpg

AG said in one of her interviews that a necklace was found - she didn't say by whom.

GATTIS: This was the necklace that she wore on Saturday night, the last time she was seen. It was laying on the floor. She had helped many girls get ready for a beauty pageant that afternoon, so she had various pieces of jewelry laying around. Interesting thing that we`ve just found yesterday, we cannot find the earrings she had on that night.

GRACE: You know, Anita, that is a tiny, a subtle but important detail in this case. Now, the necklace that was found on the floor -- let me just ask you a couple of questions. What room was it found?

GATTIS: It was in her bedroom.

GRACE: OK. And that`s the same place the radio clock was found on the floor, that sat by her bed, and the lamp was cracked. Was that the same room where she charged up her cell phone?

GATTIS: Exactly. The cell phone was in the charger right by the broken lamp.

GRACE: OK. So then was that necklace one she wore that evening, or does anybody know?

GATTIS: That is exactly the one she wore. We`ve identified it. Yes, it was the necklace she had on Saturday evening.

http://64.233.187.104/search?q=cache:VQc9-5eSOIIJ:transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0511/08/ng.01.html+missy+davis+%2B+anita+Gattis&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1

[Aussie]

rcm-715,
Thankyou for sharing on the board in a civil manner. It has been a long time since someone who knows MH personally has given any information.
It is refreshing to see some informative posts without the bad attitude that so many display on this board.
:)

[Its just me]

Originally posted by Aussie
rcm-715,
Thankyou for sharing on the board in a civil manner. It has been a long time since someone who knows MH personally has given any information.
It is refreshing to see some informative posts without the bad attitude that so many display on this board.
:)

I agree Aussie and a very humble and sincere Thank you from me also RCM-715.

[ocean]

rcm-715,

Would you care to share your thoughts on what you think may have happened to Tara?

ocean

[Results]

Originally posted by RCM-715


The relationship was over 6 months prior to that incident. MH was trying to maintain a friendship with TG, but this incident greatly discouraged a friendship.

MH did know about HD and it didn't concern him at the least. It wasn't his business at this point who TG was seeing. I know this as fact that it didn't bother him!

Several people informed MH of this relationship TG was having with HD and his response was always the same, "I could care less"...............

Thank you once again. That was what I was looking for and that explains it clearly. I always felt like this was a turning point some how and if this incident greatly discouraged a friendship then Tara must have been devastated. Maybe her anger boiled over to SF who she thought told MH but it wasn't SF who told him. The not contacting her must have been a tremendous blow to her. JMHO

[simply quiet]

Originally posted by Aussie
rcm-715,
Thankyou for sharing on the board in a civil manner. It has been a long time since someone who knows MH personally has given any information.
It is refreshing to see some informative posts without the bad attitude that so many display on this board.
:)

Ditto

I also respect how your thoughts have been posted. I am not local so this peaks my interest.

Thank you.

[TuscanDreams]

Originally posted by One2Snoop
Like RML said, it was a beaded necklace - not a chain.

AG said in one of her interviews that a necklace was found - she didn't say by whom.
[B]"Interesting thing that we`ve just found yesterday, we cannot find the earrings she had on that night." Anita Gattis

Thanks for the info, one2snoop.

From what I snipped from your article, it appears that Anita is one of the searchers who found the necklace.

I don't know Anita, but I will say that I just don't think that a family member finding evidence can be considered credible.

[Results]

I bet NG won't like that statement. IIRC, NG told a defense attorney don't even try it. JMHO

[Its just me]

Originally posted by TuscanDreams


Thanks for the info, one2snoop.

From what I snipped from your article, it appears that Anita is one of the searchers who found the necklace.

I don't know Anita, but I will say that I just don't think that a family member finding evidence can be considered credible.

Exactly, and that is why all searches needs some kind of cooperation with a division of LE.

[TuscanDreams]

Originally posted by Results
I bet NG won't like that statement. IIRC, NG told a defense attorney don't even try it. JMHO

Nancy Grace told a defense attorney that evidence found by non-LE is ok?

Interesting.

[TuscanDreams]

Originally posted by Its just me
Exactly, and that is why all searches needs some kind of cooperation with a division of LE.

I completely agree. It is imperitive that a searcher knows how to seek and preserve evidence.

There is nothing wrong with people searching for Tara, I think it's great. But, when they find something- even a necklace- they need to call LE ASAP so that the chain of evidence isn't broken.

[kundalini]

I could care less means that you care - could care a lot or a little but "I could care less" means you care.

I could NOT care less means you barely care or do not care at all.

[grandline]

Originally posted by kundalini
I could care less means that you care - could care a lot or a little but "I could care less" means you care.

I could NOT care less means you barely care or do not care at all.

Semantics.

"I could care less" is a commonly misused phrase, particularly in that region of the south, at least to my experience. It's only one of many. I would not take it that literally, IMHO.

[Its just me]

Originally posted by kundalini
I could care less means that you care - could care a lot or a little but "I could care less" means you care.

I could NOT care less means you barely care or do not care at all.

You probably are correct if being graded by an English teacher but my personal South Georgia language, "I could care less" would mean "I don't care". Just my take on things but I am often wrong.

[readmylips]

Originally posted by Its just me


You probably are correct if being graded by an English teacher but my personal South Georgia language, "I could care less" would mean "I don't care". Just my take on things but I am often wrong.

i would agree and i would add that when it is used it is usually used with as extreme. a "don't waste my time" attitude comes to mind. that is my interpretation of the use of those words from a personal standpoint and from those i have witnessed.

[RCM-715]

Originally posted by grandline


Semantics.

"I could care less" is a commonly misused phrase, particularly in that region of the south, at least to my experience. It's only one of many. I would not take it that literally, IMHO.

You are correct. One could pick this to pieces, but let's not. No matter how he worded it, I know his true feelings and he didn't give a dam*.

I think some of the georgia quotes are cool and I have gotten used to them due to working with many GA boys.

[Its just me]

Originally posted by RCM-715


You are correct. One could pick this to pieces, but let's not. No matter how he worded it, I know his true feelings and he didn't give a dam*.

I think some of the georgia quotes are cool and I have gotten used to them due to working with many GA boys.

{{I know his true feelings and he didn't give a dam*.}}

Thanks for sharing what you "know". My information is that Tara continued to bug him, harrass him or my south Georgia language would be to sling a fit. Is this hear say or truth. If you don't want to share or don't know it is ok not to respond.

[Its just me]

Originally posted by Its just me


{{I know his true feelings and he didn't give a dam*.}}

Thanks for sharing what you "know". My information is that Tara continued to bug him, harrass him or my south Georgia language would be to sling a fit. Is this hear say or truth. If you don't want to share or don't know it is ok not to respond.

Sorry to reply to my own quote. I have asked off board questions concerning MH's and Tara's relationship. I have had more than one person tell me that MH was finished with Tara but Tara could not or would not let go. I have been told that MH tried very hard to handle Tara gently and one report showed me a picture of MH being a person in control and handled a situation with Tara where he did not lose his temper and many would have if faced with the same situation.. If it was Tara's personality to be maybe persistent with MH it is possible Tara could have had the same personality with other people in her life. Just MHOO and things I have been told. Stand to be corrected.

[mooloo]

Persistent sounds right based on what other posters have said about some of her other relationships that went south. Perhaps she did nag or needle someone else just one time too many?


Originally posted by Its just me


Sorry to reply to my own quote. I have asked off board questions concerning MH's and Tara's relationship. I have had more than one person tell me that MH was finished with Tara but Tara could not or would not let go. I have been told that MH tried very hard to handle Tara gently and one report showed me a picture of MH being a person in control and handled a situation with Tara where he did not lose his temper and many would have if faced with the same situation.. If it was Tara's personality to be maybe persistent with MH it is possible Tara could have had the same personality with other people in her life. Just MHOO and things I have been told. Stand to be corrected.

[Results]

One article says GBI recovered it on the 3rd or 4th trip. Then another article states AG found it. Which one is it? Who found the necklace and where is the necklace? TIA and as always JMHO

[TuscanDreams]

Originally posted by Results
One article says GBI recovered it on the 3rd or 4th trip. Then another article states AG found it. Which one is it? Who found the necklace and where is the necklace? TIA and as always JMHO

I'd like to add that if LE found the necklace during a second, seperate search, then I believe someone most likely returned it to the home.

For example: if Officer Jack Frost (I made up the name in case anyone wonders...) searched Tara's home on all occasions, he'd notice if something was different on a particular search. Ocilla most likely has a smaller police department and they would have the same officers on each search, right? Correct me if I'm wrong, I'm just guessing.

There is nothing wrong with Anita finding the necklace, I'd just thought that she entered the home after the only LE search and located it. That would have destroyed any chain of evidence. However, now that it may seem that LE found the necklace on another search, I'm considering the fact that it was placed back in the home.

Who would place a necklace back in the home? A female, men could care less about that kind of stuff. (Another poster pointed that out in a PM).

[concernedperson]

I believe GBI had everything they needed after csi entered on Monday afternoon. It is common knowledge that the house was contaminated by the time they arrived.The only difference I can see is that they have obtained and held dna from many people. I believe that is in the event Tara is found and can compare anything on the body with what they have.

It more than likely doesn't have anything to do with the house. What needs to happen is to find Tara. I am fairly sure they have a better timeline than we do but, again, waiting. There is a piece missing and it is the someone who won't talk.

[Its just me]

cp I agree the house was contaminated during the early hours on Monday by people going in, feeding the cat and what ever was done. I don't think the GBI found anything of value but if they did it would have to be strong evidence to stand up in a court of law.
GS the following is the interview NG did with MHu (Tara's friend who drove from Hawkinsville to Ocilla on Monday morning) MHu describes the bed in this interview but I don't know how Tara's bed was on Saturday when the girls were there. I am posting the entire interview with MHu so not to take anything out of context.

Joining me now, Tara`s best friend, Maria Hulett. How long have you known Tara?

MARIA HULETT, FRIEND OF TARA GRINSTEAD: Probably 15 years.

GRACE: And that morning -- I know she went to a cookout at a school superintendent`s house the evening before, after the pageant. She had been helping younger girls get ready for a local pageant.

HULETT: Right.

GRACE: She goes to the cookout, leaves, I think, around 11:00 PM or so to drive back home. You went to her home the next morning, Sunday morning, correct?

HULETT: No, Monday morning.

GRACE: Excuse me, Monday morning. What did you see?

HULETT: I immediately went into the house...

GRACE: Well, why did you go there?

HULETT: I had been -- we had been looking for her, her mother an I had. And then so I went down there that morning, knowing that the police were on their way, and I went in. The police were outside. Well, excuse me...

GRACE: How did you get in?

HULETT: ... the detective was outside by her car. Her door was unlocked.

GRACE: Her door was unlocked?

HULETT: Uh-huh.

GRACE: OK. Go ahead.

HULETT: Yes, I walked in the door, looked where her shoes would usually be, you know, to see if she had hurried out the door, maybe, looked around to see if anything had fallen off the tables, if there looked like (INAUDIBLE) having a struggle, you know? I immediately knew that something had to have been wrong for her not to have shown up for work, not to call home. There had to have been something wrong. So I...

GRACE: What did you see in the bedroom?

HULETT: The bedroom, she had -- there were clothes on the floor, jewelry on the floor. Her shoes were on the floor. And they were really nice shoes, and she`s very peculiar about her clothes, her clothing and shoes. They were on the floor. There were things packed -- stacked up on her -- next to her bed. Her bed had been slept in, it looked like to me. You know, her pillows were arranged like she sleeps. I immediately thought that she had been in the bed at some point. You know, she had been there at night. I knew that the last time that anybody had talked to her was Saturday night.

GRACE: Now, what about the clock-radio and the lamp?

HULETT: I didn`t see the clock. That was later on, when I went back the second time, did I see the clock.

GRACE: OK. Under the bed?

HULETT: Under the bed, right. Her cell phone was plugged up to the wall, charging, next to her bed.

GRACE: So the phone -- the cell phone was there. Would she ever have left without her cell phone?

HULETT: I feel like she would have, if she didn`t want to be bothered. If she had gone with someone who she knew, who she trusted, who she didn`t want to be bothered by anybody else, she`d have left it.

GRACE: Quick break, everyone.

[Results]

IJM,

In this same interview that you are talking about this is what NG said about the bedroom and necklace:

GRACE: It`s not like her -- Renee, you should have seen this place. It was perfectly in order. But when the cops came, they found one of her beautiful necklaces on the floor of the bedroom. They found the digital clock, bedside clock, under the bed. They found her lamp knocked over and broken. And they found these shoes laying out on the floor, the clothes she had worn that evening, still lying out. That is just not like this girl.

Was the necklace there from day one or not? Is NG confused or is there 2 necklaces. This is confusing me. TIA for anybody that can help me out here to understand about the necklace. JMHO

[NancynNC]

Originally posted by RCM-715


You are correct. One could pick this to pieces, but let's not. No matter how he worded it, I know his true feelings and he didn't give a dam*.

I think some of the georgia quotes are cool and I have gotten used to them due to working with many GA boys.

IMO no one knows anyones true feelings. Sometimes I do not know my own. I may be changed tomorrow. I have sons, sisters and brothers, some days they get mad at their mates or girl friends, but I would never say I know their true feelings toward anyone. IMO

[Its just me]

Originally posted by Results
IJM,

In this same interview that you are talking about this is what NG said about the bedroom and necklace:

GRACE: It`s not like her -- Renee, you should have seen this place. It was perfectly in order. But when the cops came, they found one of her beautiful necklaces on the floor of the bedroom. They found the digital clock, bedside clock, under the bed. They found her lamp knocked over and broken. And they found these shoes laying out on the floor, the clothes she had worn that evening, still lying out. That is just not like this girl.

Was the necklace there from day one or not? Is NG confused or is there 2 necklaces. This is confusing me. TIA for anybody that can help me out here to understand about the necklace. JMHO

Results this was Aired January 13, 2006 - 20:00 ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

The first one talking about the necklace was aried Nov. 8th (I think) When reading the Nov. 8th I get the necklace was just found which was approx 2 weeks after Tara disappeared. But with NG one never knows. I have always thought the necklace was found 2 weeks later but I am like you this is confusing me also. I wish someone with some insight would post and get us straight if that's possible. LOL JK ;)

[Results]

Originally posted by Its just me


Results this was Aired January 13, 2006 - 20:00 ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

The first one talking about the necklace was aried Nov. 8th (I think) When reading the Nov. 8th I get the necklace was just found which was approx 2 weeks after Tara disappeared. But with NG one never knows. I have always thought the necklace was found 2 weeks later but I am like you this is confusing me also. I wish someone with some insight would post and get us straight if that's possible. LOL JK ;)

IJM, you just made my day because I was thinking I was crazy. I kept asking is there 2 necklaces and everyone said there is only one but NG says one of her beautiful necklace was found by a cop with all the other things mentioned the lamp, etc. Then two weeks later the necklace was found that she wore the night she went missing. So, I am totally confused if this is an error on NG part or if the necklace was never missing and it is yet another misinformation from AG? I don't know and I don't know if anyone else knows for sure. I'm with a poster that just posted awhile ago "Is there anything simple in this case". Oh the frustration of this necklace is making me go bonkers. JMHO

[RCM-715]

Originally posted by NancynNC


IMO no one knows anyones true feelings. Sometimes I do not know my own. I may be changed tomorrow. I have sons, sisters and brothers, some days they get mad at their mates or girl friends, but I would never say I know their true feelings toward anyone. IMO

You know their feelings if they express it to you. This is not complicated. There isn't any reason to waste time on this. I stated I knew his feelings and I did.

[dixinites]

RCM, do you think that any of MH's current girlfriends would be jealous enough (or tired enough) of Tara to try to maybe "teach her a lesson", so to speak?

[One2Snoop]

From everything I've read I'm only getting one necklace that was of importance. How can anyone trust anything NG says? - How do we know if the interviews were weeks prior to their showing or not? We don't.

I believe there's only one necklace in question and thats the one Tara was wearing the night she disappeared. I posted a link to a (hazy) picture earlier that shows Tara wearing the necklace. Sorry Results, but I have never thought there was another necklace.

I think where my confusion came in was when Godwin stated there were beads strewn across the floor, thus the conclusion I came to about the necklace Tara wore that night was broken and thats how the beads came about on the floor.

Actually over time I've learned, we don't know if those were beads from the actual necklace Tara was wearing or if they were left over beads that the cat or some unknown person may have strewn across the floor. MOO, JMO.

[sogalady]

I posted my thoughts about this once before, but actually still have the same question throughout the discussion of the necklace. This is a matter of interpretation and opinion, but also a possible punctuation issue.

In the interview as posted about where NG was questioning AG about the necklace, the very last sentence states:
( a complete sentence in it's entirety)

"Interesting thing that we've just found yesterday, we cannot find the earrings she had on that night."

Before the subject of the necklace being found (afterthefact) ever surfaced,, I was under the impression that "found yesterday" was in reference to realizing that the earrings that she wore that night were missing. After following the many post about this interview which took place,, ( was in Nov. 7th or 8th,,??) and noting that many interpreted this statement to mean the necklace was discovered "yesterday" which would have been around the 6th of Nov.. I too have had my doubts about my initial thoughts,,,,,BUT, I continue to feel that this may have possibly been one of those , matter of opinion and interpretation topics.

Which leads me back to this is JMHO and 2 cents worth !

:shrug:

[Its just me]

Originally posted by sogalady
I posted my thoughts about this once before, but actually still have the same question throughout the discussion of the necklace. This is a matter of interpretation and opinion, but also a possible punctuation issue.

In the interview as posted about where NG was questioning AG about the necklace, the very last sentence states:
( a complete sentence in it's entirety)

"Interesting thing that we've just found yesterday, we cannot find the earrings she had on that night."

Before the subject of the necklace being found (afterthefact) ever surfaced,, I was under the impression that "found yesterday" was in reference to realizing that the earrings that she wore that night were missing. After following the many post about this interview which took place,, ( was in Nov. 7th or 8th,,??) and noting that many interpreted this statement to mean the necklace was discovered "yesterday" which would have been around the 6th of Nov.. I too have had my doubts about my initial thoughts,,,,,BUT, I continue to feel that this may have possibly been one of those , matter of opinion and interpretation topics.

Which leads me back to this is JMHO and 2 cents worth !

:shrug:

Sogalady, I agree with you outline of the sentence but is is not in print somewhere that actually states the necklace was found 2 weeks later. Not a post on MB but maybe a news article, maybe even NG. BTW SogaL not directing this question at you. You know I don't have the notes handy and would need to ask but the sly way of asking for help is for anyone. :) IJM

[Its just me]

Originally posted by RCM-715


You know their feelings if they express it to you. This is not complicated. There isn't any reason to waste time on this. I stated I knew his feelings and I did.

I know you have said not to waste time of this and I think you are correct but I believe what you are saying. I have family and friends that I discuss things with and yes I believe them when we have a heart to heart discussion. This does not mean their mind will not change because this has happened with me more than one time but sincere discussions with someone I am close with will be a continuing relationship and continuing knowing what one's thoughts are whether they change or don't change. Does this make sense. Anyway just my 2 cents and HOO

[dixinites]

Sogalady, I think you are right:


In the interview as posted about where NG was questioning AG about the necklace, the very last sentence states:
( a complete sentence in it's entirety)

"Interesting thing that we've just found yesterday, we cannot find the earrings she had on that night."


I think that sentence was misinterpreted due to punctuation error. I interpret this to mean "interesting thing" was that the earrings were missing. Good eye! So all of this conjecture about the necklace not being there from the get go, and being discovered two weeks later, if based on this interview alone, was probably fruitless conjecture. Which would explain why in the Jan.13 interview with FG, AG, MHu and JP, Nancy Grace stated
"cops came, they found one of her beautiful necklaces on the floor." I thought it was a mis-statement, but now it makes sense.

DrG. found "beads on the floor", but they could have come from assembling a necklace, as AG had said Tara made her own necklace by combining beads from grandmothers necklace and beads she already had.

[One2Snoop]

Bumping for dixinites.

[One2Snoop]

Aren't we just too quick O2S? :)

LOL I think I'm bored or something. :tongue:

[concernedperson]

LOL I think I'm bored or something. :tongue:

I wouldn't think bored but interested to see if we missed something. If there is something it can be talked about vs. no new info. Or it could be put to bed.

I had an LE friend research this case and nothing. Of course, it wasn't Georgia so cooperation may not have been forthcoming. But, in any case there were no flags....red, yellow, green or nothing.

[One2Snoop]

I wouldn't think bored but interested to see if we missed something. If there is something it can be talked about vs. no new info. Or it could be put to bed.

I had an LE friend research this case and nothing. Of course, it wasn't Georgia so cooperation may not have been forthcoming. But, in any case there were no flags....red, yellow, green or nothing.

Sorry CP - I didn't mean I was bored with the case - just bored in general - Merrick and I posted the "Bumped thread" at the same time because dixinites requested it. :seeya:

Guess I'm not so good at being silly LOL!

[concernedperson]

Sorry CP - I didn't mean I was bored with the case - just bored in general - Merrick and I posted the "Bumped thread" at the same time because dixinites requested it. :seeya:

Guess I'm not so good at being silly LOL!

Good grief, please be silly. Humor injected at any point is appreciated. We all need a good dose from time to time.

This is a tough case, obviously, or it would have been solved by now. I think it is a great tribute to Tara that we have hung this long with no clues. And, we stay. The long haul group...pretty much sums it up. Ain't nobody going anywhere until the girl comes home.

[PNut]

Good grief, please be silly. Humor injected at any point is appreciated. We all need a good dose from time to time.

This is a tough case, obviously, or it would have been solved by now. I think it is a great tribute to Tara that we have hung this long with no clues. And, we stay. The long haul group...pretty much sums it up. Ain't nobody going anywhere until the girl comes home.

The Long Haul Group

I like that CP!!! :beer:

[Lindsey]

The Long Haul Group

I like that CP!!! :beer:

Yep, I'll drink to that! Got my coffee right here. :)

[dixinites]

Thnx O2S and Merrick, I found what I was looking for! I had forgotten what a fiesty lil booger this thread was...glad things seem to be a little more civil now. Thnx again! D.