Replies

Thank you for reminding the forum once again that you are attempting to downplay this concern, simply on account of its age.

Rest assured that everyone is aware that having this particular act of corruption exposed bothers you more than the original corrupt act itself.

Thank you for proving your narcissism . The family sued and settled 4 years ago, the press reported it extensively when it happened, it was described in a book about cop murders, but because YOU just found out about it, it is the most important topic of the day. What else didn't you know about that is important? Is Amelia Earhardt still missing? What other stories will we get to hear about as you surf the wayback machine for stories that were outrages when they occurred.

You really think you are "exposing corruption"? Lady, or Laddy, whatever, you are changing the definition of "exposing" in the same way that Democrats are changing the definition of "marriage". This case was exposed, the day it happened and in daily articles and TV news stories for weeks after--check the google search I linked for you. Your definition is that if someone somewhere didn't hear about it 6 years ago, and you just learned about it, it's your job to bring it to their attention. That's not exposure, it is just a desire for wider dissemination of an old story that died down years ago. All I wanted to know was why you are bringing it up now, so many years later. I thought maybe something happened recently, or it was part of an ongoing issue with that county or those cops. Turns out it was just an old story that you just found out about. Narcissist.