Isn't that interesting...

[EJFan]

Lots of law-enforcement agencies, particularly at the local level, are strapped for cash as it is. They don't need bogus/phony cases draining their resources even further.

i agree with you... a lot of this, i feel, is due to an increasingly anonymous society PLUS the fact that we're not raised to recognize the greater good anymore. it's no wonder that we have to have breat implants to gain self-respect... we've come to define self respect in terms of what others think of us rather than what we think of ourselves... so we do things like this to get the attention we need to achieve that goal.

 

[LadyJeanne]

The runaway bride didn't ask anyone to search for her. She only said she was kidnapped after they assumed she was and started looking for her. She stopped them from searching more by calling and saying she had been let go. Granted it was a bad choice on her part by going along with the kidnap story. I don't see how she could be considered responsible for the expense of the search.

The woman is messed up. She left just before her wedding without telling anyone, not even a text message to her fiancees cell phone, or her parents. She considered no one but herself. She should have expected that her family would call the police when she disappeared, especially since it seems her family has been very protective of her during her whole life. If you left your house to go running, wouldn't your family and friends call the police when you didn't return? Would you expect them to worry and think something bad had happened to you?

It takes an exceptionally messed up person to claim she'd been kidnapped, and to go into such great detail about the "Hispanic man and Caucasian woman" who sexually assaulted her and forced her to do things to them. She didn't just call home to tell them she'd been released so they would stop looking for her. She called in tears, sobbing almost uncontrollably, told them she didn't know where she was, told them she'd been kidnapped, told them by who, told them she'd been sexually assaulted, and what they did to her. She was trying to manipulate her fiancee, her family, and the police into feeling sorry for her, instead of just saying she had to get away for a few days.

Women have a hard enough time being believed by police and prosecutors in case of real assault and rape without people like Jennifer Wilbanks running around and lying about such things because she's too messed up to consider the consequences of her actions and too chicken to face up to what she did.

She had the nerve to start crying during Katie Couric's interview. She didn't want to be known as the Runaway Bride; she wanted people to call her "friend".

 

[Ricwilly]

I'm bothered by the fact that a missing (adult) person will make the news only if SHE'S young, cute, and white.

If one of your loved ones were missing--and you didn't yet know why--wouldn't you search for him/her regardless? She disappeared, so most people would assume that she'd been abducted. Though, interestingly enough, she's statistically more likely to be harmed by her fiancé than by a stranger.

I considered her lying to the authorities about the kidnapping as a lame-assed attempt to save face. Lying to the cops IS a crime, and nobody forced her to do so. She committed a crime (didn't she plead "no contest"?) AND she wasted time and money that would have been better spent in other ways, so she should pay restitution to the town.

Lots of law-enforcement agencies, particularly at the local level, are strapped for cash as it is. They don't need bogus/phony cases draining their resources even further.

My state had a problem with a highway shooter a year or so ago. While the search for the gunman was taking place, some dude was target shooting in his back yard and accidentally shot his dad's truck. Because he didn't want his dad to be angry with him, he called the cops and said the truck had been shot while he was driving on the highway. He ended up facing felony charges and having to pay about $5K in law-enforcement overtime/investigation costs.

You'd have to take it up with them about who they choose to look for.
Yes, I might look for a loved one, but if I found out they left town on purpose I wouldn't expect them to pay for it.
Yes she committed a crime after the fact, they had already spent the money looking, they just spent more prosecuting her which I feel was throwing good money after bad.
In the case you stated the guy instigated a branch of the investigation with a lie causing the police to spend more money, so yes he should give it back.
The runaway bride just left town, she left no indication she had been abducted, the police came to their own conclusion of that.
I can just see her in a motel room seeing the news about her and saying "OH SHIT!". I don't think she expected all the hoopla. She freaked out and went along with the story that was already out there. Bad choice but not malicious I think.

 

[Eilan]

You'd have to take it up with them about who they choose to look for.

It was merely an obervation.

Yes, I might look for a loved one, but if I found out they left town on purpose I wouldn't expect them to pay for it.

IF you found out. If her family knew she'd left town on purpose, then they would have never filed a missing person report in the first place.

Yes she committed a crime after the fact, they had already spent the money looking, they just spent more prosecuting her which I feel was throwing good money after bad.

Yeah, but she pled No Contest, and it was resolved quickly. The money spent to prosecute her was chump change compared to what had been spent up to that point.

In the case you stated the guy instigated a branch of the investigation with a lie causing the police to spend more money, so yes he should give it back.

By lying to the police, she DID commit a crime. I think, in this case, if she would have NOT lied to the police after her whereabouts were discovered, she probably wouldn't have been asked to pay back any of the money. The town may have pursued a civil suit--IF they wanted to put the money into doing so.

The roughly $13K that she was ordered to repay is all that she's responsible for legally. However, I'm of the opinion that if she receives $500K for her story, she should repay the remaining amount even though she's not legally required to do so. Morally/ethically, it's the right thing to do.

Bad choice but not malicious I think.

Is her intent relevant at this point?

 

[Ricwilly]

Eilan and LadyJeanne, you raise good points ladies.

 

[Undomiel]

For my graduation I got a necklace that I had wanted for about 5 years. Cost about €50 but that was more than enough, and I still really appreciate it. I disagree with breast implants whatever the age.

 

[Eilan]

Eilan and LadyJeanne, you raise good points ladies.

Well, your points weren't BAD; I just happen to disagree with them.

I suppose this is where we start calling names and hurling insults?

 

[Cathleen]

I agree Jennifer Wilbanks owed the community the money. She was wasn't missing, she left on her own free will. The expected reaction to a missing person report is to search for them. It's not a big leap there - she screwed up big time. I'm sorry for her for doing it in front of the world, I sure wouldn't want my screw ups to be public.

She needs to make restitution.

 

[Cathleen]

Well, your points weren't BAD; I just happen to disagree with them.

I suppose this is where we start calling names and hurling insults?

Yeah Elian - you smarty pants!

 

[Eilan]

Yeah Elian - you smarty pants!

Well! You--you--meanie!

 

[Cathleen]

Well! You--you--meanie!

(I think I got my bitchiness out of my system the other night.)

 

[Eilan]

(I think I got my bitchiness out of my system the other night.)

For me, that is not EVER possible. My bitchiness is self-replenishing.

 

[Cathleen]

OK, here is another 'interesting' thing.......

Does anyone else think Tom Cruise is imploding in front of our eyes? I'm sorry but he is losing it.... He is going to (if not already) screw up his career. The people that 'handle' him must be looking for the duct tape to shut him up.

I don't think I've ever spent more the fifteen minutes reading about any celeb, it isn't of any interest to me but damnnnn he is really something at the moment.

It would have been so much simpler for him to say he shouldn't have made a comment about Brooke Shields. (BTW what did he say? I didn't look for it.).

I'm feeling a crash and burn for him.

 

[Cathleen]

For me, that is not EVER possible. My bitchiness is self-replenishing.

LOL Best laugh of the day!! Thank you, I bow to Your Bitchiness.

 

[Eilan]

LOL Best laugh of the day!! Thank you, I bow to Your Bitchiness.

My title says it all.





At least for today, and until the novelty of changing my title wears off--in about a year or so.

 

[Eilan]

It would have been so much simpler for him to say he shouldn't have made a comment about Brooke Shields. (BTW what did he say? I didn't look for it.).

I didn't hear exactly what he said, but he made some comment about how Brooke Shields shouldn't have taken medication for her SEVERE postpartum depression.

As someone who once experienced PPD (and probably SHOULD have been medicated at one point), ignorant statements like that don't sit well with me.

 

[Cathleen]

I didn't hear exactly what he said, but he made some comment about how Brooke Shields shouldn't have taken medication for her SEVERE postpartum depression.

As someone who once experienced PPD (and probably SHOULD have been medicated at one point), ignorant statements like that don't sit well with me.

Ah, thanks Elian. I am in the same position, mental health is real. I have a family member that suffered severe PPD Psychosis.

I did hear one comment he made to Matt Lauer (sp?), that there was no such thing as chemical imbalance. Wow, he sure is smart. I never noticed the M.D. after his film credits.

I just have to say it - what a putz! Idiot.

 

[Eilan]

Ah, thanks Elian. I am in the same position, mental health is real. I have a family member that suffered severe PPD Psychosis.

I did hear one comment he made to Matt Lauer (sp?), that there was no such thing as chemical imbalance. Wow, he sure is smart. I never noticed the M.D. after his film credits.

I just have to say it - what a putz! Idiot.

What a jeenyus!

Ignorant statements like that baffle me.

 

[LadyJeanne]

Ah, thanks Elian. I am in the same position, mental health is real. I have a family member that suffered severe PPD Psychosis.

I did hear one comment he made to Matt Lauer (sp?), that there was no such thing as chemical imbalance. Wow, he sure is smart. I never noticed the M.D. after his film credits.

I just have to say it - what a putz! Idiot.

See, Cathleen and Eilan, you just don't understand the history of psychiatry. Tom Cruise does - he's studied it extensively. If you understood the history of psychiatry as well as he does, you'd agree that there is no such thing as chemical imbalance and that Brooke and others just need vitamins and good nutrition. Brooke just thinks the medication is making her better; she's been brainwashed by the medical community.



That's the jist of his interview with Matt Lauer. Then he got on a big thing about Ritalin and how it's become a street drug and how kids don't need it. Matt protested and reminded him that a lot of prescription drugs are abused and that's not the point, and then told him about a friend's child who was helped by it. Cruise just went off about how Matt didn't know what Ritalin was, and how could he be so flip about Ritalin when he didn't understand Ritalin like Tom did...

Tom's sister is his PR agent.

 

[Eilan]

See, Cathleen and Eilan, you just don't understand the history of psychiatry. Tom Cruise does - he's studied it extensively. If you understood the history of psychiatry as well as he does, you'd agree that there is no such thing as chemical imbalance and that Brooke and others just need vitamins and good nutrition.

I went through months of hell after my second child was born and all I needed was vitamins and good food?! Why, oh why, didn't I call the great Dr. Cruise? He might have saved my first marriage!

 

[brw02]

Half Right

I can agree with about half of Eilan's argument. Tom Cruise has no business criticizing the way anyone deals with a mental health problem. Untril they've been there, no one does. There are many self-proclaimed authorities telling people that their illness is "all in their heads". My answer to them would be pretty straightforward. "Go f**k yourself" would seem very appropriate. Drugs help many of the mentally ill, but fail completely for others. Therapy works for some. For many, nothing helps. Those who think they have all the answers are certifiable idiots. No one does and I doubt any of us will ever see these maladies disappear.

I cannot share the contempt shown for Jennifer Wilbanks. She made mistakes to be sure. But any attempt to prosecute her is either vicious or self-motivated. I think the prosecutor in her case was trying to make a name for himself at her expense. I can't imagine how the case ever got so much attention; thousands are dying in Iraq and we are consumed with Jennifer and Michael Jackson. What a farce.

 

[brw02]

By lying to the police, she DID commit a crime. I think, in this case, if she would have NOT lied to the police after her whereabouts were discovered, she probably wouldn't have been asked to pay back any of the money. The town may have pursued a civil suit--IF they wanted to put the money into doing so.

Is her intent relevant at this point?[/QUOTE]


In the ludicrous American justice system, it is a crime to lie to the police. It is completely legal, however, for the police to lie to you. I do feel that intent is relevant. Her intent was to run from a situation she was not able to deal with. The intent was not to harm anyone else. I don't see any "crime" worthy of any kind of prosecution.

 

[Eilan]

I cannot share the contempt shown for Jennifer Wilbanks. She made mistakes to be sure. But any attempt to prosecute her is either vicious or self-motivated. I think the prosecutor in her case was trying to make a name for himself at her expense. I can't imagine how the case ever got so much attention; thousands are dying in Iraq and we are consumed with Jennifer and Michael Jackson. What a farce.

I try to avoid television news as much as possible because even among the more "legitimate" outlets, there's a tabloid quality to it that I find off-putting. Because of 24-hour news channels, we live in a society where good news is no news, and bad news is drummed incessantly into our heads. It's the only reason we recognize the names Scott Peterson, Mark Hacking, Jennifer Wilbanks, and Natalee Holloway. I was sick of Michael Jackson long before his trial.

I don't feel contempt for Jennifer Wilbanks. I feel that she DID commit a crime, and she has paid for it--not what she should have paid, but what the law required her to pay. I refuse, however, to buy/watch anything that has to do with her story. As far as I'm concerned, and I probably won't be convinced otherwise, Jennifer Wilbanks was fine until she decided to lie to the authorities, and her false claims make the next real victim less believable. (And I don't know the prosecutor's name, btw.)

We'll just have to agree to disagree, I suppose.

 

[Eilan]

In the ludicrous American justice system, it is a crime to lie to the police. It is completely legal, however, for the police to lie to you. I do feel that intent is relevant. Her intent was to run from a situation she was not able to deal with. The intent was not to harm anyone else. I don't see any "crime" worthy of any kind of prosecution.

Then why not just come back home? Why go to such effort to concoct a story in a lame attempt to save face or whatever it was she was trying to do?

Why not just cancel the wedding and get away from it all for a few days?

 

[Ricwilly]

Well, your points weren't BAD; I just happen to disagree with them.

I suppose this is where we start calling names and hurling insults?

LOL I hope not.
Would be a short discussion if we all agreed, huh?
I enjoy a lively dicourse.