They were friends. They weren't dating any longer. How does being friends make her part of the drug ring? She was found with no drugs or money. She is either the worst drug ring member in history, or she wasn't part of it at all.
This is nonsensical. If I say “I have had 50 bucks in the past”, that statement doesn’t become false just because on one particular prior instance, I didn’t have 50 bucks. The fact that she didn’t have the money on January 3 or had to go “round it up” on that particular date doesn’t mean she didn’t handle his money at some other time in the past.
the proof is his recorded words.
Any thoughts on her clearly referencing the trap?
If she was handling the money, why could she not come up with more in 5 days? Why was she found with no money and why are the cops not able to corroborate the ex's claim but can corroborate the other accomplices version that someone else was in charge of the money?
“She used money to post bail for another person in the drug ring”
“yeah but she should have had more money!”
[laughing]
“yeah but she should have had more money!”
[laughing]
But there is 0 proof she ever managed his money. Even the cops are admitting they can't find evidence to corroborate this claim. They can however corroborate the other accomplices claims that some other female did. As they actually arrested her with it.
Lol, heresy isn't proof.
What does referencing a drug house prove. I know where several of them are in my area. The cops routinly end up there. That doesn't mean I am a part of their drug ring.
She posted 2500 5 days earlier. If she was holding money for a drug ring, she should have access to a lot more than 2500. The cops wouldn't even be on their radar if they were that low level of dealers and trafficking.
No, there’s not 0 proof. We have his recorded statements. We have the fact that she posted bail for another person in the ring days earlier.
You
You keep trying to paint it as if they’re saying she was the ONLY person handling the drug money. No one ever said that. She was clearly handling some of it, though, as evidenced by the original bail payment and his request that she round up more bail money. Total straw man on your part.
You also keep lying and saying the cops have admitted theycan’t find more proof that she was handling money. They’ve never said that.
Lol, learn how to spell hearsay. Oh, and it’s not hearsay.
Also, he says he’s going to come “get some rest in her bed”, and then they hang up and say love you. Sounds like one hell of a mere friendship. I’m sure the other guy she was dating would have no problem with that, since they clearly broke it off and all.
Lead Belly: “What’s so suspicious about that? My wife’s male friends come and sleep in our bed and tell her they love her all the time. Nothing suspicious there”
Lead Belly: “What’s so suspicious about that? My wife’s male friends come and sleep in our bed and tell her they love her all the time. Nothing suspicious there”
You and CatFan own that clown. He is just trolling you at this point.
Posting bail for someone isn't proof you are part of a drug ring. They even referenced there connection was unknown.
Hearsay isn't proof. It may not even be admissible in court.
How was she clearly handling it when no one can ever put it in her possession? The cops haven't been able to associate 1 dime of drug money to her.
How is rounding up bail money for someone proof she was part of a drug ring? If she managed his money, why would she have to round it up from other people? Why would she have to be told if she already knew about it?
Lol, how is that a strawman? What new argument did I create to distract from this one?
Sure they did. They admitted they haven't been able to corroborate any of this.
What does a possible affair have to do with anything? Considering that was in January, she may not have even been seriously involved with the new BF. They had only been dating a couple of months according to his statement. Now that would be a strawman argument on your part.
Posting money for a drug dealer, a drug dealer specifically requesting that you round up more money for bail, a drug dealer stating that you’ve handled his money, you referencing a trap house, is all evidence of involvement in a drug ring. If you can’t see that then I can’t help you. I guess keep pretending like none of that is problematic to your narrative.
His statement is not hearsay. He’s describing events and actions that he observed - not repeating what someone else has said. Not hearsay.
No, *the courier journal* hasn't corroborated any of it. The courier journal is not the LMPD.
[laughing] You said they broke it off in 2019! My goodness dude you are awful at this, I almost want to start arguing your point for you to give you some help
Their relationship did break off then. You don't have to be in a relationship to sleep with someone. It's called hooking up. Do you have evidence to suggest they were involved in a romantic or sexual relationship? or is this just conjecture on your part?
You are the one who seems to have trouble with the law and how it works.
None of that proves anyone is involved in a drug ring. Friends and family post bail for people all the time. That doesn't connect them with the criminal activity.
Referencing a "trap" house doesn't mean you are part of the drug ring.
A drug dealer stating you handled his money without any evidence to suggest this is accurate, and with refuting statements and evidence to suggest someone else had it, is in fact hearsay. Can it be confirmed by another party?
“they broke it off on 2019...except they were having an affair in 2020”
so much for forthcoming
Forgive me if I don’t care how much someone who can’t even spell hearsay thinks I know about “how the law works”
Like I said, if you don’t think that wealth of evidence is troubling for your little narrative, no more point in discussing it.
But no, it is not in fact hearsay. He’s not repeating what he heard from someone else. THAT would be hearsay. Rather, he is stating what he personally observed. I’m sorry that this concept is going over your head, but you clearly do not understand what is and isn’t hearsay.
There is no evidence they were having an affair. That is just your conjecture based off him saying he wanted to sleep on her bed. For all we know he could just really like to sleep on her mattress. It's probably better than a jail or drug house mattress. She also could have still been single at the time and just wanting some action. That wouldn't be an affair. That is not criminal or really relevant to the case. It's just a strawman argument to distract from the facts.
It doesn't matter to me how you feel about it, it's the facts.
Hearsay: information received from other people that one cannot adequately substantiate; rumor.
Her ex provided information about her that police cannot substantiate and other witness testimony actually contradicts. As does the fact the person they say handled the money was actually arrested in possession of the money. By definition of hearsay, it certainly appears to be hearsay.
What wealth of evidence? The cops don't have any, so maybe you could provide some of yours to them.
Evidently you know where it is all hidden.Information received *from other people*. That’s the point that you don’t grasp. He’s not receiving this information from other people, he’s providing it himself based on his own personal observations and experiences. That is NOT hearsay, and it’s very clearly admissible in court. It’s not even really a close call. Any halfway competent lawyer would agree.
Like I’ve already said, you’re lying when you say they’ve claimed there was only one bag person. There could clearly be more than one person handling the money. The fact that another person was also involved doesn’t disprove anything. Only in your head.
What wealth of evidence? The cops don't have any, so maybe you could provide some of yours to them.
ive already provided it to you. Your response is basically Durrr iT dOeSnT mAtTeR, pEoPlE bAiL oUt DrUg DeAlErS aLl ThE tImE
you can see why I might not think it’s worth arguing over anymore
If she is the one under investigation for potential crimes, he would be the other people! Doesn't sound like it will be allowed in court.
Lol, I think you might be lying when you state I ever made this claim. There could be 100 bag people for all I know. There is just no evidence she was one. If the cops could tie her to the drug money, they would have done so publicly by now. It would take some of the heat off of them. The other drug dealers seem to be in agreement she was not in charge of any money. Seems odd they all share this belief, but you, with zero ties to it, are convinced she was a part of the "drug ring!"
All you have provided is your personal beliefs and conjecture. That isn't proof! Your statement is "tHiS iS wHAt haPPeNeD beCaUSe I SaY SO ANd i dOnT kNoW hOw tHe LeGaL sYsTeM WoRkS."
Any rational person would have come to that conclusion when they realized they had no evidence to support their crazy theories.
Last edited:
It’s just 15 or 16 unarmed black men killed each year by police out of a population of 43 million. Far from a whole race.
See how it works?
Yes people are flocking to urban areas right now for pleasure.
So you are saying most people in urban area hotels now are rioters? Interesting!
Really it's closer to a few hundred each year, but yes, in the grand scheme, it's not an overly large amount. The issue, for most people at least, is the disproportionate ratio to other races. At only 13% of the population, black people shouldn't be accounting for 30% - 40% of that total number.
None of that is remotely true. Several hundred unarmed black men are not killed by police annually.
The answer to your other point is that black men commit a disproportionate amount of crime. They shouldn’t, but they do.
Well, I said few, but actually it is true. You can source it if you like.
Which again raises a concern. Why? Do black people really commit more crime, or are they just arrested and convicted at higher rates? Are they forced into more interactions with law enforcement because of racial profiling?
In 2017, there were 233 black men shot and killed by police. In 2018, it was 209. In 2019, it was 235.
In those same 3 years, there were 490 additional people killed with a race listed of unknown. Many of them were likely black also.
People shot to death by U.S. police, by race 2024| Statista
The trend of fatal police shootings in the U.S. seems to only be increasing each year, with Black civilians having the highest rates of being killed by police.
www.statista.com
In 2019 , 13 unarmed black men were killed by police, down from 38 in 2015. WaPo, well know white supremacy paper.
Again, you’re clueless but you go on and on like you have a clue. People like you are absolutely the problem.
In 2017, there were 233 black men shot and killed by police. In 2018, it was 209. In 2019, it was 235.
In those same 3 years, there were 490 additional people killed with a race listed of unknown. Many of them were likely black also.
People shot to death by U.S. police, by race 2024| Statista
The trend of fatal police shootings in the U.S. seems to only be increasing each year, with Black civilians having the highest rates of being killed by police.
Unarmed. Read much?
No knock on a single woman’s apartment seems excessive. Cops need to be reeled in a little. They work for the taxpayers not against them. Looters need to do time. Screw those guys.
No knock warrant was signed off on - but In the meeting prior to serving it, they explicitly decided against it...and knocked for about 45 seconds. That’s not disputed - but announcing themselves as police is...police say they did (didn’t have to), boyfriend said they didn’t. Body cams should’ve been on - could’ve provided enough to end this one way or the other.
The whole situation has just led to a hands off stand down police force and an increasing murder rate in the black community (many of them being teenagers of high school age). Sad situation, but that’s how every city ends up after they have a protested viral police involved shooting.