MONKEY MUSINGS DAILY OPEN DISCUSSION #27 3/14/09 - 3/17/09

[crazybabyborg]

There's supposed to be an article tomorrow about the Caylee case that is bombshell. Wonder what that's about?

[Green Eyes]

I have one question......Do you think Ron marry Misty to avoid statutory rapes charges??

794.05 Unlawful sexual activity with certain minors.

(1) A person 24 years of age or older who engages in sexual activity with a person 16 or 17 years of age commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. As used in this section, "sexual activity" means oral, anal, or vaginal penetration by, or union with, the sexual organ of another; however, sexual activity does not include an act done for a bona fide medical purpose.

(2) The provisions of this section do not apply to a person 16 or 17 years of age who has had the disabilities of nonage removed under chapter 743.

(3) The victim's prior sexual conduct is not a relevant issue in a prosecution under this section.

(4) If an offense under this section directly results in the victim giving birth to a child, paternity of that child shall be established as described in chapter 742. If it is determined that the offender is the father of the child, the offender must pay child support pursuant to the child support guidelines described in chapter 61

as far as i know she was of the age of consent...16. i dont know why they married, but you can never please some folks, they b*itch about living together and having babies out of wedlock, but this has to be a big dark conspiracy too. *shrugs*

Ron is 24, Misty is 17............makes me wonder??

I can see your point about the ages. But then I married right after my 18 birthday and Mr. Green Jeans was 24. So the age doesn't bother me as much as some.

[crazybabyborg]

Hi CBB

I'm telling on MT - she's being wayyyyyy too serious - and wayyyyy OT.  Could you please put her on a Time Out?

I think we should have put her on a Time Out from life in general as a pre-emptive strike a few days ago.   

[mytime]

There's supposed to be an article tomorrow about the Caylee case that is bombshell. Wonder what that's about?

I think it will confirm Chloroform in the hair!! JMO!!

Now, Please ban Jackie!! 

[KCJackie]

I have one question......Do you think Ron marry Misty to avoid statutory rapes charges??

794.05 Unlawful sexual activity with certain minors.

(1) A person 24 years of age or older who engages in sexual activity with a person 16 or 17 years of age commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. As used in this section, "sexual activity" means oral, anal, or vaginal penetration by, or union with, the sexual organ of another; however, sexual activity does not include an act done for a bona fide medical purpose.

(2) The provisions of this section do not apply to a person 16 or 17 years of age who has had the disabilities of nonage removed under chapter 743.

(3) The victim's prior sexual conduct is not a relevant issue in a prosecution under this section.

(4) If an offense under this section directly results in the victim giving birth to a child, paternity of that child shall be established as described in chapter 742. If it is determined that the offender is the father of the child, the offender must pay child support pursuant to the child support guidelines described in chapter 61

as far as i know she was of the age of consent...16. i dont know why they married, but you can never please some folks, they b*itch about living together and having babies out of wedlock, but this has to be a big dark conspiracy too. *shrugs*

Ron is 24, Misty is 17............makes me wonder??

I can see your point about the ages. But then I married right after my 18 birthday and Mr. Green Jeans was 24. So the age doesn't bother me as much as some.

 

[KCJackie]

There's supposed to be an article tomorrow about the Caylee case that is bombshell. Wonder what that's about?

I think it will confirm Chloroform in the hair!! JMO!!

Now, Please ban Jackie!! 

  Do you have a source?

[peanut]

I have one question......Do you think Ron marry Misty to avoid statutory rapes charges??

794.05 Unlawful sexual activity with certain minors.

(1) A person 24 years of age or older who engages in sexual activity with a person 16 or 17 years of age commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. As used in this section, "sexual activity" means oral, anal, or vaginal penetration by, or union with, the sexual organ of another; however, sexual activity does not include an act done for a bona fide medical purpose.

(2) The provisions of this section do not apply to a person 16 or 17 years of age who has had the disabilities of nonage removed under chapter 743.

(3) The victim's prior sexual conduct is not a relevant issue in a prosecution under this section.

(4) If an offense under this section directly results in the victim giving birth to a child, paternity of that child shall be established as described in chapter 742. If it is determined that the offender is the father of the child, the offender must pay child support pursuant to the child support guidelines described in chapter 61

as far as i know she was of the age of consent...16. i dont know why they married, but you can never please some folks, they b*itch about living together and having babies out of wedlock, but this has to be a big dark conspiracy too. *shrugs*

Ron is 24, Misty is 17............makes me wonder??

ya, i just dont know. i just want her found and whoever is responsible to be brought to justice and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. thats all i care about.

[mytime]

I have one question......Do you think Ron marry Misty to avoid statutory rapes charges??

794.05 Unlawful sexual activity with certain minors.

(1) A person 24 years of age or older who engages in sexual activity with a person 16 or 17 years of age commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. As used in this section, "sexual activity" means oral, anal, or vaginal penetration by, or union with, the sexual organ of another; however, sexual activity does not include an act done for a bona fide medical purpose.

(2) The provisions of this section do not apply to a person 16 or 17 years of age who has had the disabilities of nonage removed under chapter 743.

(3) The victim's prior sexual conduct is not a relevant issue in a prosecution under this section.

(4) If an offense under this section directly results in the victim giving birth to a child, paternity of that child shall be established as described in chapter 742. If it is determined that the offender is the father of the child, the offender must pay child support pursuant to the child support guidelines described in chapter 61

as far as i know she was of the age of consent...16. i dont know why they married, but you can never please some folks, they b*itch about living together and having babies out of wedlock, but this has to be a big dark conspiracy too. *shrugs*

Ron is 24, Misty is 17............makes me wonder??

I can see your point about the ages. But then I married right after my 18 birthday and Mr. Green Jeans was 24. So the age doesn't bother me as much as some.

No. me either but you didn't get married while you daughter was missing and your ages were not all over the news or LE??  Was it??   

[Green Eyes]

There's supposed to be an article tomorrow about the Caylee case that is bombshell. Wonder what that's about?

Isn't that the guy that blogs on the station that doesn't say anything bad about Butt azz. Can't imagine what he can come up with that hasn't all ready been talked about. It sounds like he supports her evilness.

[mytime]

I have one question......Do you think Ron marry Misty to avoid statutory rapes charges??

794.05 Unlawful sexual activity with certain minors.

(1) A person 24 years of age or older who engages in sexual activity with a person 16 or 17 years of age commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. As used in this section, "sexual activity" means oral, anal, or vaginal penetration by, or union with, the sexual organ of another; however, sexual activity does not include an act done for a bona fide medical purpose.

(2) The provisions of this section do not apply to a person 16 or 17 years of age who has had the disabilities of nonage removed under chapter 743.

(3) The victim's prior sexual conduct is not a relevant issue in a prosecution under this section.

(4) If an offense under this section directly results in the victim giving birth to a child, paternity of that child shall be established as described in chapter 742. If it is determined that the offender is the father of the child, the offender must pay child support pursuant to the child support guidelines described in chapter 61

as far as i know she was of the age of consent...16. i dont know why they married, but you can never please some folks, they b*itch about living together and having babies out of wedlock, but this has to be a big dark conspiracy too. *shrugs*

Ron is 24, Misty is 17............makes me wonder??

ya, i just dont know. i just want her found and whoever is responsible to be brought to justice and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. thats all i care about.

I agree but the timing of the marriage is nagging at me!! It is just to weird for me!!   

[Green Eyes]

I have one question......Do you think Ron marry Misty to avoid statutory rapes charges??

794.05 Unlawful sexual activity with certain minors.

(1) A person 24 years of age or older who engages in sexual activity with a person 16 or 17 years of age commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. As used in this section, "sexual activity" means oral, anal, or vaginal penetration by, or union with, the sexual organ of another; however, sexual activity does not include an act done for a bona fide medical purpose.

(2) The provisions of this section do not apply to a person 16 or 17 years of age who has had the disabilities of nonage removed under chapter 743.

(3) The victim's prior sexual conduct is not a relevant issue in a prosecution under this section.

(4) If an offense under this section directly results in the victim giving birth to a child, paternity of that child shall be established as described in chapter 742. If it is determined that the offender is the father of the child, the offender must pay child support pursuant to the child support guidelines described in chapter 61

as far as i know she was of the age of consent...16. i dont know why they married, but you can never please some folks, they b*itch about living together and having babies out of wedlock, but this has to be a big dark conspiracy too. *shrugs*

Ron is 24, Misty is 17............makes me wonder??

I can see your point about the ages. But then I married right after my 18 birthday and Mr. Green Jeans was 24. So the age doesn't bother me as much as some.

No. me either but you didn't get married while you daughter was missing and your ages were not all over the news or LE??  Was it??   

Hell no.  I can't figure out any of these people.

[peanut]

I have one question......Do you think Ron marry Misty to avoid statutory rapes charges??

794.05 Unlawful sexual activity with certain minors.

(1) A person 24 years of age or older who engages in sexual activity with a person 16 or 17 years of age commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. As used in this section, "sexual activity" means oral, anal, or vaginal penetration by, or union with, the sexual organ of another; however, sexual activity does not include an act done for a bona fide medical purpose.

(2) The provisions of this section do not apply to a person 16 or 17 years of age who has had the disabilities of nonage removed under chapter 743.

(3) The victim's prior sexual conduct is not a relevant issue in a prosecution under this section.

(4) If an offense under this section directly results in the victim giving birth to a child, paternity of that child shall be established as described in chapter 742. If it is determined that the offender is the father of the child, the offender must pay child support pursuant to the child support guidelines described in chapter 61

as far as i know she was of the age of consent...16. i dont know why they married, but you can never please some folks, they b*itch about living together and having babies out of wedlock, but this has to be a big dark conspiracy too. *shrugs*

Ron is 24, Misty is 17............makes me wonder??

ya, i just dont know. i just want her found and whoever is responsible to be brought to justice and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. thats all i care about.

I agree but the timing of the marriage is nagging at me!! It is just to weird for me!!   

i know, but im not going to connect getting married to murder. ill leave it to le and the fbi to figure out motives, they have more info than i do.

[Green Eyes]

Jackie is it warming up your way?

[crazybabyborg]

There's supposed to be an article tomorrow about the Caylee case that is bombshell. Wonder what that's about?

I think it will confirm Chloroform in the hair!! JMO!!

Now, Please ban Jackie!! 

Funny Story and True............

Not long after I became a mod, there was a "borderline" poster that was a wild canon and she always posted late at night. It was late, and this poster had been warned by Klaas, and we had messaed each other a couple of times about her. Klaas had said goodnight on the thread, and I panicked. I shot off a message to her and asked, "What do I do if this escalates?"

Her reply? "Well, you've got a remove button."

 

I had this vision of staying up all night playing slap jack with how fast I could remove a post...........    I felt like I was in a gunfight in the Old West and I was determined to "draw first" !   

It turned out that the poster came out with a particular "bad" and when Klaas looked in just before callng it a night, she pulled out the ban button as her last act of the day. I'm STILL grateful to her!! 

[crazybabyborg]

There's supposed to be an article tomorrow about the Caylee case that is bombshell. Wonder what that's about?

I think it will confirm Chloroform in the hair!! JMO!!

Now, Please ban Jackie!! 

  Do you have a source?

You mean for the article?

[KCJackie]

Jackie is it warming up your way?

So funny you should ask, I was just looking up the weather here, lol.  It's 50 right now ande 70 - 80 throughout the week.  YEAH!!!!

[mytime]

OK, sorry for the o/t!!  Now where were we..........oh, I know!!   

Time for some "oregano!""

[Green Eyes]

There's supposed to be an article tomorrow about the Caylee case that is bombshell. Wonder what that's about?

I think it will confirm Chloroform in the hair!! JMO!!

Now, Please ban Jackie!! 

Funny Story and True............

Not long after I became a mod, there was a "borderline" poster that was a wild canon and she always posted late at night. It was late, and this poster had been warned by Klaas, and we had messaed each other a couple of times about her. Klaas had said goodnight on the thread, and I panicked. I shot off a message to her and asked, "What do I do if this escalates?"

Her reply? "Well, you've got a remove button."

 

I had this vision of staying up all night playing slap jack with how fast I could remove a post...........    I felt like I was in a gunfight in the Old West and I was determined to "draw first" !   

It turned out that the poster came out with a particular "bad" and when Klaas looked in just before callng it a night, she pulled out the ban button as her last act of the day. I'm STILL grateful to her!! 

CBB back on page 29 or 30 Lucinda came on and ask if someone would ask a mod to go to a link she had posted. Have no idea what it is didn't go. Just passing on the request. 

[KCJackie]

There's supposed to be an article tomorrow about the Caylee case that is bombshell. Wonder what that's about?

I think it will confirm Chloroform in the hair!! JMO!!

Now, Please ban Jackie!! 

Funny Story and True............

Not long after I became a mod, there was a "borderline" poster that was a wild canon and she always posted late at night. It was late, and this poster had been warned by Klaas, and we had messaed each other a couple of times about her. Klaas had said goodnight on the thread, and I panicked. I shot off a message to her and asked, "What do I do if this escalates?"

Her reply? "Well, you've got a remove button."

 

I had this vision of staying up all night playing slap jack with how fast I could remove a post...........    I felt like I was in a gunfight in the Old West and I was determined to "draw first" !   

It turned out that the poster came out with a particular "bad" and when Klaas looked in just before callng it a night, she pulled out the ban button as her last act of the day. I'm STILL grateful to her!! 

  I'm so glad none of us are like that crazy poster!!!

[mytime]

There's supposed to be an article tomorrow about the Caylee case that is bombshell. Wonder what that's about?

I think it will confirm Chloroform in the hair!! JMO!!

Now, Please ban Jackie!! 

Funny Story and True............

Not long after I became a mod, there was a "borderline" poster that was a wild canon and she always posted late at night. It was late, and this poster had been warned by Klaas, and we had messaed each other a couple of times about her. Klaas had said goodnight on the thread, and I panicked. I shot off a message to her and asked, "What do I do if this escalates?"

Her reply? "Well, you've got a remove button."

 

I had this vision of staying up all night playing slap jack with how fast I could remove a post...........    I felt like I was in a gunfight in the Old West and I was determined to "draw first" !   

It turned out that the poster came out with a particular "bad" and when Klaas looked in just before callng it a night, she pulled out the ban button as her last act of the day. I'm STILL grateful to her!! 

 

Oh, how I sometimes wish I had that little ban button!!