Websleuths
Go Back   Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community > Current Events > Up to the Minute

Notices

Up to the Minute Breaking news happening right now! (This is not for crime news. Please post breaking crime in the "Crimes in the News" forum).


Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #401  
Old 02-07-2009, 06:09 AM
MeoW333's Avatar
MeoW333 MeoW333 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,793
"The state documents describe Suleman becoming pregnant with her first child after a 1999 injury during a riot at a state mental hospital where she worked. Suleman feared she would lose the child and sunk into an intense depression, according to a psychological evaluation in her workers' compensation case. "When you have a history of miscarriages, you think it will take a miracle," she told Dr. Dennis Nehamen. "I just wanted to die. I suspected I was pregnant but I thought, 'That's ridiculous.'"
But the 2001 birth of the baby "helped my spirits," Suleman said.
More than 300 pages of documents were disclosed to The Associated Press following a public records request to the state Division of Workers' Compensation. Among other things, they reveal that Suleman collected more than $165,000 in disability payments between 2002 and 2008 for the work injury, which she said left her in near-constant pain and helped end her marriage."
(from the link Fran posted)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090207/...e_us/octuplets

I am confused about this article. So during the riot when she got her "injury", she was also pregnant and sunk into a depression. Then the birth of the baby in 2001 got her out of the depression? Wouldn't she have had that baby sometime in 2000 if she was pregnant in 1999? Instead of having it in 2001? I'm sure she had another 2001, yet the wording in the article is confusing.

$165,000 in disability payments is ridiculous if the woman is claiming a back injury and gets that much money, yet she can have 14 kids since then. I guess pregnancy isn't hard on her back. Ha! I don't believe her stories.
  #402  
Old 02-07-2009, 01:05 PM
fran fran is offline
WS Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: San Diego
Posts: 31,350
Frankly, I think it's going to be the 'side-stories' and not the birth of her last 8 children that's going to become the lead-in to this.

JMHO
fran
  #403  
Old 02-07-2009, 01:40 PM
anthrobones anthrobones is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,166
I saw the interview that where it said she wanted to get a Master's degree in Counseling. How ironic...sounds like she needs some counseling herself.
  #404  
Old 02-07-2009, 03:33 PM
Jholi's Avatar
Jholi Jholi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: DFW Texas
Posts: 515
Quote:
Originally Posted by MeoW333 View Post
"The state documents describe Suleman becoming pregnant with her first child after a 1999 injury during a riot at a state mental hospital where she worked. Suleman feared she would lose the child and sunk into an intense depression, according to a psychological evaluation in her workers' compensation case. "When you have a history of miscarriages, you think it will take a miracle," she told Dr. Dennis Nehamen. "I just wanted to die. I suspected I was pregnant but I thought, 'That's ridiculous.'"
But the 2001 birth of the baby "helped my spirits," Suleman said.
More than 300 pages of documents were disclosed to The Associated Press following a public records request to the state Division of Workers' Compensation. Among other things, they reveal that Suleman collected more than $165,000 in disability payments between 2002 and 2008 for the work injury, which she said left her in near-constant pain and helped end her marriage."
(from the link Fran posted)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090207/...e_us/octuplets

I am confused about this article. So during the riot when she got her "injury", she was also pregnant and sunk into a depression. Then the birth of the baby in 2001 got her out of the depression? Wouldn't she have had that baby sometime in 2000 if she was pregnant in 1999? Instead of having it in 2001? I'm sure she had another 2001, yet the wording in the article is confusing.

$165,000 in disability payments is ridiculous if the woman is claiming a back injury and gets that much money, yet she can have 14 kids since then. I guess pregnancy isn't hard on her back. Ha! I don't believe her stories.
It says the pregnancy was after her injury, but it doesn't say how long after. e.g., If the injury were at the end of 99, she could have gotten pregnant only 3 months later, and she'd still have it in 2001.

Another thing that is confusing people is where they read that she got pregnant with her first child in 2000. But she was pregnant the first time in 1995. It was just an ectopic pregnancy. She said it was the first of three, but her doctor said no. (I don't know how anyone could have three ectopics, either.)
  #405  
Old 02-07-2009, 04:59 PM
chicagofa13's Avatar
chicagofa13 chicagofa13 is offline
up at 30,000 feet
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Native Oregonian now in Chicago
Posts: 1,607
Quote:
Originally Posted by LillyRush View Post
Thanks for the updates, everyone. I'm really glad to read that they are seriously investigating all of the hinky factors here, the disability claims, the fertility clinic, etc. At least they are not just letting things slide on by, in the midst of all this publicity.

The Angelina Jolie connections are just totally weird. I can't tell for sure about her nose, but there is definitely something up (botox pumping up!) with her lips. I will not be surprised to find out that not only is she trying to "be" like AJ, but actually trying to outdo her as far as family size!
I emailed the webmaster at www.awfulplasticsurgery.com and mentioned the Octomom, I'm sure others emailed too. Today there is a piece up about it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fran View Post
Oh, I thought you were saying the doctor who helped her get disability was being investigated...........LOL, ya know that'll be next! These types of things usually work in networks, patient, doctors, lawyers.

I'm doin' fine, friend, thanks for your thoughts!


fran
The doc is being investigated!!
  #406  
Old 02-07-2009, 07:10 PM
Only4Justice Only4Justice is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: The Beautiful Great Lakes!!
Posts: 430
Quote:
Originally Posted by nanny1 View Post
Dad probably has no intentions of coming back to the states.(please don't yell at me for saying this). Let the American's pay for them.

Just saying
I'm not going to yell at you , but your post is somewhat offensive. How do you know that they are not American citizens? Just because their family is Palestinian, doesn't mean they aren't just as much an American as you or I....just saying....



I live all the way across the country from CA and they are even talking about this story on my local news. With all the attention this has garnered, I have to believe the State of CA will step in. If they don't, and they allow her to go home with 8 babies, people will be in an uproar across the country!! This whole story is absolutely outrageous, and I agree with most of you, she seems a little unbalanced! Those poor, poor children.

  #407  
Old 02-07-2009, 08:06 PM
Kat's Avatar
Kat Kat is offline
Kind words do not cost much
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Penn's woods
Posts: 17,230
Quote:
Originally Posted by MeoW333 View Post
"The state documents describe Suleman becoming pregnant with her first child after a 1999 injury during a riot at a state mental hospital where she worked. Suleman feared she would lose the child and sunk into an intense depression, according to a psychological evaluation in her workers' compensation case. "When you have a history of miscarriages, you think it will take a miracle," she told Dr. Dennis Nehamen. "I just wanted to die. I suspected I was pregnant but I thought, 'That's ridiculous.'"
But the 2001 birth of the baby "helped my spirits," Suleman said.
More than 300 pages of documents were disclosed to The Associated Press following a public records request to the state Division of Workers' Compensation. Among other things, they reveal that Suleman collected more than $165,000 in disability payments between 2002 and 2008 for the work injury, which she said left her in near-constant pain and helped end her marriage."
(from the link Fran posted)



http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090207/...e_us/octuplets

I am confused about this article. So during the riot when she got her "injury", she was also pregnant and sunk into a depression. Then the birth of the baby in 2001 got her out of the depression? Wouldn't she have had that baby sometime in 2000 if she was pregnant in 1999? Instead of having it in 2001? I'm sure she had another 2001, yet the wording in the article is confusing.

$165,000 in disability payments is ridiculous if the woman is claiming a back injury and gets that much money, yet she can have 14 kids since then. I guess pregnancy isn't hard on her back. Ha! I don't believe her stories.
Hi Meow333. I posted a rough outline of dates that I gleaned from an earlier article that had been posted in this thread by Jholi. You might find the answer you're looking for there. It was post #337 of this thread. Maybe now that some more information has come out we can tighten up a timeline?
__________________
"Three things in human life are important: The first is to be kind; the second is to be kind; and the third is to be kind." ~ Henry James
  #408  
Old 02-08-2009, 07:26 AM
Elphaba's Avatar
Elphaba Elphaba is offline
Defying Gravity...
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: MD 'burbs of Washington DC
Posts: 5,811
I don't know if I should chuckle and think it was a flubbed moment for the mother, or feel sorry for the babies... or maybe both. Anyhow what I am referring to: I just saw an NBC teaser promoting the upcoming interview and the sound-bite they used was Curry (with a bemused look on her face) asking her something like "you forgot one of the babies names?". If she has forgotten what she has named one of the children, she's not doing herself any good by saying so. She should have really thought this interview through and waited to get her life straightened out, instead of running right to the camera.

This is just such a bad situation... I even heard a psych professional on the weekend Today show, yesterday morning, saying that the mother is in need a lot of help (mentally) to insure the children will be raised in a stable home. (or something along that line.)
  #409  
Old 02-08-2009, 03:00 PM
WholeLottaRosie's Avatar
WholeLottaRosie WholeLottaRosie is offline
Dancing on a moonbeam!
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Midwest
Posts: 2,412
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elphaba View Post
I don't know if I should chuckle and think it was a flubbed moment for the mother, or feel sorry for the babies... or maybe both. Anyhow what I am referring to: I just saw an NBC teaser promoting the upcoming interview and the sound-bite they used was Curry (with a bemused look on her face) asking her something like "you forgot one of the babies names?". If she has forgotten what she has named one of the children, she's not doing herself any good by saying so. She should have really thought this interview through and waited to get her life straightened out, instead of running right to the camera.

This is just such a bad situation... I even heard a psych professional on the weekend Today show, yesterday morning, saying that the mother is in need a lot of help (mentally) to insure the children will be raised in a stable home. (or something along that line.)
I have just seen a few clips of the interview, and really, that is the first thing that I thought of on seeing and hearing the Mom - she is, to me, not very stable, and I seriously think anyone encouraging her, or paying her, is doing wrong by the kids. I know I will not be supporting any company that in any way gives her money or products. This woman needs a lot of mental help, that is for sure. What worries me is that when these kids don't turn out to be the money maker she planned on, or she doesn't get her gig as a tv child care expert (hello??!?!??) she might take it out on the babies.
__________________






All kinds of hugs!

ROSIE


  #410  
Old 02-08-2009, 03:17 PM
MNlady's Avatar
MNlady MNlady is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 368
This is a snip of an article I read on FOX:

Suleman also said she had never been on welfare and would find a way to get by with the help of family, friends and her church. She said she planned to return to school in the fall.

This woman doesn't have a clue. WHO is He!! does she think is going to take care of her 14 babies (the first 6 aren't much more than babies) while she's lolly gagging in school~!!!!!
Her mother says she's leaving when the babies come home.....

I'm generally a lurker, but I'm incensed, can you tell??
  #411  
Old 02-08-2009, 03:35 PM
T-Rex T-Rex is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,218
I see CPS in this family's future.
  #412  
Old 02-08-2009, 03:39 PM
Kat's Avatar
Kat Kat is offline
Kind words do not cost much
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Penn's woods
Posts: 17,230
Quote:
Originally Posted by MNlady View Post
This is a snip of an article I read on FOX:

Suleman also said she had never been on welfare and would find a way to get by with the help of family, friends and her church. She said she planned to return to school in the fall.

This woman doesn't have a clue. WHO is He!! does she think is going to take care of her 14 babies (the first 6 aren't much more than babies) while she's lolly gagging in school~!!!!!
Her mother says she's leaving when the babies come home.....

I'm generally a lurker, but I'm incensed, can you tell??
I'm glad you came out of lurking, please don't go back
__________________
"Three things in human life are important: The first is to be kind; the second is to be kind; and the third is to be kind." ~ Henry James
  #413  
Old 02-08-2009, 04:38 PM
PeteyGirl's Avatar
PeteyGirl PeteyGirl is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 673
These are children born into a bad situation. They didn't ask to be born to a mother like Nadya, or brought into a world where they will suffer for her choices.

I think boycotting the companies who do chip in with supplies is doing the right thing for the wrong reason. The end result of this kind of errant moralism is further suffering of the children. Shunning the mother for her outrageous behavior hurts the kids, and none of us want the children to suffer because you and I refuse to meet a need we can meet.

There has to be a middle ground where Nadya is denied her attention seeking games and forced to take responsibility (if she can or will) while the babies and children at home are cared for.

We pride ourselves in being the kind of society that takes care of our "poor" and "meek". Threatening the companies who may donate supplies to children who need them is the issue. These kids won't be raised by Nadya et al, anyway. At least not for a long time.
  #414  
Old 02-08-2009, 05:27 PM
Jholi's Avatar
Jholi Jholi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: DFW Texas
Posts: 515
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteyGirl View Post
These are children born into a bad situation. They didn't ask to be born to a mother like Nadya, or brought into a world where they will suffer for her choices.

I think boycotting the companies who do chip in with supplies is doing the right thing for the wrong reason. The end result of this kind of errant moralism is further suffering of the children. Shunning the mother for her outrageous behavior hurts the kids, and none of us want the children to suffer because you and I refuse to meet a need we can meet.

There has to be a middle ground where Nadya is denied her attention seeking games and forced to take responsibility (if she can or will) while the babies and children at home are cared for.

We pride ourselves in being the kind of society that takes care of our "poor" and "meek". Threatening the companies who may donate supplies to children who need them is the issue. These kids won't be raised by Nadya et al, anyway. At least not for a long time.
I have to agree with this. I was hoping Oprah et al would give the 2 million in a trust overseen by third parties, and when they do the shows, be sure not to paint her in a positive light.

Any gifts should be simple necessities. Food, diapers, etc. And any volunteers should make clear that they do not approve of what she did and aren't her help, but the children's.

Finding the balance between serving the kids' needs without rewarding her in any way isn't going to be easy, but will be critical to achieve.
  #415  
Old 02-08-2009, 07:25 PM
LillyRush's Avatar
LillyRush LillyRush is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,440
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kat View Post
That is a very good article, thanks Jholi.

This woman is reported to be 33, so depending on what her date of birth is, she was born in 1976 or 1977 give or take a year.

So she would have graduated from HS in or around 1994. I just added 18 years to her birth year. Does the math look okay so far?
Kat, I'm also 33 years old. I was born in 1975 and graduated from HS in 1993. I don't know what octuplet mom was up to right after HS. But, by 1995, I was finishing my sophomore yr of college and starting my junior year. Anyone who is 33 yrs old right now would have to have been either born in 1975 and turning 34 sometime in 2009 or born at the very early part of 1976 and have just turned 33 in January or this month. Just trying to add some perspective to the timeline, because it was mentioned again recently.
__________________
A good head and a good heart are always a formidable combination.
~ Nelson Mandela
  #416  
Old 02-08-2009, 07:41 PM
Kat's Avatar
Kat Kat is offline
Kind words do not cost much
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Penn's woods
Posts: 17,230
TY LillyRush


So she was probably born in 1975 and graduated High School in 1993.

In 1995 she has the first of her three ectopic pregnancies (The records are unclear about whether those pregnancies were the result of artificial insemination.)

A year later she marries Marcos G. 1996(?). She earns a psychiatric technician license from Mt. San Antonio College and began working at Metropolitan State Hospital, a psychiatric facility in Norwalk.

"On Sept. 18, 1999, 20 patients began rioting..." This is the date she was injured.

Keep in mind we don't know the dates of the other two ectopic pregnancies.

In 2000, she separated from Gutierrez, a split she blamed in part on her withdrawal and lack of interest in life."

2001 birth of the baby, I assume this child was IVF.

Anyone know the ages of the six older children? TIA
__________________
"Three things in human life are important: The first is to be kind; the second is to be kind; and the third is to be kind." ~ Henry James
  #417  
Old 02-08-2009, 08:35 PM
nanny1 nanny1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 912
[quote=Only4Justice;3275169]

I'm not going to yell at you , but your post is somewhat offensive. How do you know that they are not American citizens? Just because their family is Palestinian, doesn't mean they aren't just as much an American as you or I....just saying....



I live all the way across the country from CA and they are even talking about this story on my local news. With all the attention this has garnered, I have to believe the State of CA will step in. If they don't, and they allow her to go home with 8 babies, people will be in an uproar across the country!! This whole story is absolutely outrageous, and I agree with most of you, she seems a little unbalanced! Those poor, poor children.

Sorry you took offense. The father is from Palestine and yes he could have applied for and recieved American citizenship. Although I do wonder about the alias,this family has been using. I live in a state that has numerous illegal immagrants living it,so I do wonder. JMO
  #418  
Old 02-08-2009, 08:54 PM
claude daigle claude daigle is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 11
[quote=nanny1;3278505]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Only4Justice View Post


Sorry you took offense. The father is from Pakistan and yes he could have applied for and recieved American citizenship. Although I do wonder about the alias,this family has been using. I live in a state that has numerous illegal immagrants living it,so I do wonder. JMO

Sorry Nanny1 --
What gave you the impression the father was from Pakistan? I have read conflicting suggestions that he is either Palestinian or Iraqi, but this is the first I am hearing of his having origins in a non-Arabic-speaking country in Asia. Secondly, about the citizenship question -- does anyone have evidence that Nadya's father is NOT a US citizen? Thirdly, about this "alias" matter; since when has this family been using an alias? Is Suleman not their real name?
Sounds like a lot of misinformation to me. But I am open to persuasion if you have anything to back up your claims.
  #419  
Old 02-08-2009, 09:03 PM
nanny1 nanny1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 912
[quote=claude daigle;3278620]
Quote:
Originally Posted by nanny1 View Post


Sorry Nanny1 --
What gave you the impression the father was from Pakistan? I have read conflicting suggestions that he is either Palestinian or Iraqi, but this is the first I am hearing of his having origins in a non-Arabic-speaking country in Asia. Secondly, about the citizenship question -- does anyone have evidence that Nadya's father is NOT a US citizen? Thirdly, about this "alias" matter; since when has this family been using an alias? Is Suleman not their real name?
Sounds like a lot of misinformation to me. But I am open to persuasion if you have anything to back up your claims.
Sorry my mistake. I just corrected it. The family has also used the last name of Doud and it has been mentioned.
http://www.whittierdailynews.com/rds...rdailynews.com

Last edited by nanny1; 02-09-2009 at 12:08 AM.
  #420  
Old 02-08-2009, 09:07 PM
Logger Logger is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Northern California
Posts: 394
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteyGirl View Post
These are children born into a bad situation. They didn't ask to be born to a mother like Nadya, or brought into a world where they will suffer for her choices.

I think boycotting the companies who do chip in with supplies is doing the right thing for the wrong reason. The end result of this kind of errant moralism is further suffering of the children. Shunning the mother for her outrageous behavior hurts the kids, and none of us want the children to suffer because you and I refuse to meet a need we can meet.

There has to be a middle ground where Nadya is denied her attention seeking games and forced to take responsibility (if she can or will) while the babies and children at home are cared for.

We pride ourselves in being the kind of society that takes care of our "poor" and "meek". Threatening the companies who may donate supplies to children who need them is the issue. These kids won't be raised by Nadya et al, anyway. At least not for a long time.
If Nadya has not taken responsibility for the six children she already has I see nothing to support she will suddenly change and be responsible now.

Adoption would be a good solution the infants.
  #421  
Old 02-08-2009, 09:10 PM
chicagofa13's Avatar
chicagofa13 chicagofa13 is offline
up at 30,000 feet
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Native Oregonian now in Chicago
Posts: 1,607
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jholi View Post
I have to agree with this. I was hoping Oprah et al would give the 2 million in a trust overseen by third parties, and when they do the shows, be sure not to paint her in a positive light.

Any gifts should be simple necessities. Food, diapers, etc. And any volunteers should make clear that they do not approve of what she did and aren't her help, but the children's.

Finding the balance between serving the kids' needs without rewarding her in any way isn't going to be easy, but will be critical to achieve.
Sorry to disagree, but if we (the taxpayers) or "Oprah et al" are going to pay, they might as well be removed from the home. AFAIK Gerber, Pampers and others have said they are NOT donating items to the mom. No, the kids don't deserve to suffer because of their mom, but she doesn't deserve any enrichment from their birth either, so where do we draw a line? Donations IMO will just cause her to do less than she already has.

As for her not being on welfare, AFAIK she's been receiving disability and has been investigated for a false claim. She's pretty darn close to welfare at this point.
  #422  
Old 02-08-2009, 10:11 PM
Jholi's Avatar
Jholi Jholi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: DFW Texas
Posts: 515
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagofa13 View Post
Sorry to disagree, but if we (the taxpayers) or "Oprah et al" are going to pay, they might as well be removed from the home. AFAIK Gerber, Pampers and others have said they are NOT donating items to the mom. No, the kids don't deserve to suffer because of their mom, but she doesn't deserve any enrichment from their birth either, so where do we draw a line? Donations IMO will just cause her to do less than she already has.

As for her not being on welfare, AFAIK she's been receiving disability and has been investigated for a false claim. She's pretty darn close to welfare at this point.
I agree about the welfare and her being a leech.

I don't know where to draw the line. I don't want to decide what's best until we see more about and from the grandparents.

But I think taking them away, especially as long as private money is supporting them, will be more difficult to defend.

My biggest concern with removing the kids is the effect it will have on siblings. Not just the octuplets, but the older sibs who know about them.
  #423  
Old 02-08-2009, 11:09 PM
txsvicki's Avatar
txsvicki txsvicki is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 14,090
I must have missed something about Oprah. Is Oprah giving Nadya 2 million dollars to help out with the babies? I'd also like to know if Nadya had any back surgeries for her injury or if she is claiming nerve injury.
  #424  
Old 02-08-2009, 11:19 PM
chicagofa13's Avatar
chicagofa13 chicagofa13 is offline
up at 30,000 feet
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Native Oregonian now in Chicago
Posts: 1,607
No, I don't think O is helping out.
  #425  
Old 02-08-2009, 11:20 PM
Jholi's Avatar
Jholi Jholi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: DFW Texas
Posts: 515
I don't know about her back, Vickie, but this is what we've been referring to about Oprah et al:
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Octup...n-103567.shtml
--

Nadya Suleman, 33, the mother of the eight newly-born children, is now in talks to break the silence on her life story for the whopping amount of $2 million. Speculation has it that less than a week ago she could have gotten as much as five times the sum, that is, before word transpired in the media that she had other six children under 8 at home, in her care. This is when public interest for her case plunged, which is why rumor has it that she’s now doing her best to get on Oprah before interest dwindles even more.

According to several media outlets, Oprah is not the only one looking for exclusivity on the Suleman story. “Good Morning America” presenter Diane Sawyer is also said to be looking into the deal, as also is CBS’ Katie Couric, both of them being reportedly more than willing to pay the approximately $2 million price Suleman asks for her story. Whether any of the three will actually get to have the 33-year-old mother on the set is yet to be established.

--
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Woman Tries To Leave After Giving Birth In Lot JBean Crimes in the News 5 11-08-2006 12:46 AM
37 lb woman gives birth IdahoMom Bizarre and Off-Beat News 5 02-11-2006 09:03 AM
Woman 'gives birth to frog' Casshew Bizarre and Off-Beat News 7 06-28-2004 08:30 PM


© Copyright Websleuths 1999-2012 New To Site? Need Help?
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:59 AM.

Advertisements

Pre-Order Imperfect Justice: Prosecuting Casey Anthony today!