Found Deceased TX - Michael Chambers, 70, Hunt County, 10 March 2017 #5

[Razz]

Thank you for returning, cchambers18 and for your input. After seeing your post above, I went back and looked at the Chambers' property records again, and I absolutely stand corrected: I see that the house and shop were both built in 2006. I am so sorry for any confusion my previous post may have caused.

Now I see that:

1. July, 2000: A Deed of Trust is signed (The C's purchase a 10.43 acre lot located at 7086 FM 2101 QUINLAN).
Amount: $35,000.00
Maturity Date: "As Provided in Said Note"

2. July, 2000: A Mechanic Lien Contract is signed.

Looking at this document more closely today, under "Construction," it says this:
"Certain repairs, additions and improvements to the Property. Physical movement of that certain Manufactured Home, Serial Number [blank] and [blank], and attachment of said Manufactured Home to the Property."

Amount: $101,400.00
Maturity Date: "As Provided in Said Note"

3. Sep., 2000: A Deed of Trust is signed.
Amount: $139,469.00

Under "Renewal and Extension Addendum to the Deed of Trust," it says:
"A portion of the note renews and extends the balances of $136,400.00 principal and interest that Grantor owes on two prior notes" [i.e., 1. and 2. above]

Maturity Date: Oct. 1, 2030

4. May, 2003: A Deed of Trust is signed.
Amount: $136,688.00

Under "Renewal and Extension Addendum," it says:
"The note secured by this security instrument is given in renewal and extension but not in extinguishment of the amount left owing and unpaid by borrower upon that one certain promissory note in the original sum of $139,469.00." [i.e., 3. above]

Maturity Date: June 1, 2033

5. July, 2004: A Deed of Trust is signed.
Amount: $138,040.00

Under "Renewal and Extension Exhibit," it says:
"The Note secured hereby is in renewal and extension but not in extinguishment of that indebtedness, whether one or more, described as follows:

Deed of Trust from Michael G. Chambers and Rebecca L. Chambers [...], dated May 1, 2003 [...], securing a Promissory Note in the original sum of $136,688.00 [...]." [i.e., 4. above]

Maturity Date: August 1, 2034

6. May, 2006: A Mechanic's Lien Contract is signed.

Under "Construction," it says:
"Certain construction upon and improvements to the herein described property."

Amount: $163,500.00

Maturity Date: "As Provided in Said Note"

[Observation: The document says the owners' mailing address is "1230 Stanford, Greenville, TX." Per the other Mechanic's Lien Contract (the one signed in July, 2000), I would have thought they would have been living in the manufactured home on their lot in Quinlan ....]

7. May, 2006: A Deed of Trust is signed.
Amount: $184,800.00

According to the "Renewal and Extension Exhibit":
"The note renews and extends the balance of 21,300.00 that Grantor owes on a prior note in the original principal amount of 138,040.00 which is dated 7/26/04 ....

[...]

The note renews and extends the balance of 163,500.00 that Grantor owes on a prior note in the original principal amount of 184,800.00 which is dated 5/19//06 ...." [i.e., 5. and 6. above]

Maturity Date: March 1, 2037

8. Feb., 2007: A Loan Modification Agreement ("Providing for Fixed Interest Rate") is signed.
Amount: $184,800.00

"Yearly Rate": 6.375%

Maturity Date: March 1, 2037

Since I wasn't familiar with loan modifications, I did a little research, and here is what I found:

"Loan Modification vs. Refinancing"
"Understanding the differences
A refinance replaces the existing mortgage with a new loan with a lower rate, and/or more favorable terms, such as a fixed rate loan versus an adjustable one. It is a more permanent solution than most loan modifications, and usually offers greater advantages.

A loan modification is an adjustment to the terms of the borrower’s existing loan, often for a short period of time to help the borrower get back on their financial feet, but the original loan is still in place. It’s the option borrowers tend to turn to if they cannot refinance their existing mortgage.

To qualify for a refinancing, borrowers need to have good credit. Credit report blemishes such as recent late mortgage payments (past 12-24 months) will disqualify most borrowers from being able to refinance, making them a better fit for a loan modification.

In the case of a refinance, borrowers can shop for different lenders and search for the best rates and terms. In a loan modification, the original lender is doing the modifying, and borrower would work only with them."
https://www.mortgageloan.com/mortgage-loan-modification/refinancing

All BBM

I still have to go back and look at the documents from 2009 to 2014 (most recent transaction), but I am starting to think that maybe they were having some financial difficulties, at least around 2006.

I am trying to find our VI's post about the fire also but so far to no avail. I will keep trying, though (by the way, cchambers18, do you know anything about it?).

Source: https://hunttx-recorder.tylerhost.net/web/

6.3%. That's high. I wonder why they never refinanced. But then, that takes money upfront. Her best bet appears to sell the property asap and get more than enough to pay off the loan. Not only that but out of the sale price she'll need to pay realtor fees and leave 1/2 of what is left over to MC's estate.

I need to look at the specs again on the house and car building. I just don't see how they came up with the price they
did. She's not sitting as pretty as some may think.

Sent from my SM-J727T using Tapatalk

 

[inmyhumbleopinion]

6.3%. That's high. I wonder why they never refinanced. But then, that takes money upfront. Her best bet appears to sell the property asap and get more than enough to pay off the loan. Not only that but out of the sale price she'll need to pay realtor fees and leave 1/2 of what is left over to MC's estate.

I need to look at the specs again on the house and car building. I just don't see how they came up with the price they
did. She's not sitting as pretty as some may think.

Sent from my SM-J727T using Tapatalk

It looks like they did refinance in 2009, 2013 and then 2014:

9. Nov., 2009: A Deed of Trust is signed.
Amount: $188,000.00

According to the "Renewal and Extension Exhibit,” this renews and extends “that certain promissory note secured by an instrument recorded in volume 1459 ….” [i.e., Deed of Trust in the amount of $184,800.00, dated May 19, 2006]

Maturity Date: Dec. 1, 2039

10. June, 2013: A Deed of Trust is signed.
Amount: $185,775.00

According to the "Renewal and Extension Exhibit,” this renews and extends the promissory note in the principal sum of $188,000.00, dated Nov. 3, 2009. [i.e., 9. Above]

Maturity Date: July 1, 2033

11. July, 2014: A Deed of Trust is signed.
Amount: $180,800.00

According to the "Renewal and Extension Exhibit,” this renews and extends the promissory note in the principal sum of $185,775.00, dated June 8, 2013. [i.e., 10. Above]

Maturity Date: Aug. 1, 2029

Source: https://hunttx-recorder.tylerhost.net/web/

 

[cnmccarthy]

Warrants are not necessary when they have reason to believe life may be in danger. The phone carriers cooperate and paperwork is done later. I'm not sure what Hunt County's 911 dispatch system can provide but apparently they felt like it would have been able to locate his phone.
As I understand a normal 911 system, when you call 911 their system is essentially calling you back as you speak and that gives them data on your location based on it hitting the cell towers. In a missing person, 911 calls the number directly and does the same thing they would do if a 911 call is made.
With MC phone that night I think we were told that they only got it off one or 2 towers when it went dead or off. To actually locate it they need 3 or more towers. I have wondered if someone saw the phone and it ringing with HCSO caller ID and quickly turned it off before it could connect. Or if it was a process trying to get it to connect off that 3rd tower that took a while and coincidentally it went off before that could occur.

Great explanation ! Thank you!

 

[cnmccarthy]

RM states in his facebook live interview that the dispatcher pinged MC's phone right when they got the 911 call he was missing and it was in the vicinity of the 2 mile bridge. He pretty much stated it as fact, so we are all wondering why he didn't go immediately in that area and search. That is the stuff the Sheriff is throwing out that is not making good sense to anyone with half a brain. Why search around the house if the dispatcher pinged his phone close to 2 mile bridge?

Exactly.

 

[Tripod]

It looks like they did refinance in 2009, 2013 and then 2014:

9. Nov., 2009: A Deed of Trust is signed.
Amount: $188,000.00

According to the "Renewal and Extension Exhibit,” this renews and extends “that certain promissory note secured by an instrument recorded in volume 1459 ….” [i.e., Deed of Trust in the amount of $184,800.00, dated May 19, 2006]

Maturity Date: Dec. 1, 2039

10. June, 2013: A Deed of Trust is signed.
Amount: $185,775.00

According to the "Renewal and Extension Exhibit,” this renews and extends the promissory note in the principal sum of $188,000.00, dated Nov. 3, 2009. [i.e., 9. Above]

Maturity Date: July 1, 2033

11. July, 2014: A Deed of Trust is signed.
Amount: $180,800.00

According to the "Renewal and Extension Exhibit,” this renews and extends the promissory note in the principal sum of $185,775.00, dated June 8, 2013. [i.e., 10. Above]

Maturity Date: Aug. 1, 2029

Source: https://hunttx-recorder.tylerhost.net/web/

These look more like loan modifications to me than refinances, but I've never seen this much "action" financially, on a home property before, and am just not familiar. I'm also confused, lol.

 

[Talullah]

I think we can expect SM a non answer as to why they didn’t check the bridge that night.
It’s sad to see how little regard BC has for MC’s children and grandchildren. They seemed genuinely fond of her. VI posted(9/7/17) BC could sell the land her mother and aunt grew up on. I hope BC had the decency to give them a chance to make an offer on it-not that they should have to buy it-before she put it on the market. If not, there’s nothing else to question about her character.

 

[Razz]

These look more like loan modifications to me than refinances, but I've never seen this much "action" financially, on a home property before, and am just not familiar. I'm also confused, lol.

I don't understand it either. It seems strange that during that entire time the principal didn't decrease one iota.
But....I'm a kook re finances.

Sent from my SM-J727T using Tapatalk

 

[Razz]

I think we can expect SM a non answer as to why they didn’t check the bridge that night.
It’s sad to see how little regard BC has for MC’s children and grandchildren. They seemed genuinely fond of her. VI posted(9/7/17) BC could sell the land her mother and aunt grew up on. I hope BC had the decency to give them a chance to make an offer on it-not that they should have to buy it-before she put it on the market. If not, there’s nothing else to question about her character.

What land are you referring to? The VI's mom and aunt couldn't have lived at the current address. They're too old. Even the boys would have been older.
2006-2018 =12 years. The youngest son is approx. 30. He would have been 18 at the time they built the current house! I don't see where BC owes anybody anything except for possibly the cars he bequeathed to them in the will. I would hope she honors that.

And...a lot happened the night of MC's disappearance. More than we are aware of per one close to the investigation who is not a VI. Sorry, can't say more than that. Don't want to violate TOS rules, but you might try looking at the thread before this.

Sent from my SM-J727T using Tapatalk

 

[ocgrad]

What land are you referring to? The VI's mom and aunt couldn't have lived at the current address. They're too old. Even the boys would have been older.
2006-2018 =12 years. The youngest son is approx. 30. He would have been 18 at the time they built the current house! I don't see where BC owes anybody anything except for possibly the cars he bequeathed to them in the will. I would hope she honors that.

And...a lot happened the night of MC's disappearance. More than we are aware of per one close to the investigation who is not a VI. Sorry, can't say more than that. Don't want to violate TOS rules, but you might try looking at the thread before this.

Sent from my SM-J727T using Tapatalk

I believe Talullah meant the land in Italy TX that was listed on the asset statement.

 

[Razz]

I believe Talullah meant the land in Italy TX that was listed on the asset statement.

I'm afraid I know don't know much about the land in Italy, TX, other than the youngest was supposed to inherit it (via what the will said) after both MC and BC died. So I'm confused. Was it sold? If so, for how much? Was the land formerly owned by MC"s parents?
Was it just land or was their a house too. Did his parents bequeath the land to him? or to all? Did he and either wife and subsequent children live there?

I wonder if in his 1st divorce settlement, if he he had to buy out 1/2 of the house in Greenville (if that is where they all lived during his marriage to his 1st wife.) Also, did she remarry? Otherwise that would have been alimony payments for....how long?

So, I'm sorry. I'm confused about what assets have been sold and for how much? Could/Would someone enlighten me please?!

Sent from my SM-J727T using Tapatalk

 

[JazzTune]

I'm going to sit out their personal property and financial discussions here. Not meaning that as a criticism of anyone. I realize the information is public record, and we do want to find MC, no matter which stones get unturned, ( within TOS, of course. )

I'm just saying that on a strictly personal level only, this makes me really uncomfortable - sort of in a 'peeping Tom' type of way. That's just me. My opinion only...

As I said, I intend no criticism or disrespect toward others who are working so hard to find any motive for why MC could be missing..


JMO

 

[Midge Montana]

I'm going to sit out their personal property and financial discussions here. Not meaning that as a criticism of anyone. I realize the information is public record, and we do want to find MC, no matter which stones get unturned, ( within TOS, of course. )

I'm just saying that on a strictly personal level only, this makes me really uncomfortable - sort of in a 'peeping Tom' type of way. That's just me. My opinion only...

As I said, I intend no criticism or disrespect toward others who are working so hard to find any motive for why MC could be missing..


JMO

I was wondering what his first divorce settlement and alimony to the ex wife had to do with any of this?

 

[ocgrad]

I was wondering what his first divorce settlement and alimony to the ex wife had to do with any of this?

I understand trying to look into that which can be seen as a point of trying to establish motive. As I have said before I think this requires finding motive and then the suspects and one of them leading investigators to his body. If motive is some undying passionate love affair, she's-mine-you-can't-have-her scene, that is different than being unhappy about impending financial hardship, like in a situation of her wanting to sell the house to get out from under the payment, he refused, so the only way to live like she wanted was to get rid of him. One is love(lust) the other is money. A third possibility is that of a nurse with low moral standards who is stealing drugs for the fast money, as well as power which that brings and a husband who discovers it and is murdered to keep him from busting the operation. Just thoughts on possible motives. The 1st (love) and 3rd (drugs) could involve or even be driven by a 3rd party, possibly without her knowledge. The middle (money) would almost certainly mean she hired someone and that could be true for any motive except on the spur of the moment which does not seem to fit here, if you think the Wal-Mart trip was part of a plan.
We saw yesterday that any of the participants phone records will mostly be gone unless investigators had a quick jump start last fall. We know that HCSO did not subpoena anyone's phone records. But tower dumps seem to provide a good option. This is an article that describes how they caught some criminals in CO. It goes back a few years but I think is still relevant today with how LE uses tower dumps. With the several towers around there, perhaps this is one way the investigators will figure out who was at Wal-Mart, at their home and later also at the bridge. I hope they requested tower dumps as soon as they began the investigation since some are only kept for one year. https://www.google.com/amp/s/arstec...igh-country-bandits-and-why-it-matters/?amp=1

Here is a fairly recent article from 2016 on how cell tower dumps requests by LE are upheld in court. One thing interesting it states,
"[FONT=&quot]Right now, CSLI comes in three flavors. The first is “real-time,” where police work with a cell provider to access location data immediately after it’s created. This usually does require a warrant. The second is a “tower dump,” when authorities ask for all the phones that have communicated with a certain tower during a period of time. There’s not a lot of law about how tower dumps work, but as of September of last year cops rarely sought a warrant for them. [/FONT][FONT=&quot]The third is historical CSLI, where law enforcement requests a backlog of location data created by a certain phone. This does not require a warrant, and hundreds of these requests happen per day. In 2015, AT&T alone handled [/FONT]more than 58,000[FONT=&quot] requests for historic CSLI. (By contrast, it received about 17,000 real-time CSLI warrants and fewer than 1,500 tower-dump requests.)"[/FONT]
https://www.theatlantic.com/technol...rcuit-cellphone-tracking-csli-warrant/478197/

 

[flute4peace]

Interesting thoughts, here. You've hit on a couple of things I hadn't really thought about. Thanks for sharing!

I understand trying to look into that which can be seen as a point of trying to establish motive. As I have said before I think this requires finding motive and then the suspects and one of them leading investigators to his body. If motive is some undying passionate love affair, she's-mine-you-can't-have-her scene, that is different than being unhappy about impending financial hardship, like in a situation of her wanting to sell the house to get out from under the payment, he refused, so the only way to live like she wanted was to get rid of him. One is love(lust) the other is money. A third possibility is that of a nurse with low moral standards who is stealing drugs for the fast money, as well as power which that brings and a husband who discovers it and is murdered to keep him from busting the operation. Just thoughts on possible motives. The 1st (love) and 3rd (drugs) could involve or even be driven by a 3rd party, possibly without her knowledge. The middle (money) would almost certainly mean she hired someone and that could be true for any motive except on the spur of the moment which does not seem to fit here, if you think the Wal-Mart trip was part of a plan.
We saw yesterday that any of the participants phone records will mostly be gone unless investigators had a quick jump start last fall. We know that HCSO did not subpoena anyone's phone records. But tower dumps seem to provide a good option. This is an article that describes how they caught some criminals in CO. It goes back a few years but I think is still relevant today with how LE uses tower dumps. With the several towers around there, perhaps this is one way the investigators will figure out who was at Wal-Mart, at their home and later also at the bridge. I hope they requested tower dumps as soon as they began the investigation since some are only kept for one year. https://www.google.com/amp/s/arstec...igh-country-bandits-and-why-it-matters/?amp=1

Here is a fairly recent article from 2016 on how cell tower dumps requests by LE are upheld in court. One thing interesting it states,
"[FONT=&amp]Right now, CSLI comes in three flavors. The first is “real-time,” where police work with a cell provider to access location data immediately after it’s created. This usually does require a warrant. The second is a “tower dump,” when authorities ask for all the phones that have communicated with a certain tower during a period of time. There’s not a lot of law about how tower dumps work, but as of September of last year cops rarely sought a warrant for them. [/FONT][FONT=&amp]The third is historical CSLI, where law enforcement requests a backlog of location data created by a certain phone. This does not require a warrant, and hundreds of these requests happen per day. In 2015, AT&T alone handled [/FONT]more than 58,000[FONT=&amp] requests for historic CSLI. (By contrast, it received about 17,000 real-time CSLI warrants and fewer than 1,500 tower-dump requests.)"[/FONT]
https://www.theatlantic.com/technol...rcuit-cellphone-tracking-csli-warrant/478197/

 

[JazzTune]

I was wondering what his first divorce settlement and alimony to the ex wife had to do with any of this?

I understand trying to look into that which can be seen as a point of trying to establish motive. As I have said before I think this requires finding motive and then the suspects and one of them leading investigators to his body. If motive is some undying passionate love affair, she's-mine-you-can't-have-her scene, that is different than being unhappy about impending financial hardship, like in a situation of her wanting to sell the house to get out from under the payment, he refused, so the only way to live like she wanted was to get rid of him. One is love(lust) the other is money. A third possibility is that of a nurse with low moral standards who is stealing drugs for the fast money, as well as power which that brings and a husband who discovers it and is murdered to keep him from busting the operation. Just thoughts on possible motives. The 1st (love) and 3rd (drugs) could involve or even be driven by a 3rd party, possibly without her knowledge. The middle (money) would almost certainly mean she hired someone and that could be true for any motive except on the spur of the moment which does not seem to fit here, if you think the Wal-Mart trip was part of a plan.
We saw yesterday that any of the participants phone records will mostly be gone unless investigators had a quick jump start last fall. We know that HCSO did not subpoena anyone's phone records. But tower dumps seem to provide a good option. This is an article that describes how they caught some criminals in CO. It goes back a few years but I think is still relevant today with how LE uses tower dumps. With the several towers around there, perhaps this is one way the investigators will figure out who was at Wal-Mart, at their home and later also at the bridge. I hope they requested tower dumps as soon as they began the investigation since some are only kept for one year. https://www.google.com/amp/s/arstec...igh-country-bandits-and-why-it-matters/?amp=1

Here is a fairly recent article from 2016 on how cell tower dumps requests by LE are upheld in court. One thing interesting it states,
"[FONT=&amp]Right now, CSLI comes in three flavors. The first is “real-time,” where police work with a cell provider to access location data immediately after it’s created. This usually does require a warrant. The second is a “tower dump,” when authorities ask for all the phones that have communicated with a certain tower during a period of time. There’s not a lot of law about how tower dumps work, but as of September of last year cops rarely sought a warrant for them. [/FONT][FONT=&amp]The third is historical CSLI, where law enforcement requests a backlog of location data created by a certain phone. This does not require a warrant, and hundreds of these requests happen per day. In 2015, AT&T alone handled [/FONT]more than 58,000[FONT=&amp] requests for historic CSLI. (By contrast, it received about 17,000 real-time CSLI warrants and fewer than 1,500 tower-dump requests.)"[/FONT]
https://www.theatlantic.com/technol...rcuit-cellphone-tracking-csli-warrant/478197/

Personally, I agree with you MM, but I wasn't referring to those particular discussions you mentioned by others. I assumed they were tying all that in to a possible motive.

In my post, I was only referring to my own discomfort. I'm sorry if I wasn't very clear about it.

However, I really want to thank ocgrad for once again, connecting the dots in all this. Very good post, and very appreciated!!


JMO

 

[Midge Montana]

Thanks for the explanation, ocgrad! I was just getting confused (lots to be confused about on this case, for sure) and thought maybe I had missed that this was a clue for some reason. Now I understand what that was all about.

 

[Razz]

I'm going to sit out their personal property and financial discussions here. Not meaning that as a criticism of anyone. I realize the information is public record, and we do want to find MC, no matter which stones get unturned, ( within TOS, of course. )

I'm just saying that on a strictly personal level only, this makes me really uncomfortable - sort of in a 'peeping Tom' type of way. That's just me. My opinion only...

As I said, I intend no criticism or disrespect toward others who are working so hard to find any motive for why MC could be missing..


JMO

I totally understand. For me, it is something that needs to be explored
as it may shed some light on things. I did not realize the Italy, TX property had been sold. Or maybe it hasn't been.

But don't you think all this talk re BC is....tawdry? And very much peeping
Tomish?

Sent from my SM-J727T using Tapatalk

 

[Razz]

I understand trying to look into that which can be seen as a point of trying to establish motive. As I have said before I think this requires finding motive and then the suspects and one of them leading investigators to his body. If motive is some undying passionate love affair, she's-mine-you-can't-have-her scene, that is different than being unhappy about impending financial hardship, like in a situation of her wanting to sell the house to get out from under the payment, he refused, so the only way to live like she wanted was to get rid of him. One is love(lust) the other is money. A third possibility is that of a nurse with low moral standards who is stealing drugs for the fast money, as well as power which that brings and a husband who discovers it and is murdered to keep him from busting the operation. Just thoughts on possible motives. The 1st (love) and 3rd (drugs) could involve or even be driven by a 3rd party, possibly without her knowledge. The middle (money) would almost certainly mean she hired someone and that could be true for any motive except on the spur of the moment which does not seem to fit here, if you think the Wal-Mart trip was part of a plan.
We saw yesterday that any of the participants phone records will mostly be gone unless investigators had a quick jump start last fall. We know that HCSO did not subpoena anyone's phone records. But tower dumps seem to provide a good option. This is an article that describes how they caught some criminals in CO. It goes back a few years but I think is still relevant today with how LE uses tower dumps. With the several towers around there, perhaps this is one way the investigators will figure out who was at Wal-Mart, at their home and later also at the bridge. I hope they requested tower dumps as soon as they began the investigation since some are only kept for one year. https://www.google.com/amp/s/arstec...igh-country-bandits-and-why-it-matters/?amp=1

Here is a fairly recent article from 2016 on how cell tower dumps requests by LE are upheld in court. One thing interesting it states,
"[FONT=&quot]Right now, CSLI comes in three flavors. The first is “real-time,” where police work with a cell provider to access location data immediately after it’s created. This usually does require a warrant. The second is a “tower dump,” when authorities ask for all the phones that have communicated with a certain tower during a period of time. There’s not a lot of law about how tower dumps work, but as of September of last year cops rarely sought a warrant for them. [/FONT][FONT=&quot]The third is historical CSLI, where law enforcement requests a backlog of location data created by a certain phone. This does not require a warrant, and hundreds of these requests happen per day. In 2015, AT&T alone handled [/FONT]more than 58,000[FONT=&quot] requests for historic CSLI. (By contrast, it received about 17,000 real-time CSLI warrants and fewer than 1,500 tower-dump requests.)"[/FONT]
https://www.theatlantic.com/technol...rcuit-cellphone-tracking-csli-warrant/478197/

That's just the thing. I'm not sure there is a motive here. You all know what Im thinking, whether correct or not.

I find it perplexing that the $180,000 kept getting rolled over and over again. MC strikes me as the type of man who wouldn't be comfortable with that debt hanging over his head for all those years. Where was their money going to if not toward the loan?

Sent from my SM-J727T using Tapatalk

 

[ocgrad]

I totally understand. For me, it is something that needs to be explored
as it may shed some light on things. I did not realize the Italy, TX property had been sold. Or maybe it hasn't been.

But don't you think all this talk re BC is....tawdry? And very much peeping
Tomish?

Sent from my SM-J727T using Tapatalk

Yes I agree, although that is part of sleuthing and investigating isn't it. Unfortunately. I often feel that way. But then it isn't peeping into lives just for a kick or to spread gossip, here again motive plays a part, for those of us who want, through lots of minds brainstorming together and bouncing off others ideas, to bring some small piece of information that could help bring justice and closure. Without knowing Suzy, I am very much like her in that I would hate to see someone get away with murder and go about living their lives. Irks me! Even though I believe this life is but a moment and there is a judge in heaven from whom no one escapes.

 

[Tricia]

Hey Everyone,

I need a minute of your time.

Websleuths is in trouble. We are trying to keep things afloat but
it is very hard. You can read all the details at our page RIGHT HERE

We can't tell you what it means if you can help. Feel free to use PayPal.com if you would rather.
The email address is websleuthsdonations@gmail.com

Websleuths is a thriving community and with your help, Websleuths will be back on its feet in no time.

Thank you very very much.

Sincerely,
Tricia Griffith
Owner/Websleuths.com