Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Detroit Free Press)   Michigan man arrested today for killing his wife 43 years ago   ( freep.com) divider line
    More: Weird, complaint charges Pierce, Green Bay Press-Gazette, Richard Gale Pierce, Carol Jean Pierce, Green Bay, Wisconsin, criminal complaint, sturgeon bay, Police  
•       •       •

4572 clicks; posted to Main » on 11 Oct 2018 at 11:14 PM (11 days ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



66 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2018-10-11 06:35:36 PM  
Someone sure took a long time writing that report
 
2018-10-11 06:49:18 PM  
A group meet in Sept that had nothing to do with the investigation and gathered no new information but decided let's arrest the old man and see what happens. Most of the people involved are dead. Unless the old man pleads guilty he will be going home.
 
2018-10-11 06:58:16 PM  
He'd be getting out now.
 
2018-10-11 07:18:34 PM  
If it really happened she would have come out way sooner than 40 years. Fake news.
 
2018-10-11 07:26:06 PM  

eurotrader: A group meet in Sept that had nothing to do with the investigation and gathered no new information but decided let's arrest the old man and see what happens. Most of the people involved are dead. Unless the old man pleads guilty he will be going home.



If you read the criminal complaint, they actually have quite a bit more that just guesses.  He bought a bulldozer and trailer that hasn't been found.  The wife signed over the mobile home and vehicle before she "disappeared".   Numerous lies and contradicting info.  There has been no sign of the wife in 43 years.

Still..... this have to be the slowest investigation ever.
 
2018-10-11 07:58:25 PM  

tukatz: eurotrader: A group meet in Sept that had nothing to do with the investigation and gathered no new information but decided let's arrest the old man and see what happens. Most of the people involved are dead. Unless the old man pleads guilty he will be going home.


If you read the criminal complaint, they actually have quite a bit more that just guesses.  He bought a bulldozer and trailer that hasn't been found.  The wife signed over the mobile home and vehicle before she "disappeared".   Numerous lies and contradicting info.  There has been no sign of the wife in 43 years.

Still..... this have to be the slowest investigation ever.


I did read the complaint and there was nothing newer than 2005. There was a reason no charges had be brought before when witnesses were still alive, there is little to no chance of a conviction with a basic defense attorney. The group that recommend charges reasoning they looked at a few things and since the leader is a prison guard  charging someone with murder without a body and any evidence of a death is ok for a vanity group. No confession no conviction
 
2018-10-11 08:57:39 PM  
I don't get this one at all.  They're claiming he had financial motive, but if that's grounds to arrest him now, why wasn't it 40 years ago?  Also, another article says she had a $25,000 life insurance policy, but that it was never collected on.  I don't get it, on what grounds was he arrested?
 
2018-10-11 09:37:13 PM  

eurotrader: tukatz: eurotrader: A group meet in Sept that had nothing to do with the investigation and gathered no new information but decided let's arrest the old man and see what happens. Most of the people involved are dead. Unless the old man pleads guilty he will be going home.


If you read the criminal complaint, they actually have quite a bit more that just guesses.  He bought a bulldozer and trailer that hasn't been found.  The wife signed over the mobile home and vehicle before she "disappeared".   Numerous lies and contradicting info.  There has been no sign of the wife in 43 years.

Still..... this have to be the slowest investigation ever.

I did read the complaint and there was nothing newer than 2005. There was a reason no charges had be brought before when witnesses were still alive, there is little to no chance of a conviction with a basic defense attorney. The group that recommend charges reasoning they looked at a few things and since the leader is a prison guard  charging someone with murder without a body and any evidence of a death is ok for a vanity group. No confession no conviction



They have enough to arrest him.  Plus the criminal complaint may not even include everything... just enough to lock him up and start proceedings.  Not CSI, so a body isn't mandatory.  Chances are, due to his age and hopefully lack of ability to lie well, they are hoping he'll confess and cut a deal... part of which would be telling where he buried the body.   Or they'll let him out on bond and see if he stupidly leads them to the body in an attempt to move it.  Most cases end with plea deals.  At his age, he will probably want to try getting out before keeling over.

It did take way too long for this to turn into charges.  I would guess someone finally came forward who didn't speak before and had enough info to get the interest going again.
 
2018-10-11 09:45:53 PM  

tukatz: eurotrader: tukatz: eurotrader: A group meet in Sept that had nothing to do with the investigation and gathered no new information but decided let's arrest the old man and see what happens. Most of the people involved are dead. Unless the old man pleads guilty he will be going home.


If you read the criminal complaint, they actually have quite a bit more that just guesses.  He bought a bulldozer and trailer that hasn't been found.  The wife signed over the mobile home and vehicle before she "disappeared".   Numerous lies and contradicting info.  There has been no sign of the wife in 43 years.

Still..... this have to be the slowest investigation ever.

I did read the complaint and there was nothing newer than 2005. There was a reason no charges had be brought before when witnesses were still alive, there is little to no chance of a conviction with a basic defense attorney. The group that recommend charges reasoning they looked at a few things and since the leader is a prison guard  charging someone with murder without a body and any evidence of a death is ok for a vanity group. No confession no conviction


They have enough to arrest him.  Plus the criminal complaint may not even include everything... just enough to lock him up and start proceedings.  Not CSI, so a body isn't mandatory.  Chances are, due to his age and hopefully lack of ability to lie well, they are hoping he'll confess and cut a deal... part of which would be telling where he buried the body.   Or they'll let him out on bond and see if he stupidly leads them to the body in an attempt to move it.  Most cases end with plea deals.  At his age, he will probably want to try getting out before keeling over.

It did take way too long for this to turn into charges.  I would guess someone finally came forward who didn't speak before and had enough info to get the interest going again.


Even if he did it he has not confessed in 43 years. No body and no evidence of a death is a really bad standard for arresting people. Three husbands in a short time, a woman changing her name and moving away  and now dead from disease is reasonable doubt.
 
2018-10-11 09:50:40 PM  

tukatz: They have enough to arrest him.


They say he had financial motive to kill her, but he never collected her life insurance payout.  How the hell do they have enough to arrest him?
 
2018-10-11 10:40:36 PM  

Darth Pickle: tukatz: They have enough to arrest him.

They say he had financial motive to kill her, but he never collected her life insurance payout.  How the hell do they have enough to arrest him?



He slipped up several times in conversations and hinted at getting rid of his wife or referring to her dying.  His timeline after she disappeared is shaky... two people state her purse, possessions, cat, etc were still in the trailer a day or two after the husband said she was gone.  He contradicted himself many times when giving details.  He bought a bulldozer that he had no use for and it can't be found now.  He got a new girlfriend within weeks of the wife leaving.

Arresting him isn't an automatic "you're guilty".  It means they have enough to suspect he did kill her.  They will start the proceedings, see if he wants to talk and take a deal.  If not, they will continue to look for the body and other information to help their case.

As for the insurance policy, perhaps he thought it might look suspicious if he tried to claim it.  He doesn't sound like the sharpest pencil in the box.
 
2018-10-11 11:00:07 PM  

tukatz: Darth Pickle: tukatz: They have enough to arrest him.

They say he had financial motive to kill her, but he never collected her life insurance payout.  How the hell do they have enough to arrest him?


He slipped up several times in conversations and hinted at getting rid of his wife or referring to her dying.  His timeline after she disappeared is shaky... two people state her purse, possessions, cat, etc were still in the trailer a day or two after the husband said she was gone.  He contradicted himself many times when giving details.  He bought a bulldozer that he had no use for and it can't be found now.  He got a new girlfriend within weeks of the wife leaving.

Arresting him isn't an automatic "you're guilty".  It means they have enough to suspect he did kill her.  They will start the proceedings, see if he wants to talk and take a deal.  If not, they will continue to look for the body and other information to help their case.

As for the insurance policy, perhaps he thought it might look suspicious if he tried to claim it.  He doesn't sound like the sharpest pencil in the box.


FYI, they can have nothing on anyone to make an arrest.  They have to have something to get it past hearings.  They don't even have to prove their was a crime committed to make an arrest, just the idea a crime was committed.  What many people forget, the prosecution has to prove a crime was committed before they can prove the defendant did it.  Also, they can't really build a case after they arrest him, because the first thing the prosecution has to do is turn over all the evidence they do have to his lawyer.  Arresting someone just for being suspicious could lead to either the charges being dropped because they can't prove enough to move on through the process, or the charges are dismissed with prejudice, which means they can't recharge the guy.

Just because something smells fishy doesn't mean there's trout in the fridge.  It could've been a bad marriage, he was cheating on her, she left, and he moved on.  That is the assumption till they can prove otherwise.  For all we know, she could be a Jane Doe or still alive somewhere.
 
2018-10-11 11:17:15 PM  
Well that solves his retirement issues, that worked out nicely for him.
 
2018-10-11 11:21:55 PM  
s.newsweek.comView Full Size


He said, she dead. Who are you gonna believe?
 
2018-10-11 11:33:11 PM  
"Yesterday" all my troubles seemed so far....
 
2018-10-11 11:35:17 PM  

lack of warmth: FYI, they can have nothing on anyone to make an arrest. They have to have something to get it past hearings. They don't even have to prove their was a crime committed to make an arrest, just the idea a crime was committed. What many people forget, the prosecution has to prove a crime was committed before they can prove the defendant did it. Also, they can't really build a case after they arrest him, because the first thing the prosecution has to do is turn over all the evidence they do have to his lawyer. Arresting someone just for being suspicious could lead to either the charges being dropped because they can't prove enough to move on through the process, or the charges are dismissed with prejudice, which means they can't recharge the guy.


The basis for arrest is probable cause to believe a crime was committed and the person being arrested committed that crime. The weak point in this case was the lack of a body. Now that 40 years has passed with no sign of her, it gives greater weight to the belief that she's dead. That's probably why the DA is accepting the case this time.
 
2018-10-11 11:41:23 PM  
img.fark.netView Full Size


"HELLO."
 
2018-10-11 11:43:46 PM  

lack of warmth: tukatz: Darth Pickle: tukatz: They have enough to arrest him.

They say he had financial motive to kill her, but he never collected her life insurance payout.  How the hell do they have enough to arrest him?


He slipped up several times in conversations and hinted at getting rid of his wife or referring to her dying.  His timeline after she disappeared is shaky... two people state her purse, possessions, cat, etc were still in the trailer a day or two after the husband said she was gone.  He contradicted himself many times when giving details.  He bought a bulldozer that he had no use for and it can't be found now.  He got a new girlfriend within weeks of the wife leaving.

Arresting him isn't an automatic "you're guilty".  It means they have enough to suspect he did kill her.  They will start the proceedings, see if he wants to talk and take a deal.  If not, they will continue to look for the body and other information to help their case.

As for the insurance policy, perhaps he thought it might look suspicious if he tried to claim it.  He doesn't sound like the sharpest pencil in the box.

FYI, they can have nothing on anyone to make an arrest.  They have to have something to get it past hearings.  They don't even have to prove their was a crime committed to make an arrest, just the idea a crime was committed.  What many people forget, the prosecution has to prove a crime was committed before they can prove the defendant did it.  Also, they can't really build a case after they arrest him, because the first thing the prosecution has to do is turn over all the evidence they do have to his lawyer.  Arresting someone just for being suspicious could lead to either the charges being dropped because they can't prove enough to move on through the process, or the charges are dismissed with prejudice, which means they can't recharge the guy.

Just because something smells fishy doesn't mean there's trout in the fridge.  It could've been a bad marriage, he was cheating on h ...


Police must have probable cause 1.to believe that a crime was committed and 2. that the accused committed the crime before they can arrest someone.  So they have to have something on that person, even if that something falls short of proof beyond a reasonable doubt at the time they make the arrest. TFA gives me the impression that the evidence against him is circumstantial and while that isn't an absolute bar to obtaining a conviction it does mean that the prosecution has a tough row to hoe ahead of her.
 
2018-10-11 11:44:13 PM  
She was a horrible cook.
So what's the issue here?
 
2018-10-11 11:53:29 PM  
43yrs and no body. That will be an east win.
 
2018-10-11 11:53:51 PM  
Nowadays one only needs to be accused of a crime, now it's up to him to prove his innocence.
 
2018-10-11 11:55:04 PM  
They let this rot in the field waiting too long. They would have to have something irrefutable to get a conviction. This long and with so many deceased witnesses that could cooborate his story or refute it or anything else is stacked against him. Even he might not be able to recall or know what happened or could fake it. It would be practically impossible for them to show mens rea now unless he confessed. And even then it might get tossed as him being coerced or senile.
 
2018-10-11 11:56:55 PM  

eurotrader: A group meet in Sept that had nothing to do with the investigation and gathered no new information but decided let's arrest the old man and see what happens. Most of the people involved are dead. Unless the old man pleads guilty he will be going home.


Under the More Stories section, it also has a stoy about a murder suspect alleging that jail guards assaulted him.

Methinks they're just trying to intimidate this guy into a false confession to get more bodies for the profit jail.
 
2018-10-11 11:59:32 PM  
82 now I am sure 3 hots and a cot with government health care is a pretty good deal at this stage in his life.

Nobody in prison is going to fark with the 82 year old
 
2018-10-12 12:02:03 AM  
tukatz:

Innocent people have been arrested, tried, and convicted for crimes they not only didn't do, but that never happened at all.

So no, I shan't extend any benefit of the doubt to these cold case coppers until they prove they aren't the Hot Dog Squad.
 
2018-10-12 12:02:04 AM  

Random Anonymous Blackmail: 82 now I am sure 3 hots and a cot with government health care is a pretty good deal at this stage in his life.

Nobody in prison is going to fark with the 82 year old


You ever been to prison?
 
2018-10-12 12:04:34 AM  
The baseline standard for murder charges should be a body, or enough evidence of a body having existed to be convincing.

43 years missing is the very definition of reasonable doubt.
 
2018-10-12 12:04:40 AM  

lack of warmth: Also, they can't really build a case after they arrest him, because the first thing the prosecution has to do is turn over all the evidence they do have to his lawyer.


Others addressed PC for warrant-less arrests, so I'll just respond to this.

Where did you hear that prosecution has to turn over any evidence to the lawyer of someone arrested? Ultimately the police would have to show they had PC, should a 4th amendment complaint be filed. But the prosecutor doesn't have to be involved with an arrest at all, warrant or warrantless, much less reveal everything they or the police know.  Charges don't even have to be filed for an arrest.

Hell, an arrest can even happen without the knowledge of the cop in some cases (when he wrongly thinks it is just an investigatory detention).

So yeah, they can definitely build a case after an arrest if they want (though they cannot hold him indefinitely to do so).
 
2018-10-12 12:05:42 AM  
What did the guy do, flip off a pig?

Seriously, there's no evidence, no witnesses, no body, and an old man.

The pigs were either bored or out to get this guy.  I hope somebody gets caught, and by somebody I mean a crooked pig.
 
2018-10-12 12:07:50 AM  
Just another Heartland Weirdass

Random Anonymous Blackmail: 82 now I am sure 3 hots and a cot with government health care is a pretty good deal at this stage in his life.

Nobody in prison is going to fark with the 82 year old

You ever been to prison?


I am not on trial here. The simple point is there is a lot of macho testosterone posturing grouping with gangs and all that crap but there is a lot of respect. Assaulting an elderly person for whatever motive is only going to make you look like a punk ass biatch.
 
2018-10-12 12:11:19 AM  

Random Anonymous Blackmail: Just another Heartland Weirdass

Random Anonymous Blackmail: 82 now I am sure 3 hots and a cot with government health care is a pretty good deal at this stage in his life.

Nobody in prison is going to fark with the 82 year old

You ever been to prison?

I am not on trial here. The simple point is there is a lot of macho testosterone posturing grouping with gangs and all that crap but there is a lot of respect. Assaulting an elderly person for whatever motive is only going to make you look like a punk ass biatch.


You ever been to prison?
 
2018-10-12 12:26:07 AM  
Is this him?

forgottenadvertisements.files.wordpress.comView Full Size
 
2018-10-12 12:29:16 AM  

leeksfromchichis: The baseline standard for murder charges should be a body, or enough evidence of a body having existed to be convincing.43 years missing is the very definition of reasonable doubt.


To the contrary, I think the lack of any communication from the woman for 43 years, taken in concert with the circumstantial evidence that existed at the time of her disappearance, is sufficient to support probable cause that she's dead and that he did it. Whether it's enough to support proof beyond a reasonable doubt is a different matter.

People have been convicted of murder without a body. One such case.
 
2018-10-12 12:32:59 AM  

holdmybones: If it really happened she would have come out way sooner than 40 years. Fake news.


Actually, when new evidence came out about John Wayne Gacy several years ago a few people they thought he killed showed up living in Oregon and Florida. The now undead ran away and presumed to have been killed by Gacy. They were missing for 33 years. It is possible she ran away.
 
2018-10-12 12:51:16 AM  

tukatz: eurotrader: tukatz: eurotrader: A group meet in Sept that had nothing to do with the investigation and gathered no new information but decided let's arrest the old man and see what happens. Most of the people involved are dead. Unless the old man pleads guilty he will be going home.


If you read the criminal complaint, they actually have quite a bit more that just guesses.  He bought a bulldozer and trailer that hasn't been found.  The wife signed over the mobile home and vehicle before she "disappeared".   Numerous lies and contradicting info.  There has been no sign of the wife in 43 years.

Still..... this have to be the slowest investigation ever.

I did read the complaint and there was nothing newer than 2005. There was a reason no charges had be brought before when witnesses were still alive, there is little to no chance of a conviction with a basic defense attorney. The group that recommend charges reasoning they looked at a few things and since the leader is a prison guard  charging someone with murder without a body and any evidence of a death is ok for a vanity group. No confession no conviction


They have enough to arrest him.  Plus the criminal complaint may not even include everything... just enough to lock him up and start proceedings.  Not CSI, so a body isn't mandatory.  Chances are, due to his age and hopefully lack of ability to lie well, they are hoping he'll confess and cut a deal... part of which would be telling where he buried the body.   Or they'll let him out on bond and see if he stupidly leads them to the body in an attempt to move it.  Most cases end with plea deals.  At his age, he will probably want to try getting out before keeling over.

It did take way too long for this to turn into charges.  I would guess someone finally came forward who didn't speak before and had enough info to get the interest going again.


Or at his age he gives a confused answer and they go "AHA! Contradictions! Guilty!"

If, as mentioned above this post, there really isn't no new info/witnesses, someone really dropped the ball on this one.
 
2018-10-12 01:00:50 AM  
#IBelieveCarolJeanPierce

Prove you didn't, old white guy!
 
2018-10-12 01:04:51 AM  

RedRudy: Well that solves his retirement issues, that worked out nicely for him.


And THIS^^^^

A lot of folks in the thread have made issue of his failure to claim the insurance and what financial incentive he would have to commit murder.

He was set to receive a Federal pension and, in fact, began drawing it within two weeks of her disappearance.  Even had they not been in a community property state, she could have sought a claim against his retirement.  If successful she could have received up to 1/2 of his pension.

So 1/2 of his pension for the last 40 years is a pretty powerful incentive.  In fact, the $25K pales in comparison to what she would have received that now went into his pocket for the past 40 years.

I had a friend who's wife was a boozer and 3 pack a day smoker.  He caught her cheating on him.  Both kids were already grown and gone.

When they divorced she managed to get 1/2 of his pension.  Of course he couldn't start drawing his retirement until he actually retired so she wasn't entitled to 1/2 either.

He figured with her lifestyle that between the booze and cigarettes she'd die long before he did.  So he kept working after he was eligible to retire.  She found Jeebus and kicked the booze but kept the 3 pack a day habit.  Sure enough, 5 years later she kicked the bucket.

Two days later he turned in his paperwork to retire.  That was 25 years ago and he's still going strong.

So that IS a pretty powerful financial incentive.
 
2018-10-12 01:09:50 AM  

Just another Heartland Weirdass: Random Anonymous Blackmail: Just another Heartland Weirdass

Random Anonymous Blackmail: 82 now I am sure 3 hots and a cot with government health care is a pretty good deal at this stage in his life.

Nobody in prison is going to fark with the 82 year old

You ever been to prison?

I am not on trial here. The simple point is there is a lot of macho testosterone posturing grouping with gangs and all that crap but there is a lot of respect. Assaulting an elderly person for whatever motive is only going to make you look like a punk ass biatch.

You ever been to prison?


Only to (conjugally) visit your mom. I've had a couple friends ask me to ask you to please tell her she needs to stop letting herself go.
 
2018-10-12 02:17:11 AM  

CruiserTwelve: leeksfromchichis: The baseline standard for murder charges should be a body, or enough evidence of a body having existed to be convincing.43 years missing is the very definition of reasonable doubt.

To the contrary, I think the lack of any communication from the woman for 43 years, taken in concert with the circumstantial evidence that existed at the time of her disappearance, is sufficient to support probable cause that she's dead and that he did it. Whether it's enough to support proof beyond a reasonable doubt is a different matter.

People have been convicted of murder without a body. One such case.


Oh, we all know people have been convicted of murder without a body.

What we're saying is that it should not be possible, not that it hasn't happened.  As far as that goes, it shouldn't even  be possible to bring murder charges at all without irrefutable proof that the alleged victim is dead.
 
2018-10-12 02:57:05 AM  
it's always the husband. proving it, however...
 
2018-10-12 03:09:47 AM  
Ya know, we really shouldn't be punishing people for what happened 43 years ago...

It was a different time.
 
2018-10-12 03:13:04 AM  

Sean VasDeferens: Nowadays one only needs to be accused of a crime, now it's up to him to prove his innocence.


No that's just at Trump rallies and it's SHE has to prove her innocence. Idiots Out Wandering Around Trump
 
2018-10-12 03:19:43 AM  

DarkVader: CruiserTwelve: leeksfromchichis: The baseline standard for murder charges should be a body, or enough evidence of a body having existed to be convincing.43 years missing is the very definition of reasonable doubt.

To the contrary, I think the lack of any communication from the woman for 43 years, taken in concert with the circumstantial evidence that existed at the time of her disappearance, is sufficient to support probable cause that she's dead and that he did it. Whether it's enough to support proof beyond a reasonable doubt is a different matter.

People have been convicted of murder without a body. One such case.

Oh, we all know people have been convicted of murder without a body.

What we're saying is that it should not be possible, not that it hasn't happened.  As far as that goes, it shouldn't even  be possible to bring murder charges at all without irrefutable proof that the alleged victim is dead.


How about blood stains containing the victim's DNA that are too large to be made in an amount that is possible for someone to lose and still live?
 
2018-10-12 03:39:05 AM  

some_beer_drinker: it's always the husband.


Of course it is.

Why would anyone else bother?
 
2018-10-12 04:00:01 AM  

DarkVader: As far as that goes, it shouldn't even be possible to bring murder charges at all without irrefutable proof that the alleged victim is dead.


The legal standard is "proof beyond a reasonable doubt," not "irrefutable proof."

A bunch of people died when the Titanic went down. How can we be certain they're dead? There's no "irrefutable proof."
 
2018-10-12 04:46:58 AM  

lack of warmth: FYI, they can have nothing on anyone to make an arrest.  They have to have something to get it past hearings.  They don't even have to prove their was a crime committed to make an arrest, just the idea a crime was committed.


This is not true at all. If the police think a crime was committed they technically can arrest me for it, but if I prove there was no reason to suspect me in the first place I am suing them for false arrest.
 
2018-10-12 04:51:13 AM  

CruiserTwelve: DarkVader: As far as that goes, it shouldn't even be possible to bring murder charges at all without irrefutable proof that the alleged victim is dead.

The legal standard is "proof beyond a reasonable doubt," not "irrefutable proof."

A bunch of people died when the Titanic went down. How can we be certain they're dead? There's no "irrefutable proof."


If they had any of that, they would have done this decades ago.
 
2018-10-12 05:04:17 AM  

leeksfromchichis: CruiserTwelve: DarkVader: As far as that goes, it shouldn't even be possible to bring murder charges at all without irrefutable proof that the alleged victim is dead.

The legal standard is "proof beyond a reasonable doubt," not "irrefutable proof."

A bunch of people died when the Titanic went down. How can we be certain they're dead? There's no "irrefutable proof."

If they had any of that, they would have done this decades ago.


Prove it.
 
2018-10-12 05:05:33 AM  

CruiserTwelve: DarkVader: As far as that goes, it shouldn't even be possible to bring murder charges at all without irrefutable proof that the alleged victim is dead.

The legal standard is "proof beyond a reasonable doubt," not "irrefutable proof."

A bunch of people died when the Titanic went down. How can we be certain they're dead? There's no "irrefutable proof."


It isn't often we are on the same side, I would like to give you a high five on this one!
 
2018-10-12 05:38:57 AM  

stan unusual: Sean VasDeferens: Nowadays one only needs to be accused of a crime, now it's up to him to prove his innocence.

No that's just at Trump rallies and it's SHE has to prove her innocence. Idiots Out Wandering Around Trump


Uh, no. Off your meds again?
 
Displayed 50 of 66 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report