DaLincolnJones
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2011
- Messages
- 8,319
- Likes
- 1,886
- Points
- 113
Glad to see that she does not have cancer. The other stuff can be dealt with and maintained.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Wow! You sure dodged some bullets lately. I am going to predict you will have a happy Thanksgiving.Just went to the doctor with my mother. The initial tests were wrong. I repeat wrong. Further testing has come back clear of cancer. My mother doesn't have cancer. Thank God. The large quantity of antibodies they attributed to multiple cell myeloma are in fact due to her body fighting her psoriatic arthritis.
Oh FUCK YEAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!Just went to the doctor with my mother. The initial tests were wrong. I repeat wrong. Further testing has come back clear of cancer. My mother doesn't have cancer. Thank God. The large quantity of antibodies they attributed to multiple cell myeloma are in fact due to her body fighting her psoriatic arthritis.
Change all the fluids.Thanks man. Yeah it is fucked up. Yeah its a damn good car, reliable, runs likes a boss. Thanks too for the prayers
Hughes and others say this all changed in 2014, when the Oregon Court of Appeals ruled in a case that has made prosecuting car thefts very, very difficult.
The case involved Jerrol Edwin Shipe, a 49-year-old former retirement home worker who was arrested in 2012 while sitting in a stolen truck in Washington County. He was convicted but appealed the verdict, claiming he didn't know it was stolen and that he had gotten the truck from "a friend named Richey."
Evidence at the scene suggested Shipe knew he was driving a stolen truck. He had bolt cutters, multiple sets of keys, and a locked case labeled—amazingly—"Crime Committing Kit." The truck had other stolen property inside. The key Shipe had been using to start the engine did not belong to the truck.
Shipe's appeal claimed that prosecutors could not prove he had "knowingly" taken possession of a stolen vehicle. Prosecutors argued that the evidence should have made it obvious to any reasonable person that the truck had been stolen.
The Oregon Court of Appeals judges ruled in Shipe's favor. Chief Appellate Judge Erika Hadlock wrote in the July 23, 2014, decision that the state was asking the court "to accept too great an inferential leap" in determining that Shipe knew the truck was stolen when he took possession of it. (Hadlock declined comment to WW on her ruling.)
It set a precedent: Carrying tools associated with car break-ins or even operating a car with the wrong key was not enough evidence to prove that someone sitting in a stolen car knew that it was hot.
Wow! You sure dodged some bullets lately. I am going to predict you will have a happy Thanksgiving.
Wow! You sure dodged some bullets lately. I am going to predict you will have a happy Thanksgiving.
Just went to the doctor with my mother. The initial tests were wrong. I repeat wrong. Further testing has come back clear of cancer. My mother doesn't have cancer. Thank God. The large quantity of antibodies they attributed to multiple cell myeloma are in fact due to her body fighting her psoriatic arthritis.
I got arthritis like a fuck ton. Better than cancer.Wow, Chris. Glad to hear that it wasn't cancer, although I'm sure that the arthritis is no picnic. Also glad that I didn't read this thread until today. Got to cut straight to the happy ending.
Hooray!Just went to the doctor with my mother. The initial tests were wrong. I repeat wrong. Further testing has come back clear of cancer. My mother doesn't have cancer. Thank God. The large quantity of antibodies they attributed to multiple cell myeloma are in fact due to her body fighting her psoriatic arthritis.
