Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Thread Morons -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Phil(bullrider) who wrote (1535)	6/12/1998 1:16:00 AM
From: X Y Zebra	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12810

Anyway, the paper said it was an "ex, former, boyfriend" that killed the woman, and then himself. Does that mean he is a current boyfriend, or that they dated more than twice and she ditched him more than once? Well, now let's see, there are a number of possibilities here. Possibility # 1. When there is a murder one must certainly consider all angles... so if an "ex" "former" boyfriend is the apparent executor of the horrible deed, it must be that the former means he WAS the boyfriend, but then when you put in front of former, the "ex", then that means that the former boyfriend had gone back to being a "current" boyfriend, in other words, he was an ex- (used to be) former, (not a boyfriend anymore), therefore we have that the ex former, is now the current boyfriend because he no longer is a former boyfriend. Therefore, the murder took place between two people that had a relationship in the past, broke up, and then returned to being closely related, hence a crime of passion may have been committed. This means that possible "mitigating circumstances may exists, changing considerably the possible defense to present for the murdering bastard. Are you with me so far? Now, then. Possibility # 2. The "ex" prefix could simply mean that while he was no longer the boyfriend, (because he was a "former" boyfriend), he used to be a former boyfriend, however, at one point in time one "ceases to be a "former" boyfriend and returns to be simply a normal human being, with no present (or expected) relationship with the murdered girl as both become complete detached from each other, therefore while he is an "ex" (used to be the former boyfriend), but now simply he has returned to the status of a totally and complete stranger to the girl in question. If we so consider the status, then we can say that it was a murder between complete strangers. In this instance since one stranger is killing another stranger the defense may be more difficult to present. Of course, in both cases, since the ex former boyfriend killed himself, that really solves (and saves), the problem of having to defend the murdering bastard. Possibility # 3. It was a simple case of an ex-boyfriend getting jealous and simply going and kill the former girlfriend. Then a MORONIC reporter, got the "ex" and the "former" confused, and pu them close and together, and wrote the piece without having a clue what he wrote. In this instance it is clear that the ex boyfriend killed the former girlfriend, the reporter wrote the story (got the facts all screwed up) due to his poor writing skills, or the lack of a proof reader, and then the readers got it all wrong.... May be even the police, not to mention the judge, (big possibility if you have a good attorney that can "spin" things around a bit. Again the whole exercise is a waste of time since the ex-boyfriend killed himself after killing the former girlfriend... Now, is that clear?, because if not here you can have some more possibilities: intriguing.com What neighborhood do you live in boy?.... Good thing the murdering boyfriend did not get all confused BEFORE the murder, he could have gotten the WRONG house.... Now, that would mean that.....