Earlier this evening, a new thread (with the title "Judgemental") was started by a poster named "Juror 10." Here is what they posted:
Judgemental
Hello everyone,
I have been lurking here since after the mistrial, and understand that many of you have questions for me. I will try and answer some if you feel so inclined as to ask.
Respectfully,
Juror 10
Several people asked him questions. Some didn't believe that it was him, until another poster said they had contacted the forum moderator who verified that it was Juror #10. I didn't get that email from the moderator, so, I'm actually not going to say that it's been verified. The poster never answers one question that was put to him, so that first post was quite misleading to say the least.I have been lurking here since after the mistrial, and understand that many of you have questions for me. I will try and answer some if you feel so inclined as to ask.
Respectfully,
Juror 10
A few hours later, "Juror #10" comes back on and makes the following post:
Juror 10
Member
Registered: Oct 2007
Location:
Posts: 2
Location:
Posts: 2
Just wanted to see how my experiment would work. The title of this thread is self explainatory. Most of you posters have proven it. Why any of you feel you need an explaination for anything that happened with this jury is beyond me. Get over yourselves. This case was not proven. End of story.
For those of you who kept an open mind about the outcome of this trial, you are appreciated greatly. Thank you for your fairness. The world needs more people like you.
I will not be back.
Juror 10
That was one of the most classic displays of passive aggressive behavior I've seen in a long time. Whoever it was, they sure must be enjoying themselves, lol!For those of you who kept an open mind about the outcome of this trial, you are appreciated greatly. Thank you for your fairness. The world needs more people like you.
I will not be back.
Juror 10
You can be anyone you want on Internet message boards, where it's pretty easy to pretend to be someone else. Maybe even Brad Paisley, lol!
Does anyone have any comments about this manipulative event that just happened on the Court TV Phil Spector Forum?
Update: 11:55 pm
Oh, they always come back for more attention, lol!
Juror 10
Member
Registered: Oct 2007
Location: Fooling you all
Posts: 3
Venting LMAO,Location: Fooling you all
Posts: 3
So do you all feel better now that you got to get rid of some of your frustration? Or did I make it worse?
I am NOT juror 10.
Just someone who thought you needed to be shown how bad and judgemental some of you really are. Have a good night.
Sorry if I cause any of you lovely, sincere people (you know who you are) any cause for embarassment.
Peace Out
What did I tell ya. Just another chain yanker. Some people have too much time on their hands. Really, lol! That and a propensity for their brains to turn into melted cheese. Maybe it's "Chelle." Rachelle must be locked up in the Castle, because you know, Spector locked up those kids and he locked up Ronnie. And he has to threaten women with a gun who decide they've had enough of entertainment with Phil. Poor Rachelle. With no where to go, no clubs to go to, maybe this is how she passes the long hours in her wing of the castle. Making death threats to Judges and impersonating a juror. What a sad life that must be. "Chelle" all dressed up in Christian Laboutin shoes and no trial to go to every day so she can display them.
Posts
4 comments:
Hi Sprocket: Yes, I admit to also lurking since I try to avoid the sites since they seem off topic and like children playing more than not, so I get bored easily. The new post stuck out and, of course, as anyone and as I am sure was intended by poster....I checked in.! Feel like a sucker! Darn it. Looks to me like either cowardly lion or "checking" his poplularity rating and how many will respond, then basically, the guys sits back and laughs to say "catch you later". Juror #10 wins! (at least in his mind). Shouldn't have indulged him, but all did. Frankly at this point, who cares what he thinks (if he does). And, juror #10, it explanation NOT explaination.(drop the I)...dyslexic perhaps.
Well, that round went to Juror #10 (or poser) in my play book unfortunately, as all of you (I kept waiting also) stayed on and waited and kept asking and waited and waited and waited.
Thanks for the up-to-the-minute blog entry, Sprocket. My take is that our 'G' posters got it from the get-go. They challenged the poster, Juror 10's true identity right away and also asked some legitimate questions (as you know yourself), just to pose the questions to show what a lame juror he was, not really expecting an answer. These NG's seem to have an unhealthy need for attention, but, as dini keeps saying, Phil is still going to prison. Bottom line.
I never felt this was Juror #10, but I asked the questions anyway, lol, just to see if there would be a response.
I'll have to ask Juror #9 what he thinks about all this over the weekend.
Like I mentioned in my entry, anyone can be anyone on the Internet. There are ways to fool just about anyone. Call me a skeptic, but, when the MSM ~which is usually pretty good at verifying information/sources~ verifies that this was Juror #10 speaking out on the CTV message boards, then I'll believe it.
Well this entry sure gave me a roll on the floor! Juror 10 = Chelle or her mama or sister or umm yeah, Chelle.
How in the world will she ever recapture her fame of the past several moments? Whatever will she do for the next trial as she has already used up her clothing/fashion quota? No matter what she puts on those feet, her face remains the same... horse teeth? Too big. Hair? Too coiffed. Maybe he'll go ahead and buy her those boobies she's wanted for so long... After all, she was a pretty good girl for most of the trial, right? Perhaps we should pose that question to juror #10 and see if s/he concurs?
You continue to rock it Sprocket!
Muah!!!
Post a Comment