Wow !

[TheChipPrince]

Theres nothing that out of order that that post can't stay imo, as long as its a one-off post.

[tikay]

Tony,
can I ask you to clear up what "(understandable) date confusion" is.?
I have never heard of that before and it has caused me some confusion.
Carl.

One would assume, that, it's because trying to recollect something that happened 2 years ago is not that simple.

I can understand that dates can be fotgotten 2 years down the line, but, if Kev says he asked for permission at the funeral (written in Kev's blog, not Tighty's error), that is not remembering a date, that is remembering a happening...  So, if the dates of the funeral are accurate, and, the dates of the Aqua communication are accurate, where is the date confusion?  The money was withdrawn 1 week before permission was requested..

I'll reply with care to that. I'm not judge or jury here, so I'll keep it factual & make no assumptions.

The dates I "corrected" against Tighty's Post are exactly as I stated. The Funeral date is proofed by a link to the Funeral thread. The date the money was withdrawn from Aqua/blonde Cardroom was as stated - a week before the Funeral. There is no dispute on either date, & we have the e-Mails from the Cardroom to Kev & vice-versa. I (& Tighty) were aware of that from the very outset, that is to say, a day or two after I returned home from Vegas.

Which was why I issued the "corrected dates" Post.

Kev discussed this with me last night. He told me that he had simply got the dates confused, but that he is 100% certain of one thing - that he asked the Family's permission BEFORE withdrawing the money. He was utterly insistent upon that, in fact it was the whole reason he asked me to ring him.

When I said "but the Funeral was a week later?" he said that was just some confusion in his mind.

I am not spinning this either way - those are the facts as I was given them, or know them.

[TightEnd]

Theres nothing that out of order that that post can't stay imo, as long as its a one-off post.

I agree, we agree.

[tikay]

Tony,
can I ask you to clear up what "(understandable) date confusion" is.?
I have never heard of that before and it has caused me some confusion.
Carl.

Carl,
Pardon me not being clear on this but are you referring to the use of the word "understandable" or the actual date confusion? I'll answer either, but please clarify first.
Thanks.

Tony, I guess "date confusion" is what I was referring to, but also "understandable" also a bit baffled me, but I have just made a post prior to this one that maybe explained what I was thinking.

Carl.

I have answered the date confusion.

"Understandable"?

It's quite difficult for me to come cross as even-handed in this, & I thought it seemed reasonable to offer up the suggestion that, in fact, because it was nearly 2 years ago, he had become confused/forgetful as to precise dates.

[tikay]

Tony,
can I ask you to clear up what "(understandable) date confusion" is.?
I have never heard of that before and it has caused me some confusion.
Carl.

One would assume, that, it's because trying to recollect something that happened 2 years ago is not that simple.

I can understand that dates can be fotgotten 2 years down the line, but, if Kev says he asked for permission at the funeral (written in Kev's blog, not Tighty's error), that is not remembering a date, that is remembering a happening...  So, if the dates of the funeral are accurate, and, the dates of the Aqua communication are accurate, where is the date confusion?  The money was withdrawn 1 week before permission was requested..

I forgot to add that I have never read Kev's Blog properly, or recently, except to speed-read one bit, so I've no idea what it actually said in that regard.

Note, also, that I agreed with Kev last night that if I report something about our convo last night factually incorrectly, he'll text or 'phone me, & I'll correct it if need be.

[Woodsey]

Kev should be allowed to post on here just for a few days on this thread imo. Seems a bit unfair on him having no direct proper right of reply...........

[Shogun112]

Thanks for your explanation Tony.

I would agree that it is understandably very hard to remember exact dates 2 years later.  I would though remember happenings and whther they were before other happenings.

[bobby1]

The question I have now Rich is  this. As part of your investigation did you or anyone else request the checking of Kevs data by Jane?

I did not no. As I have said the Brendan issue was raised as a verbal concern to me. After the family had been contacted I then got the data from our former card-room provider

On the Dawn issue, which was her issue not a blonde poker issue, again no request from me.

As tikay was unaware of the Brendan issue until ten days ago, the same answers will apply to him I would think

Correct.

just to clarify I didnt have you in mind Tony. I had finally realised that the back story might invovle the police. I was hoping that the examining of msn and pM'S might have been done at their request which would make it understandable.

[EvilPie]

The question I have now Rich is  this. As part of your investigation did you or anyone else request the checking of Kevs data by Jane?

I did not no. As I have said the Brendan issue was raised as a verbal concern to me. After the family had been contacted I then got the data from our former card-room provider

On the Dawn issue, which was her issue not a blonde poker issue, again no request from me.

As tikay was unaware of the Brendan issue until ten days ago, the same answers will apply to him I would think

Correct.

just to clarify I didnt have you in mind Tony. I had finally realised that the back story might invovle the police. I was hoping that the examining of msn and pM'S might have been done at their request which would make it understandable.

Pretty sure that if the police wanted someone's PC checking for potentially incriminating evidence they wouldn't ask the bloke's ex to have a quick check through it for them.

[bobby1]

The question I have now Rich is  this. As part of your investigation did you or anyone else request the checking of Kevs data by Jane?

I did not no. As I have said the Brendan issue was raised as a verbal concern to me. After the family had been contacted I then got the data from our former card-room provider

On the Dawn issue, which was her issue not a blonde poker issue, again no request from me.

As tikay was unaware of the Brendan issue until ten days ago, the same answers will apply to him I would think

Correct.

just to clarify I didnt have you in mind Tony. I had finally realised that the back story might invovle the police. I was hoping that the examining of msn and pM'S might have been done at their request which would make it understandable.

Pretty sure that if the police wanted someone's PC checking for potentially incriminating evidence they wouldn't ask the bloke's ex to have a quick check through it for them.

oh dear, they might ask the company Blondepoker tho...

[tikay]

The question I have now Rich is  this. As part of your investigation did you or anyone else request the checking of Kevs data by Jane?

I did not no. As I have said the Brendan issue was raised as a verbal concern to me. After the family had been contacted I then got the data from our former card-room provider

On the Dawn issue, which was her issue not a blonde poker issue, again no request from me.

As tikay was unaware of the Brendan issue until ten days ago, the same answers will apply to him I would think

Correct.

just to clarify I didnt have you in mind Tony. I had finally realised that the back story might invovle the police. I was hoping that the examining of msn and pM'S might have been done at their request which would make it understandable.

Yes, the involvement of the Police & the Police File, or Case, has been a backdrop to my Posts & comments.

I have - literally - scores of e-Mails & PM's which explain who told who else, what, & when, & I'd be lying if I said eveything is clear in my mind in that area. If you ask me now if the Police were the ones who first requested the MSN logs be produced, I honestly don't remember. I could & will check, though.

I'm "grey" on that whole area I'm afraid. I need to go now, I have an 11pm Telecon, sorry for the rushed & perhaps garbled answer. I'll be back, though......

[turny]

The question I have now Rich is  this. As part of your investigation did you or anyone else request the checking of Kevs data by Jane?

I did not no. As I have said the Brendan issue was raised as a verbal concern to me. After the family had been contacted I then got the data from our former card-room provider

On the Dawn issue, which was her issue not a blonde poker issue, again no request from me.

As tikay was unaware of the Brendan issue until ten days ago, the same answers will apply to him I would think

Correct.

just to clarify I didnt have you in mind Tony. I had finally realised that the back story might invovle the police. I was hoping that the examining of msn and pM'S might have been done at their request which would make it understandable.

Pretty sure that if the police wanted someone's PC checking for potentially incriminating evidence they wouldn't ask the bloke's ex to have a quick check through it for them.

oh dear, they might ask the company Blondepoker tho...

never in a million years, they would seize them and examine them themselves

[bobby1]

The question I have now Rich is  this. As part of your investigation did you or anyone else request the checking of Kevs data by Jane?

I did not no. As I have said the Brendan issue was raised as a verbal concern to me. After the family had been contacted I then got the data from our former card-room provider

On the Dawn issue, which was her issue not a blonde poker issue, again no request from me.

As tikay was unaware of the Brendan issue until ten days ago, the same answers will apply to him I would think

Correct.

just to clarify I didnt have you in mind Tony. I had finally realised that the back story might invovle the police. I was hoping that the examining of msn and pM'S might have been done at their request which would make it understandable.

Yes, the involvement of the Police & the Police File, or Case, has been a backdrop to my Posts & comments.

I have - literally - scores of e-Mails & PM's which explain who told who else, what, & when, & I'd be lying if I said eveything is clear in my mind in that area. If you ask me now if the Police were the ones who first requested the MSN logs be produced, I honestly don't remember. I could & will check, though.

I'm "grey" on that whole area I'm afraid. I need to go now, I have an 11pm Telecon, sorry for the rushed & perhaps garbled answer. I'll be back, though......

Ive been veiwing this subject from a position so far behind a lot of others that it took  me a long time to work that out so I owe you an apology too. I just didnt get it at the time.

[EvilPie]

The question I have now Rich is  this. As part of your investigation did you or anyone else request the checking of Kevs data by Jane?

I did not no. As I have said the Brendan issue was raised as a verbal concern to me. After the family had been contacted I then got the data from our former card-room provider

On the Dawn issue, which was her issue not a blonde poker issue, again no request from me.

As tikay was unaware of the Brendan issue until ten days ago, the same answers will apply to him I would think

Correct.

just to clarify I didnt have you in mind Tony. I had finally realised that the back story might invovle the police. I was hoping that the examining of msn and pM'S might have been done at their request which would make it understandable.

Pretty sure that if the police wanted someone's PC checking for potentially incriminating evidence they wouldn't ask the bloke's ex to have a quick check through it for them.

oh dear, they might ask the company Blondepoker tho...

It's more likely that they would just seize it before the evidence became compromised.

Rifling through someone's PC isn't a job for any member of the public under any circumstances. Once there is any suspicion of a crime being committed the PC should be handed over to the law.

By going through it and thus changing all the "last read" dates etc. it probably just invalidates any potential evidence that was there in the first place.

There's far too many interferring people here who've become involved in their own "private investigations". Unfortunately that's probably ruined any chance of real justice being served if a crime has actually been committed.

[Laxie]

It's ok Matt.  I have logs on my computer too...which were requested by police.