Is anyone surprised, well maybe a little after reading the 8 count indictment against Andrea Sneiderman. But when your boss is convicted of murdering your husband, chances are you may have something to do with the motive behind such a fatal decision.
And when you travel, dine, dance, share wine and send hundreds of texts/emails to the man who killed your husband, one may be inclined to believe your relationship was the sole motivation.
As is the case of Andrea Sneiderman.
But is Andrea guilty of adultery and poor performance on the witness stand or is she guilty of conspiring with Hemy Neuman to kill her husband?
DA James believes it is the latter and he does not seem to be the type of DA who brings charges without having a strong case to back up those charges.
For Andrea's supporters the most troubling indictment may be that of attempted murder. We expected perjury, and some even expected Or wanted malice murder charges, but attempted murder??? Does DA James have additional evidence or some one's cooperation. I guess we will have to 'stay tuned'.
Saturday, August 4, 2012
Monday, July 16, 2012
If you build it, government should take the credit????
Out of the mouth of idiots, or in this case president Obama
In a speech to Virginia supporters regarding increasing taxes on those families/businesses earning 250k+ and individuals/bussinesses making 200k+, Obama said the following:
(please note, I purposely switched the order of the paragraphs to begin looking at BO's word choice)
If you were successful, someone along the line gave you some help.
There was a great teacher somewhere in your life.
Somebody helped create this Unbelievable American system we have That ALLOWED you to Thrive.
Somebody invested in roads and bridges.
If you own a business, you Didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen.
There are a lot of wealthy successful Americans Who agree with me because they want to give something back. If you've been successful, you didn't get there On your own.
I'm always struck by people who Think, well it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. It must be because I worked harder than Everybody else. Let me tell you something-there are a lot of hardworking people out there.
Oh BO, class warefare at its finest and mixed in with the rhetoric, word choices giving each of us great insight into Your political philosophy and view of this unbelievable American system. 1-7, is the insight I gained after reading the speech. You can draw your own conclusions.
1.). If you were successful, someone along the line gave you some help.
BO's use of the word Were and have been later in his speech, and both in relation to an individial's success is both troubling and insightful.
This president is described as a great orator, and so I do not believe he says or does anything by accident. And when he has a slip of the tongue, it's always revealing (i.e. the 'spread the wealth' comment to joe the plumber when campaigning for president).
Regardless of whether the use of the past tense in relation to being successful is a slip or scripted, in my opinion it expresses the likelihood BO's policies will ensure those who achieved success will be less so if he is re-elected. His intention to tax those who are deemed by his administration to be too successful ensures they will not only be less successful, they will pay back those who gave help along the line.
2.). There was a great teacher somewhere.
Here BO gives a shout out to the teacher's union. Teachers good. Tax cuts for the rich hurt teachers.
3.). Somebody helped create this unbelievable American system that ALLOWED you to thrive.
BO's use of the word allowed, troubling and again insightful. Allowed is defined as To permit. To let have.
BO's use of allow expresses many things about the great orator's philosophy:
You are successful or thrive because of government
Without government help, you cannot succeed or thrive
Only certain folks in America were ALLOWED to succeed
Government alone should decide who succeeds, how much success is enough, how much the government keeps for allowing such success and how much will be transferred to others who undoubtedly helped you along the line.
4.). Somebody invested in roads and bridges.
Really? Do 'successful folks' not pay taxes, and don't our taxes pay for the investment in roads and bridges????
I can only assume BO threw this little tid bit in as an example of the necessity of his 787B stimulus plan, of which only 3% went to infrastructure projects, but ok.
And the most insightful statement in BO's speech requires 0 parsing of words to assess his political philosophy..........
5.). If you own a business. You didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen.
Obama believes when someone has an idea, creates a business, and has success this person owes it to everyone else. There is no individual, there is only the collective. The individual's success is everyone's success and it must be shared. Again clearly illustrating, BO's philosophy:
You are successful or thrive because of government
Your success therefore is the government's to decide how best to share it with the collective.
6.) There are a lot of wealthy who agree with me, because they want to give something back.
What is stopping them BO????? Do they need government permission to write more charitable donation checks, or to increase the amount on the checks they currently write?
What stops these rich who are dying to do more from giving more to their communities directly vs. Paying more in taxes to the federal government where a % of their dollars will be wasted on bureaucratic red tape????
And how much more should the wealthy give, (the wealthy you don't know, the wealthy who feel they give enough).
The top 10% already pay 71% of federal income taxes, how much more should they pay 100%. What then incents this group to produce more, to create more jobs when so much already goes to government???
I have an idea, why dont you place pressure on Harry Reid to pass a budget spending less than it takes in???? We have not had a budget since 2009, why don't you clean your house before asking any American, rich or poor, to contribute another dime???
Curious, BO what do you call an economic plan selling taxing The wealthy more as its strategy to improve our economy, when we could take everything the wealthy make and own; and would not Have enough money to pay for one year's worth of government spending??
Idiotic at best, incompeent, class warfare at the worst, and your economic plan for the US.
7). I'm always struck by people who think, well it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. It must be because I worked harder than Everybody else. Let me tell you something-there are a lot of hardworking people out there.
BO's use of the word think is not only troubling. It's desperate. It shows his campaign's inability to run on his record, there desperation to gin up support, and resort to what they do best, insight class warfare by any means necessary.
And to do so, BO has been gifted with ability to mind read. He tells us he knows what those evil successful people think.
I'm curious, when is the last time you heard a business owner say he/she is a success bc they are just so damned smart and worked harder than anyone else???? I haven't.
Well maybe I've heard a few say they work hard, but they certainly haven't said they don't appreciate or understand others work just as hard if not harder.
Yet Obama seems to know what they think and he'd like nothing more than for us to buy into this too. Those of us who dont own our own business or don't find ourselves making over 200k. He'd like we who are deemed not successful to get angry at those who are, and get out and vote for him.
Bc BO understands us, he knows what we think. He knows you, the business owner, other americans would not and could not be a success without him, without government.
Without goverment Paving the way for those who succeed and helping those who don't. They allow the successful among us keep a portion of their success and give the remainder to those government thinks are just as smart and worked just as hard but somehow were not able to become a success even though the government allowed them to.
In a speech to Virginia supporters regarding increasing taxes on those families/businesses earning 250k+ and individuals/bussinesses making 200k+, Obama said the following:
(please note, I purposely switched the order of the paragraphs to begin looking at BO's word choice)
If you were successful, someone along the line gave you some help.
There was a great teacher somewhere in your life.
Somebody helped create this Unbelievable American system we have That ALLOWED you to Thrive.
Somebody invested in roads and bridges.
If you own a business, you Didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen.
There are a lot of wealthy successful Americans Who agree with me because they want to give something back. If you've been successful, you didn't get there On your own.
I'm always struck by people who Think, well it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. It must be because I worked harder than Everybody else. Let me tell you something-there are a lot of hardworking people out there.
Oh BO, class warefare at its finest and mixed in with the rhetoric, word choices giving each of us great insight into Your political philosophy and view of this unbelievable American system. 1-7, is the insight I gained after reading the speech. You can draw your own conclusions.
1.). If you were successful, someone along the line gave you some help.
BO's use of the word Were and have been later in his speech, and both in relation to an individial's success is both troubling and insightful.
This president is described as a great orator, and so I do not believe he says or does anything by accident. And when he has a slip of the tongue, it's always revealing (i.e. the 'spread the wealth' comment to joe the plumber when campaigning for president).
Regardless of whether the use of the past tense in relation to being successful is a slip or scripted, in my opinion it expresses the likelihood BO's policies will ensure those who achieved success will be less so if he is re-elected. His intention to tax those who are deemed by his administration to be too successful ensures they will not only be less successful, they will pay back those who gave help along the line.
2.). There was a great teacher somewhere.
Here BO gives a shout out to the teacher's union. Teachers good. Tax cuts for the rich hurt teachers.
3.). Somebody helped create this unbelievable American system that ALLOWED you to thrive.
BO's use of the word allowed, troubling and again insightful. Allowed is defined as To permit. To let have.
BO's use of allow expresses many things about the great orator's philosophy:
You are successful or thrive because of government
Without government help, you cannot succeed or thrive
Only certain folks in America were ALLOWED to succeed
Government alone should decide who succeeds, how much success is enough, how much the government keeps for allowing such success and how much will be transferred to others who undoubtedly helped you along the line.
4.). Somebody invested in roads and bridges.
Really? Do 'successful folks' not pay taxes, and don't our taxes pay for the investment in roads and bridges????
I can only assume BO threw this little tid bit in as an example of the necessity of his 787B stimulus plan, of which only 3% went to infrastructure projects, but ok.
And the most insightful statement in BO's speech requires 0 parsing of words to assess his political philosophy..........
5.). If you own a business. You didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen.
Obama believes when someone has an idea, creates a business, and has success this person owes it to everyone else. There is no individual, there is only the collective. The individual's success is everyone's success and it must be shared. Again clearly illustrating, BO's philosophy:
You are successful or thrive because of government
Your success therefore is the government's to decide how best to share it with the collective.
6.) There are a lot of wealthy who agree with me, because they want to give something back.
What is stopping them BO????? Do they need government permission to write more charitable donation checks, or to increase the amount on the checks they currently write?
What stops these rich who are dying to do more from giving more to their communities directly vs. Paying more in taxes to the federal government where a % of their dollars will be wasted on bureaucratic red tape????
And how much more should the wealthy give, (the wealthy you don't know, the wealthy who feel they give enough).
The top 10% already pay 71% of federal income taxes, how much more should they pay 100%. What then incents this group to produce more, to create more jobs when so much already goes to government???
I have an idea, why dont you place pressure on Harry Reid to pass a budget spending less than it takes in???? We have not had a budget since 2009, why don't you clean your house before asking any American, rich or poor, to contribute another dime???
Curious, BO what do you call an economic plan selling taxing The wealthy more as its strategy to improve our economy, when we could take everything the wealthy make and own; and would not Have enough money to pay for one year's worth of government spending??
Idiotic at best, incompeent, class warfare at the worst, and your economic plan for the US.
7). I'm always struck by people who think, well it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. It must be because I worked harder than Everybody else. Let me tell you something-there are a lot of hardworking people out there.
BO's use of the word think is not only troubling. It's desperate. It shows his campaign's inability to run on his record, there desperation to gin up support, and resort to what they do best, insight class warfare by any means necessary.
And to do so, BO has been gifted with ability to mind read. He tells us he knows what those evil successful people think.
I'm curious, when is the last time you heard a business owner say he/she is a success bc they are just so damned smart and worked harder than anyone else???? I haven't.
Well maybe I've heard a few say they work hard, but they certainly haven't said they don't appreciate or understand others work just as hard if not harder.
Yet Obama seems to know what they think and he'd like nothing more than for us to buy into this too. Those of us who dont own our own business or don't find ourselves making over 200k. He'd like we who are deemed not successful to get angry at those who are, and get out and vote for him.
Bc BO understands us, he knows what we think. He knows you, the business owner, other americans would not and could not be a success without him, without government.
Without goverment Paving the way for those who succeed and helping those who don't. They allow the successful among us keep a portion of their success and give the remainder to those government thinks are just as smart and worked just as hard but somehow were not able to become a success even though the government allowed them to.
Friday, June 29, 2012
The biggest lie of all: if you like your coverage. You can keep it
Well maybe if you work for a company run by an idiot you can. And if this is the case you can keep your employer sponsored health plan until the company goes under because the owner doesn't have sound financial judgement.
What do you mean you right wing nut. President Obama said if I like my plan I can keep it. You are using scare tactics about this bill. Am I, you decide.
For a business with 50+ employees you either offer healthcare coverage or pay a penalty.
But beginning in 2014, you no longer have the freedom to choose which plans you offer your employees. (Remember the recent controveresy of religious establishments being forced to include contraception coverage in their plans????). Obamacare.
As a private business you can no longer choose the type of plans to offer your employees, the type of plans your business can afford. Instead you must offer plans Obama deems acceptable.
Plans that include unlimited coverage, cannot exclude pre-existing conditions, give away 'freebies' such as birth control, preventative care, kids on coverage until the age of 26. Plans that do not allow cost sharing in the form of coinsurance or deductibles for the mandated mentioned above. Nor does the law allow a private health insurance company to charge the rate they feel they should charge to make a profit for the mandated coverage. (how dare a private company be allowed to make a profit).
So essentially the government decides how much a private business can charge for their product, while deciding what type of product aNother private business must purchase and offer to its employees. Ok got it.
For those who agree with the above, and celebrate the supreme court's ruling which is completely your prerogative, I'm curious, mathematically do you think it is feasible for an insurance company to stay in business while their policy must cover everyone, for everything, with no limits and for less premium?
If you don't care And think, serves them right those damn evil insurance companies. I don't care if they do go out of business, ask yourself, then what. What does that leave you with? Self pay? Or the new and exciting single payor or government exchange programs.
Be careful what you wish for, and then think about receiving healthcare from a government controlled entity. My mind immediately goes to my last trip to the DMV. Scary thought.
Think it couldn't happen, or that a single payer government run system is not what was intended by Obamacare???? Read on.
So as An employer I must decide Do I continue to offer the more expensive and mandatory healthcare coverage to my employees, or do I pay the penalty per employee instead? Surely the penalty is so outrageously high that offering My employees a more comprehensive policy is really the only option. Because I know the law is intended to provide more affordable and quality healthcare for all Americans.
For your reference, in 2001 the average employer contribution for family coverage was $5,269 and in 2011 it was $10,944. For single coverage, the 2011 average employer contribution was $4,500.
Let me get my calculator out. Should I pay a 2k penalty or offer my employees coverage for more than double the penalty for single coverage and more than 5 times the penalty for family coverage??? Hmmm. Tough decision. I'm no mathematician or financial genius, but I'd say the choice has all but been made for me, wouldn't you?
And Why on earth would Obamacare set the employer penalty for not offering employee's healthcare coverage significantly less than the expense to insure employees from 11 years ago??? Somehow this doesn't make sense if what BO says is true, if you like your coverage you can keep it.
So by forcing private health insurance carriers to offer coverage to everyone, for everything, while the government not the private company decides how much they should charge for it. And setting employer penalties for not offeing healthcare coverage to their employees well below the employers healthcare expenses from over 10 years ago, BO ges exactly what he intended with Obamacare. The start to a single payor system run by our government.
So should we believe BO's promises about keeping our current plans, and that the purpose of Obamacare is to provide quality and affordable healthcare to all americans.
Or should we use the math skills learned in elementary school to come to a more logical conclusion. That Obamacare is about moving to a single payor goverment sponsored healthcare system by forcing private health insurance companies out of the market via the inability to make a profit for the product sold and by forcing more consumers into the single payor system by charging employers a penalty that looks more like an incentive to discontinue their employee's healthcare coverage.
I believe this is exactly what Obama intended and that the intention is included in the last 4 words of the bill's description, found on page 2' it reads:
To provide affordable, quality healthcare for all Americans and reduce the growth in healthcare spending AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
What do you believe?
What do you mean you right wing nut. President Obama said if I like my plan I can keep it. You are using scare tactics about this bill. Am I, you decide.
For a business with 50+ employees you either offer healthcare coverage or pay a penalty.
But beginning in 2014, you no longer have the freedom to choose which plans you offer your employees. (Remember the recent controveresy of religious establishments being forced to include contraception coverage in their plans????). Obamacare.
As a private business you can no longer choose the type of plans to offer your employees, the type of plans your business can afford. Instead you must offer plans Obama deems acceptable.
Plans that include unlimited coverage, cannot exclude pre-existing conditions, give away 'freebies' such as birth control, preventative care, kids on coverage until the age of 26. Plans that do not allow cost sharing in the form of coinsurance or deductibles for the mandated mentioned above. Nor does the law allow a private health insurance company to charge the rate they feel they should charge to make a profit for the mandated coverage. (how dare a private company be allowed to make a profit).
So essentially the government decides how much a private business can charge for their product, while deciding what type of product aNother private business must purchase and offer to its employees. Ok got it.
For those who agree with the above, and celebrate the supreme court's ruling which is completely your prerogative, I'm curious, mathematically do you think it is feasible for an insurance company to stay in business while their policy must cover everyone, for everything, with no limits and for less premium?
If you don't care And think, serves them right those damn evil insurance companies. I don't care if they do go out of business, ask yourself, then what. What does that leave you with? Self pay? Or the new and exciting single payor or government exchange programs.
Be careful what you wish for, and then think about receiving healthcare from a government controlled entity. My mind immediately goes to my last trip to the DMV. Scary thought.
Think it couldn't happen, or that a single payer government run system is not what was intended by Obamacare???? Read on.
So as An employer I must decide Do I continue to offer the more expensive and mandatory healthcare coverage to my employees, or do I pay the penalty per employee instead? Surely the penalty is so outrageously high that offering My employees a more comprehensive policy is really the only option. Because I know the law is intended to provide more affordable and quality healthcare for all Americans.
For your reference, in 2001 the average employer contribution for family coverage was $5,269 and in 2011 it was $10,944. For single coverage, the 2011 average employer contribution was $4,500.
Let me get my calculator out. Should I pay a 2k penalty or offer my employees coverage for more than double the penalty for single coverage and more than 5 times the penalty for family coverage??? Hmmm. Tough decision. I'm no mathematician or financial genius, but I'd say the choice has all but been made for me, wouldn't you?
And Why on earth would Obamacare set the employer penalty for not offering employee's healthcare coverage significantly less than the expense to insure employees from 11 years ago??? Somehow this doesn't make sense if what BO says is true, if you like your coverage you can keep it.
So by forcing private health insurance carriers to offer coverage to everyone, for everything, while the government not the private company decides how much they should charge for it. And setting employer penalties for not offeing healthcare coverage to their employees well below the employers healthcare expenses from over 10 years ago, BO ges exactly what he intended with Obamacare. The start to a single payor system run by our government.
So should we believe BO's promises about keeping our current plans, and that the purpose of Obamacare is to provide quality and affordable healthcare to all americans.
Or should we use the math skills learned in elementary school to come to a more logical conclusion. That Obamacare is about moving to a single payor goverment sponsored healthcare system by forcing private health insurance companies out of the market via the inability to make a profit for the product sold and by forcing more consumers into the single payor system by charging employers a penalty that looks more like an incentive to discontinue their employee's healthcare coverage.
I believe this is exactly what Obama intended and that the intention is included in the last 4 words of the bill's description, found on page 2' it reads:
To provide affordable, quality healthcare for all Americans and reduce the growth in healthcare spending AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
What do you believe?
Thursday, June 28, 2012
The words that stopped me from throwing a rock through justice Roberts window
If you are like me, you received the shock of a lifetime when the supreme court's ruling on the constitionality of Obamacare was announced. While I was shocked the law was found constitutional, I was in complete disbelief to learn the swing vote was provided by Chief Justice John Roberts.
I practically ran off the road pulling up the Drudge Report on my iPhone to confirm. Surely the news reports got the ruling wrong, it is simply not possible Chief Justice Roberts provided the swing vote.
So I said a little prayer as the app was loading only to be brought from disbelief to outrage when the bold red type said OBMAMA CARE STANDS.
For the ill informed who believe this ruling is somehow good news, I say just wait. It will be a matter of time only until you begin to understand the impact of the ruling, and discover there really is no such thing as a free lunch.
If you have an interest in understanding the impact of this ruling on your life, check back in a few days as I will give a succinct and 'dumbed down' explanation of the hidden taxes and costs associated with the Obamacare law. Did you really think a 2700 page law was only about providing affordable healthcare??????
Realizing the reports were correct, Obamacare stands and that not just Chief Justice Roberts but BUSH APPOINTED CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS provided the fatal blow I found myself wanting to provide a fatal blow to Mr. Roberts via a rock through his window with a note saying how fricking dare you (with a little less 'rick and a lot more 'uck). But as the day went on and the outrage subsided, I began instead researching the law and supreme court majority opinion for my written rock through Justice Roberts' window instead.
While reading excerpts of the majority opinion, no one was more surprised than me to find Justice Roberts' own words provided the most accurate and import lesson for me, for us all......
He writes: 'Members of this court are vested with the authority to interpret the law. We possess neither the expertise nor the prerogative to make policy judgements. Those decisions are entrusted to our nation's elected leaders who can be thrown out office if the people disagree with them. It is not our job to Protect the people from the Consequences of their political choices'.
And while I could not disagree more with the Supreme Court's ruling, I could not agree more with these words from Chief Justice John Roberts. It's as if he is trying to educate the American people while providing instruction on what to do next. And I found myself wanting to write my rock through his window less and less.
It is clear the majority of Americans disagree with the healthcare law, and in his opinion, Justice Roberts is challenging you, is challenging each of us to do something about it. Will you?
Afterall, we do have the power to change this ruling. The power and the responsibility resides with each of us. We have the power to vote Obama and any elected official who voted for Obamacare out of office. But we cannot complain about it if we don't act.
In 2008 I did act, did you? I knew who Obama was before he was elected. Did you?
I was proud that our country was going to have the opportunity to elect the first black president, but I knew who he was, what his record was and knew I would never vote for him. I did not allow myself to get carried away with the historic election while ignoring his record. Did you?
I worked for Mccain's campaign in a swing state to try and get him elected. I did everything I could to prevent the scenario we face today with the Supreme Court's ruling. Did you?
You may not agree with my opinions or positions and that is so ok with me. But like it or not, I am well informed on them. Are you?
So in my haste to let all of my outrage out on Justice Roberts, I was reminded that he is not the person who got us here, the ill informed who voted for Obama, or did not vote at all and now find themsleves outraged by this decision are, and now we all have something we can do about it. Will you?
As you decide how you fell about this ruling, or what you will do, I'll leave you to ponder one of my favorite Thomas Jefferson quotes:
Whenever people are well informed they can be trusted with their own government.
I practically ran off the road pulling up the Drudge Report on my iPhone to confirm. Surely the news reports got the ruling wrong, it is simply not possible Chief Justice Roberts provided the swing vote.
So I said a little prayer as the app was loading only to be brought from disbelief to outrage when the bold red type said OBMAMA CARE STANDS.
For the ill informed who believe this ruling is somehow good news, I say just wait. It will be a matter of time only until you begin to understand the impact of the ruling, and discover there really is no such thing as a free lunch.
If you have an interest in understanding the impact of this ruling on your life, check back in a few days as I will give a succinct and 'dumbed down' explanation of the hidden taxes and costs associated with the Obamacare law. Did you really think a 2700 page law was only about providing affordable healthcare??????
Realizing the reports were correct, Obamacare stands and that not just Chief Justice Roberts but BUSH APPOINTED CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS provided the fatal blow I found myself wanting to provide a fatal blow to Mr. Roberts via a rock through his window with a note saying how fricking dare you (with a little less 'rick and a lot more 'uck). But as the day went on and the outrage subsided, I began instead researching the law and supreme court majority opinion for my written rock through Justice Roberts' window instead.
While reading excerpts of the majority opinion, no one was more surprised than me to find Justice Roberts' own words provided the most accurate and import lesson for me, for us all......
He writes: 'Members of this court are vested with the authority to interpret the law. We possess neither the expertise nor the prerogative to make policy judgements. Those decisions are entrusted to our nation's elected leaders who can be thrown out office if the people disagree with them. It is not our job to Protect the people from the Consequences of their political choices'.
And while I could not disagree more with the Supreme Court's ruling, I could not agree more with these words from Chief Justice John Roberts. It's as if he is trying to educate the American people while providing instruction on what to do next. And I found myself wanting to write my rock through his window less and less.
It is clear the majority of Americans disagree with the healthcare law, and in his opinion, Justice Roberts is challenging you, is challenging each of us to do something about it. Will you?
Afterall, we do have the power to change this ruling. The power and the responsibility resides with each of us. We have the power to vote Obama and any elected official who voted for Obamacare out of office. But we cannot complain about it if we don't act.
In 2008 I did act, did you? I knew who Obama was before he was elected. Did you?
I was proud that our country was going to have the opportunity to elect the first black president, but I knew who he was, what his record was and knew I would never vote for him. I did not allow myself to get carried away with the historic election while ignoring his record. Did you?
I worked for Mccain's campaign in a swing state to try and get him elected. I did everything I could to prevent the scenario we face today with the Supreme Court's ruling. Did you?
You may not agree with my opinions or positions and that is so ok with me. But like it or not, I am well informed on them. Are you?
So in my haste to let all of my outrage out on Justice Roberts, I was reminded that he is not the person who got us here, the ill informed who voted for Obama, or did not vote at all and now find themsleves outraged by this decision are, and now we all have something we can do about it. Will you?
As you decide how you fell about this ruling, or what you will do, I'll leave you to ponder one of my favorite Thomas Jefferson quotes:
Whenever people are well informed they can be trusted with their own government.
Tuesday, April 10, 2012
Andrea Sneiderman: grand jury investigation
Apparently DA Robert James was not bluffing when he said, 'stay tuned'.
A Dekalb county grand jury suBpoenaed the 2 day testimony of Andrea Sneiderman from a local news station- WSB Tv, channel 2.
In a move that surprised many, Andrea Sneiderman agreed to testify in Hemy Neuman's trial as she wished to do all she could in order to secure a conviction for the murder of her husband, Rusty Sneiderman. Now one wonders if she had motivation in securing the conviction against Hemy, or of she was foolish in subjecting herself to potential prosecution.
During her two day testimony, the DA heard for the first time when Andrea was told her husband had been shot. Per her own words, she had no idea what happened to Rusty, no one told her until she arrived at the hospital around 11 am. However, the victims father and Andrea's friend testified she told them Rusty had been shot prior to arriving at the hospital.
Don Sneiderman, Rusty's father, testified Andrea told him Rusty had been shot on the way to the daycare and in a surprise move, Shayna Citron called the DA after Andrea's testimony and offered her account of when she was told of Rusty's shooting. She testified Andrea told her Rusty had been shot in route to the hospital.
I've been struck by the silence of Andrea Sneiderman's family during all of this. My understanding is her mother was with her when she went to the daycare and hospital. Can she offer any additional information in this case. Did she hear her daughter speak with Don and Shayna? Did she hear her daughter tell them Rusty was shot before arriving at the hospital? I guess the answer to this is 'stay tuned.'
The other thing I've wondered and have not been able to find anywhere, is what time the shooting was reported to the public? Could Andrea have heard there was a shooting at Dunwoody Prep on the way there? It wouldn't take a rocket scientist to put two and two together at that point. It also would not be difficult to assume your husband had been shot if she saw the scene, but at this point I am not sure she did.
So at this point, that' all the new information available. Will she be tried? My guess is yes. Will she be convicted? Was she involved? I guess we will have to stay tuned.
A Dekalb county grand jury suBpoenaed the 2 day testimony of Andrea Sneiderman from a local news station- WSB Tv, channel 2.
In a move that surprised many, Andrea Sneiderman agreed to testify in Hemy Neuman's trial as she wished to do all she could in order to secure a conviction for the murder of her husband, Rusty Sneiderman. Now one wonders if she had motivation in securing the conviction against Hemy, or of she was foolish in subjecting herself to potential prosecution.
During her two day testimony, the DA heard for the first time when Andrea was told her husband had been shot. Per her own words, she had no idea what happened to Rusty, no one told her until she arrived at the hospital around 11 am. However, the victims father and Andrea's friend testified she told them Rusty had been shot prior to arriving at the hospital.
Don Sneiderman, Rusty's father, testified Andrea told him Rusty had been shot on the way to the daycare and in a surprise move, Shayna Citron called the DA after Andrea's testimony and offered her account of when she was told of Rusty's shooting. She testified Andrea told her Rusty had been shot in route to the hospital.
I've been struck by the silence of Andrea Sneiderman's family during all of this. My understanding is her mother was with her when she went to the daycare and hospital. Can she offer any additional information in this case. Did she hear her daughter speak with Don and Shayna? Did she hear her daughter tell them Rusty was shot before arriving at the hospital? I guess the answer to this is 'stay tuned.'
The other thing I've wondered and have not been able to find anywhere, is what time the shooting was reported to the public? Could Andrea have heard there was a shooting at Dunwoody Prep on the way there? It wouldn't take a rocket scientist to put two and two together at that point. It also would not be difficult to assume your husband had been shot if she saw the scene, but at this point I am not sure she did.
So at this point, that' all the new information available. Will she be tried? My guess is yes. Will she be convicted? Was she involved? I guess we will have to stay tuned.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)