no one is doubting the facts however the interjection of opinion as fact is the problem. As for his comment on the domestic charge and the subsequent "beating" that he interjects as a fact which couldn't be farther from the truth. once again, his assumptions are being proposed as facts. just because he calls the asst DA and finds out that charges and subsequent penalties associated with them, that does not make him an expert or being right, any one can log in to the Suffolk county site and see charges and lists of penalty/time if convicted. His constant grandstanding and wanting to group everyone together isn't going to hide the fact that the person he is cheer-leading for is in jail, no one else is.

As i have always said, if someone wants to talk about the case and the facts, fine but to keep putting his opinions AS fact in an ongoing trial shows his utter lack of character.

also it hasnt gone down as he said it would, once again he said people are going to do time, so far only one doing time is Jeff Murray...deservedly I might add.

Your point is very well taken and I clearly see this from your point of view and I agree. Unless "pole smoker" was in the room and saw the "wife beating" in progress it should not be injected and posted as a factual occurrence.

Guys, please keep in mind I have no dog in the fight and I'm simply pointing out the obvious from an outsiders perspective. I stumbled across this site and thread looking for Bayliner information of all things.

From my perspective I would assume based on pslonaker's past credibility from his previous "predictions" that actually became a "fact" in this matter...I would assume there was a "beating". I would also assume that pslonaker has access to the police report of the "beating" since he obviously has demonstrated that he has access to inside information. By all appearances it seems like he has the inside information on this entire case.

Just another guys opinion

Nice post repoguy.

Slonaker has stated that his posts are his opinions, and we are all entitled to our opinions. I have no dog in this fight either but I find it ironic how nobody that tries to discredit his "information" can add anything substantial on their behalf to prove him wrong. And as time goes on some of his "opinions" have become fact.

Possibly the dislike for a person makes it hard to believe anything they post as possibly fact?

I think I'd summarize as impartial people (as impartial as anyone getting hosed by insurance rates would be) appreciate his input and understand most is opinion and a lot has turned out right. Thieves/accused thieves/accomplices/friends of thieves seem to have a problem with everything he says.

Even if what he says became fact it still is "wrong" because he had an engine disagreement w/ Dereberry or because he's friends w/ chubby or he stated it too much like a fact not opinion I guess.

That possibility is definetly possible on OSO. :lolhit:

It was also his opinion that murray was innocent...

The facts are that there are a number of separate cases here that are misleading and all being lumped in under the card shark name, the facts are that the people that were being investigated and some wound up in jail and others made deals, if you want to scream to the high heavens how unfair you think that is then so be it. but when you are once again interjecting opinion as fact and writing it, that is called libel. there are people involved that have not had their day in court, whether anyone on here likes it they are entitled to it...without people making accusations and lies to bolster their own opinions as facts, if you are disgusted with the acts then OK, but why lie an make crap up?

I agree.

As if it matters that he may have an ax to grind or not... 99% of the posters in this thread have an ax to grind with one of the others, so what's the difference? :lolhit:

I understand ya Rob. I'm sure eventually when all the "facts" come out and all is done with any involved there will be posters eating crow.

youre right, and in my last post I quoted you, however i wasnt insinuating you were making stuff up.