i urge you all to take a look at at the "CSI" thread and read between the lines... the only convincing evidence that they gave us were about the tatoos and horse pic........ the "evidence" about the mill thing was only their word against kellys and hwo would they be able to get that info? i am of the assumption that customers who shop still have a certain amount of "anonymity" (is that even a word?...lol) especially if it is an online store and a customer pays by credit card, ect.... how would they get this info????? and we never actually saw any evidence leading to the beliefe that "ryan" doesnt exist, she posted a tatoo that he supposedly got, ok, but then CSI went on to hin that this person is a lie
again, redirectiion....... as far as the dog bite incident with petco or petsmart or whatever it is called, did we actually see a VIDEO or voice recording where the managers state this didnt happen????? no, we didnt, again we have CSI's word agaisnt someone elses and im not going to go through them all if you want my thoughts you can pm me but a lot of these topics discussed as "evidence" and "lies" are actually one persons word against another, and we dont even know who CSI actually is..... so what makes them so credible??????