Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Did you miss the part about "no questions asked"? It's clear that return of the dogs is her only concern. Very selfish.
No, she just encouraged the continuation of this crime (no one was killed by the way, but it could have happened).
If she doesn’t put that no one would come forward and they still wouldn’t have information to help solve the case. I’m sure the police will be monitoring if she gets them back, I’m sure she’d share security tapes, etc.
I understand why she's doing this. She's probably going out of her mind and just wants her dogs back and has the means to offer a lot for their return. But by offering a reward "no questions asked" does that mean that she won't help with the investigation of who shot the dog walker? I think he definitely deserves some justice.
Not only that, it endangers literally celebrity-owned dog and their caretakers if criminals think they can "dognap" and then turn around and expect a huge "reward."
I didn't take it like that. SHE is offering a reward, and SHE is saying she won't ask questions. Doesn't mean the police won't, or the dog walker won't.
She just wants her dogs back. It doesn't stop others from doing their due diligence.
No, I didn't miss anything. Of course she said that. She wants her dogs back alive and well. I would too.
Once she gets them, she can change her mind. She doesn't have to announce that to the world.
We all love our dogs, but don't forget a person was shot. Her statement can actually conflict/interfere with a criminal investigation. It's not her prerogative to change her mind, "no questions asked" is not an option and not up to her so it was a meaningless statement anyways. However, saying "no questions asked" sadly put a dollar sign value on all her pets, a message to all kidnappers that crime pays. It's just plain stupid.
But the point was really in regards to the callousness and lack of empathy she had with her friend that was almost killed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ocnjgirl
If she doesn’t put that no one would come forward and they still wouldn’t have information to help solve the case. I’m sure the police will be monitoring if she gets them back, I’m sure she’d share security tapes, etc.
No that's not how it works. The proper public statement with the award would be "information leading up to the arrest of...."
I don't want to go off topic and political discussions are really not allowed here - but there is a reason it's called "defund the police" and not "focus funds into social programs" or something more descriptive to fit what YOU think it means. So stop with your line.
If you're not one of the ones suggesting it, then you don't get to decide what it means.
I didn't take it like that. SHE is offering a reward, and SHE is saying she won't ask questions. Doesn't mean the police won't, or the dog walker won't.
She just wants her dogs back. It doesn't stop others from doing their due diligence.
How could she help with the investigation if she's rewarding "no questions asked"?
Who walks dogs at 10 p.m. at night? What dogs are up at 10 p.m. at night? What kind of a schedule is that?!
Maybe you don't, but plenty of people do. Especially if it's a professional dog walker who has many clients to get to.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
