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.
I'm pretty sure Smart was being honest. Here's why.
Pam Smart: "I'll give you an example of how wacked out I was at that time. My atty called me and told me Cecelia was going to fone me tomorrow but not to talk to her because she will be wired".
Again, despite your evaluation of her credibility, outside of some other evidence, I'm not going to accept that that's what happened. I don't believe anything Pam Smart has to say.
Again, despite your evaluation of her credibility, outside of some other evidence, I'm not going to accept that that's what happened. I don't believe anything Pam Smart has to say.
You've made a rule for yourself that declares that liars only tell lies. A trait I've noticed with Pam is that she loves to take a pinch of truth and mix it up with 2 pounds of lies. She uses truth to back up her lies.
Another trait Pam exhibits is she believes she is smarter than everyone else. She thinks she is another Isaac Newton. So despite her atty telling her don't talk to Cecelia, Pam's ego took over her brain. She thought Cecelia was a silly dufus whom she towered over intellectually so she talked to Cecelia while Cecelia baited Pam. Yet Cecelia walked away from this case getting away with complicity to murder and with $100,000 in her pocket and put Pam in jail for 60+ years. I doubt if even Isaac Newton could have pulled that off.
Be attentive when listening to Pam because she does tell the truth at times like all pathological liars do.
And quite often Pam's ego overwhelms her intellect and this causes her to kill people and hang herself.
Yet Cecelia walked away from this case getting away with complicity to murder and with $100,000 in her pocket and put Pam in jail for 60+ years.
She was not complicit. She told an adult at the school about the conversation she overheard and they laughed it off. She did her due diligence. She was a kid. What else was she supposed to do? She also received 10k not 100k for allowing the use of her name. PAM put PAM in jail for life....not Cecelia.
She was not complicit. She told an adult at the school about the conversation she overheard and they laughed it off. She did her due diligence. She was a kid. What else was she supposed to do? She also received 10k not 100k for allowing the use of her name. PAM put PAM in jail for life....not Cecelia.
She was complicit in the search for a gun. Several methods to acquire a gun were made.
She was paid $100,000 not $10,000
Your claims are inaccurate.
She was given a deal by police in exchange for being wired tp record Pam. You haven't done your reading.
She was complicit in the search for a gun. Several methods to acquire a gun were made.
She was paid $100,000 not $10,000
Your claims are inaccurate.
She was given a deal by police in exchange for being wired tp record Pam. You haven't done your reading.
Excuse me? My "claims" are inaccurate? I'm not claiming anything. I'm stating what I have read including the interview from 2016 with Cecelia. She was never given a deal. She was never charged with anything to need a deal. 10K not 100K or 120k which is the actual number generally thrown around. I'm not sure you understand what the word complicit means. Knowing and engaging are entirely different things. Regardless, that teenage girl is by no means the reason Pam Smart is where she is today. Also, you need to check your facts regarding Pam being a model prisoner. While she had dozens of minor infractions the first few years, the last 15 plus years she has been pretty much perfect. Not that she should ever get out of prison but I just wanted to clear up your erroneous comment.
Well here I go....I think she's right where she should be.
Granted, she didn't pull the trigger..but she was the mastermind.
I've seen her on the one of the crime shows arguing the fact that she didn't do the deed, so she doesn't understand why the shooter has been released, and she's still in doing time.
As I'm writing this now, I'm trying to remember how much involvement she copped to.
Did she try to say she didn't really mean it, or it wasn't her idea?
No one answers this question. What do we gain from 60 yr sentences?
Canada and Europe do not have these long sentences like the US dishes out and their recidivism is lower than ours.
Again, despite your evaluation of her credibility, outside of some other evidence, I'm not going to accept that that's what happened. I don't believe anything Pam Smart has to say.
Listen at 9:20 she tells about her lawyers warning to her.
I don't think anyone is claiming she never said that. We're just doubting that it actually happened. I think she's lieing about that in order to try to convince a jury that she wasn't confessing or admitting to anything, but she was trying to find out from the girl what actually happened.
Listen at 9:20 she tells about her lawyers warning to her.
You're not listening to what I'm telling you. Again, there is no evidence-outside of Pam saying so-that her attorney ever told her that Cecilia was tapping the phone or was wired.
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.
