Death of David Ruffin, former Temptation in 1991 - Page 3 - PhillyBlog

Scoop0901 · #21 (**permalink**) 01-23-2006, 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDeal

from reading drex's yahoo message board is how she conveniently left out her intentions for gathering this information.

What tangled webs we weave.

dogfaceboy · #22 (**permalink**) 01-23-2006, 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDeal

from reading drex's yahoo message board is how she conveniently left out her intentions for gathering this information.
My understanding of her research is to prove David Ruffin's death was not accidental,and in fact a cover up exist that involves the medical examiner,the PPD.the media as well as the people he reportedly was last seen with.
So much in fact that she has offered to pay for polygraph test for Mr. Murrell,Diane Showers and Mr.Nowell.
She has also circulated posters in Philidelphia offering a monetary incentive of 1000.00 for information.
Her objective (according to her board) is to gather enough information to warrent the reopening of this closed case by the authorities.
Not once (on her board) has she stated her research has anything to do with her obtaining a degree.
On the contrary, her contention is her field of study qualifies her to amply shed enough light on the so called inconsistancies gleaned from media reports and other Temptation message boards to revisit the mishandled or botched (her words) investigation of the events leading to the late stars death. With the motive being the missing money David Ruffin supposedly had in his possession the night of his death.

Maybe She left out some things because someone is following her inquiries on the internet and making efforts to discredit her. I find it odd that two names on here joined PB in Jan. and have one post each and they're both in this thread. What is your interest in this?

Do you think cover ups ever existed at the levels you described?

I'd be interested to know where all that money went too and if the investigation was indeed botched then why is what She's doing so questionable.

If it wasn't botched then let Her do Her thing. It's no big deal.

Maybe I am a supersleuth! :rolling_:

TheDeal · #23 (**permalink**) 01-23-2006, 10:53 PM

What you said could very well explain why she "left somethings out".But seeing that she operates a message board on the internet and post her email address on message boards on the internet. These actions alone are not consistant with an individual that is concerned with being followed in Cyberspace.
What I find odd is your question regarding my interest. If I were to go into a defensive mode (which I will not) I could very well ask the same of you.
I did not question what it is that she is doing. Actually I stated the truth about what she is doing. You know "some of the things she left out".
I just think when asking people for help or information one should be forth coming as to why the help is requested or needed. It's only fair,right and honest to let people choose between discussing a topic with a student doing research, vs helping a student launch a criminal investigation.
Maybe you are a supersleuth!
Have A great evening!

Quote:

Originally Posted by dogfaceboy

Maybe She left out some things because someone is following her inquiries on the internet and making efforts to discredit her. I find it odd that two names on here joined PB in Jan. and have one post each and they're both in this thread. What is your interest in this?

Do you think cover ups ever existed at the levels you described?

I'd be interested to know where all that money went too and if the investigation was indeed botched then why is what She's doing so questionable.

If it wasn't botched then let Her do Her thing. It's no big deal.

Maybe I am a supersleuth! :rolling_:

dogfaceboy · #24 (**permalink**) 01-23-2006, 11:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDeal

But seeing that she operates a message board on the internet and post her email address on message boards on the internet. These actions alone are not consistant with an individual that is concerned with being followed in Cyberspace.
What I find odd is your question regarding my interest. If I were to go into a defensive mode (which I will not) I could very well ask the same of you.

As far as being followed, I don't know of her posting this blog as one of her inquiry sites on her site. Also if she was making an effort to conceal her interest completely, she did a bad job by posting the links in this thread. Soooooo when two people who just joined, make replies which are directed at her motives,character or whatever, it indeed looks odd to one who might notice this. I don't know if she really cares about being tracked on the internet, I simply made a statement of that being a possibility....sheesh!!! talk about putting words in someones mouth.

As far as you finding it odd that I find it odd....I find that extremely odd. You see nothing odd about this? I think I just out odd'd you.:lol:

As far as you asking me? I could care less whether you do or don't but , I'll give it up anyway.
1. I follow posts that interest me.
2. I'm a long time fan of the Temps. So this one got my attention.
3. I noticed you and another person made this thread your first post and you both looked to shoot holes in her inquiry,which is contraversial and involes the death of a person. That doesn't happen here much ,if ever..... I'm sure.
3. I don't feel the least bit defensive telling you any of the above.
4. Why do you consider a reply on your part to be defensive? I find that odd also. {yer out odd'd again. :rolling_:

TheDeal · #25 (**permalink**) 01-23-2006, 11:38 PM

Whatever:whistle: :icon_be_: But it was YOU that stated
"Maybe She left out some things because someone is following her inquiries on the internet and making efforts to discredit her".

My last response to YOU is nothing I posted was an attempt to "discredit" her. Everything I posted was the truth.
Check it out for yourself!

http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group...uffinUnsolved/
Peace:whistle:

Quote:

Originally Posted by dogfaceboy

As far as being followed, I don't know of her posting this blog as one of her inquiry sites on her site. Also if she was making an effort to conceal her interest completely, she did a bad job by posting the links in this thread. Soooooo when two people who just joined, make replies which are directed at her motives,character or whatever, it indeed looks odd to one who might notice this. I don't know if she really cares about being tracked on the internet, I simply made a statement of that being a possibility....sheesh!!! talk about putting words in someones mouth.

As far as you finding it odd that I find it odd....I find that extremely odd. You see nothing odd about this? I think I just out odd'd you.:lol:

As far as you asking me? I could care less whether you do or don't but , I'll give it up anyway.
1. I follow posts that interest me.
2. I'm a long time fan of the Temps. So this one got my attention.
3. I noticed you and another person made this thread your first post and you both looked to shoot holes in her inquiry,which is contraversial and involes the death of a person. That doesn't happen here much ,if ever..... I'm sure.
3. I don't feel the least bit defensive telling you any of the above.
4. Why do you consider a reply on your part to be defensive? I find that odd also. {yer out odd'd again. :rolling_:

dogfaceboy · #26 (**permalink**) 01-23-2006, 11:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDeal

Whatever:whistle: :icon_be_: But it was YOU that stated
"Maybe She left out some things because someone is following her inquiries on the internet and making efforts to discredit her".

My last response to YOU is nothing I posted was an attempt to "discredit" her. Everything I posted was the truth.
Check it out for yourself!

http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group...uffinUnsolved/
Peace:whistle:

I already did. She posted a link in this thread.

TheDeal · #27 (**permalink**) 01-23-2006, 11:56 PM

I noticed you and another person made this thread your first post and you both looked to shoot holes in her inquiry,which is contraversial and involes the death of a person

Please direct me to where I attemtped to shoot "holes" in her inquiry??
Knowing that you can not. I will respectfully ask that you confine your comments to what's true,when referring to my post.

dogfaceboy · #28 (**permalink**) 01-24-2006, 12:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDeal

from reading drex's yahoo message board is how she conveniently left out her intentions for gathering this information.
My understanding of her research is to prove David Ruffin's death was not accidental,and in fact a cover up exist that involves the medical examiner,the PPD.the media as well as the people he reportedly was last seen with.
So much in fact that she has offered to pay for polygraph test for Mr. Murrell,Diane Showers and Mr.Nowell.
She has also circulated posters in Philidelphia offering a monetary incentive of 1000.00 for information.
Her objective (according to her board) is to gather enough information to warrent the reopening of this closed case by the authorities.
Not once (on her board) has she stated her research has anything to do with her obtaining a degree.
On the contrary, her contention is her field of study qualifies her to amply shed enough light on the so called inconsistancies gleaned from media reports and other Temptation message boards to revisit the mishandled or botched (her words) investigation of the events leading to the late stars death. With the motive being the missing money David Ruffin supposedly had in his possession the night of his death.

If this isn't trying to shoot holes in her post , I don't know what is.
You typed the above, not I. It's in the first sentence.
This was not meant to discredit her?
Talk about the TRUTH!! :rolling_:

dogfaceboy · #29 (**permalink**) 01-24-2006, 12:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDeal

I noticed you and another person made this thread your first post and you both looked to shoot holes in her inquiry,which is contraversial and involes the death of a person

Please direct me to where I attemtped to shoot "holes" in her inquiry??
Knowing that you can not. I will respectfully ask that you confine your comments to what's true,when referring to my post.

I'd like to direct you to the reply below, that has your very own quote in it.
I've respectfully confined my comment's to what's true.
How ya like them apples? :lol:

TheDeal · #30 (**permalink**) 01-24-2006, 11:33 AM

I guess it comes down to Perception. You claim I and another poster attempted to discredit her or “shoot holes” in her post. The other poster merely offered their opinion to what she posted (that is called discussion), and I pointed out “some of the things” she was remiss in disclosing. (That is called exposure)

We must agree to disagree.

It’s obvious by your reaction my post hit its mark. In your zealous defense of your friend, you failed to refute any of my statements in regards to her agenda.

In the final analysis it seems that you and I are the only 2 posters responding in this thread, other than the very timely advice offered by the Moderator. I feel that the advice offered her will prove to be more advantageous to her than this senseless banter between you and me. :deal?:
So as to not take her focus away from those informational post made that really deserve her attention, I will peruse this site and find a more interesting discussion to engage in,as it seems the other posters have done.

Have a Great Day!!:drinking: