Isaac

The vast majority (91%) of fraud victims say they found a shoulder to cry on and told someone else about it. Most were not able to bring themselves to share the experience with loved ones, however, as only about one in four (27%) report telling family members about it and even fewer (22%) shared their experience with friends. A majority (54%), albeit a surprisingly slim one at that, claim to have reported the incident to their financial institution.

You’ve concluded your involvement in our matter, that is appreciated and understood. The RCMP is better equipped to handle this type of matter, but I’m just better at it, honestly. Enjoy the show, and thanks for you expressed consent. Now, your crew will understand how to APPROPRIATELY deal with this kinda criminal activity.

Pay attention, you’ll likely be using this for teaching your newbies to the lawfare games I play. -Isaac

We’re coming for you.. not just both of you, but also the useful ignorants you’ve played to enable you to steal in excess of $5,000.

Hey Anne,

Well, K1 and K2, you know about each other by now and you’ll hopefully understand the reasoning which I employed...

I love my wife, yet I respect you and love OUR children.

If I don't protect my wife and respect OUR children.. it'll destroy the potential.

Unfortunately, Kelly has reverted to he programmed expectation of betrayal.

Over a sequence of 6-months, Anne and I were consensual partners in crime..

The rule of inherent improbability or physical impossibility on which defendant relies has been stated thusly: " 'Although an appellate court will not uphold a judgment or verdict based upon evidence inherently improbable, testimony which merely discloses unusual circumstances does not come within that category. [Citation.] To warrant the rejection of the statements given by a witness who has been believed by a trial court, there must exist either a physical impossibility that they are true, or their falsity must be apparent without resorting to inferences or deductions. [Citations.] Conflicts and even testimony which is subject to justifiable suspicion do not justify the reversal of a judgment, for it is the exclusive province of the trial judge or jury to determine the credibility of a witness and the truth or falsity of the facts upon which a determination depends. [Citation.]' " (People v. Lyons (1956) 47 Cal.2d 311, 319-320.)