http://www.roadrunner.com/v5/2/news/frame/...p~1~9000_580863
not the 1 sueing :lol: :lol:
it's kind of stupid of the lady . you dont have the ticket your not a winner period ,i dont think she's goin to win the case .
Printable View
http://www.roadrunner.com/v5/2/news/frame/...p~1~9000_580863
not the 1 sueing :lol: :lol:
it's kind of stupid of the lady . you dont have the ticket your not a winner period ,i dont think she's goin to win the case .
This is what I believe bujub22's dead link is referring to.
http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/newssentinel/.../printstory.jsp
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/elecialotto1.html
If the person who lost the ticket really had it there finger prints or some of there DNA should be on it and that much cash would justify expensive laboratory analysis, but only the person who bought it knows where the ticket was bought along with the lottery agency.
thanx for correcting that and i told yah she would'nt win!Quote:
Originally posted by <TROUBLE^MAKER>@7 January 2004 - 14:45
This is what I believe bujub22's dead link is referring to.
http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/newssentinel/.../printstory.jsp
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/elecialotto1.html
If the person who lost the ticket really had it there finger prints or some of there DNA should be on it and that much cash would justify expensive laboratory analysis, but only the person who bought it knows where the ticket was bought along with the lottery agency.
she got caught this morning lying about the whole thing :lol: :lol: :01: dumm laady
:lol: :lol: :lol: iwas jus bout to post that :D :D :DQuote:
Originally posted by <TROUBLE^MAKER>@9 January 2004 - 18:23
http://img.coxnewsweb.com/B/02/66/62/image_362662.jpg
http://www.thesmokinggun.com//archiv...iacharge1.html
Crack Hoe
yup :lol: :lol: :lol:Quote:
Originally posted by <TROUBLE^MAKER>@9 January 2004 - 23:35
Crack Hoe
The thing about all her numbers being family-related aren't completely true.
Five of the numbers were successfully identified as being related to family, though in no particular order. When asked about 49, she replied that her husband turned 49 this year.
When questioned, her husband said that he was 44 - He turns 45 this year :rolleyes:
I wonder if the real winner picked those numbers or just asked the computer to, the losers so dumb you have about as good of a chance at ripping off the lottery as getting away with robing a bank.
She has actually admitted to lying now.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3382205.stm
We know Dan, read the third post. :lol:
What? Where did all those posts come from???Quote:
Originally posted by Busyman@10 January 2004 - 20:38
We know Dan, read the third post. :lol:
I missed them completey. D'oh :lol:
the winner played the same numbers every week. oddly enough, though, you statistically have a better chance of winning, if you let the computer choose the numbers randomly.Quote:
Originally posted by <TROUBLE^MAKER>@10 January 2004 - 10:39
I wonder if the real winner picked those numbers or just asked the computer to, the losers so dumb you have about as good of a chance at ripping off the lottery as getting away with robing a bank.
Justice won.