| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
foxhound
Guest
|
 Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2007 6:28 am
|
 |
|
|
| Perhaps this should get sent to AlanZ. He might get his eyes opened that RJ doesn't just swindle investors and customers, but that he is a genuine pirate and grifter as well. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Knotter
Joined: 07 Sep 2007
Posts: 64
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2007 8:06 am
|
|
|
|
| Damn near won last place! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Admin
Site Admin
Joined: 23 Jun 2006
Posts: 1018
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2007 8:12 am
|
|
|
|
| sam wrote: | | Perhaps this should get sent to AlanZ. |
He wouldn't care. He would say something like grand theft has nothing to do with his barbecue.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
curly
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 665
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2007 8:45 am
|
|
|
|
| Knotter wrote: | | Damn near won last place! |
He prolly sank it too  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Spanker
Joined: 10 Nov 2006
Posts: 207
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2007 12:37 pm
|
|
|
|
This post takes on a whole new meaning: LauraJ Wishing Her Dear ol' Dad a Happy Birthday
| Quote: |
And we are so thankful for everything that you have provided for us, all the good values you have taught us, and all of the life experiences that you have been through that make you....YOU!
|
I would say he's taught 'em everything he knows.
| Quote: |
We will get you your sail boat soon! Better yet, lets RAISE NAMSANG!
|
Not sure this is what she had in mind. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
janzy
Guest
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2007 12:54 pm
|
|
|
|
Yo Ho, yo ho, a pirate's life for me!!!
The little snippet about there being a relationship between him and the Ice Chips, intrigues me also. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
curly
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 665
|
Posted: Wed Oct 17, 2007 12:59 pm
|
|
|
|
That's way too funny and prophetic...you slooths are amazing.
At first I thought that was a post from today...and I thought she was poking fun at this article. Then I saw DavidM and U2 posted on the thread and thought...wow, they got back on the kool-aid.
Course I still think RJ is rather proud of his exploits. All this time most of us thought he was just a petty thief, now we know he's way more big time than that...an international flim flam man
But I believe there are still those that will continue the worship...maybe even more so now  They have scales over their eyes.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DavidS
Guest
|
Posted: Thu Oct 18, 2007 4:15 am
|
|
|
|
| The Raising of the Nam Sang was posted on A.F. Barbecue newsgroup with a link to kamadofraud.org. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
somebodyelse
Guest
|
Posted: Fri Oct 19, 2007 2:18 pm
CIA reference in the saga |
|
|
|
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fishtail-99
Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Posts: 1437
|
Posted: Fri Oct 19, 2007 2:47 pm
|
|
|
|
| Sure, he was IN the CIA. IN a holding cell, no doubt...... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
foxhound
Guest
|
Posted: Mon Oct 22, 2007 9:52 am
|
|
|
|
It is interesting that Richard has sailed internationally yet sinks the his yacht sailing in a harmless river getting snagged on a bridge line.
I'm wondering if the same type of ending will occur for him in business. He will trip over someting simple and stupid and it will sink him!
I think it is a mistake of arrogance, he gets so cocky that he can so easily deceive. I think that is the way with a lot of criminals, a careless little mistake is what gets them caught. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Spanker
Joined: 10 Nov 2006
Posts: 207
|
Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2008 4:02 pm
|
|
|
|
Just a thought:
Wonder if the Kamadettes knew of their parents' grand theft before it was revealed here? The oldest, Laura, was just a young teenager in Feb/March of '93. As much as most of us despise the way the Kamadettes have been used to deflect properly directed questions and criticisms of the K company, THEY MAY HAVE HAD NO IDEA their father was an international yacht thief.
Imagine learning of this from your supposed enemies. It would be a pretty brutal awakening. Dinner that night may have been a bit awkward. Wonder how Dick and Deb spun it? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nemesis
Joined: 04 Jul 2006
Posts: 534
|
Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2008 7:53 pm
|
|
|
|
| You give them too much credit, Spanker. The way they lie and connive today shows that they have had years of practice. I wouldnt be surprised if they were used to run interference for the heist! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gerard
Joined: 05 Jul 2006
Posts: 769
|
Posted: Sun Mar 30, 2008 1:56 pm
There's a significant gap in the timeline. |
|
|
|
I remember that this was mentioned in a previous thread that has since been deleted by Admin in his spring cleaning:
Mannix v The Ship "Nam Sang" (Unreported: NZ, 3/2/94) the issues involved bail bond, Application for Security for Costs, weather jurisdiction in respect of security for costs and security to obtain release should be exercised on similar grounds.
As posted in:http://www.au.lawoffice.com/article/5074.htm
I haven't been able to learn anything about it. Online New Zealand maritime cases only go back to 2001 or so.
But, in rereading it for the millionth time, it dawned on me... consideration of "bail bond" and "security to obtain release" implies that either someone (alleged thief???) and/or something (Nam Sang???) were in the custody of New Zealand authorities. This case is one year after the alleged theft and one year before the sinking. Don't think they would be hearing the case in absentia, would they?
Lots of intriguing possibilities there. Anyone care to venture any theories? Anyone with a legal background (Helllooo Esq!) care to shoot holes in my reading of the case and its implications? Can anyone suggest a way to get more info?
Heck, if there was a legal proceeding and RJ was still in possession of the Nam Sang a year later, maybe he was exonerated and the ship awarded to him!
Fair and balanced = me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Admin
Site Admin
Joined: 23 Jun 2006
Posts: 1018
|
Posted: Mon Mar 31, 2008 10:12 am
|
|
|
|
Have you emailed or called anyone to see if you can get more info? There seemed to be some contact information, but I haven't been able to delve.
Do we know any Aussies who can dig into it more? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
